Esther de Heij Geneva, March 27

Statistics Netherlands Ethics Committee

Purpose, composition and methods

• Ethics Committee advises on the ethical aspects of new requests for statistical research;

• Perspective of data ethics: should we perform every research that is legally and methodologically feasible?;

• The Statistics Netherlands Ethics Committee is anchored in the exploratory phase of new research;

• Ethics Committee advises senior management including the director-general of Statistics Netherlands.

Purpose

• The statistics to be made public by the government are accurate, complete, reliable and technically and socially explainable;

• Without revealing; • Without the results having a stigmatizing effect on a specific

group; • Without the results having undesirable consequences for a

specific group; • Without the subject or the questioner being too controversial

in combination with the goal.

Assessment framework – (1) Reliability

• Statistics Netherlands is independent and determines when and how it publishes which statistical information;

• Statistics Netherlands publishes objective statistical information of high quality, which is also user- friendly;

• The statistical information must have an authoritative and undisputed reputation.

Assessment framework – (2) Objectivity

• Statistical information is provided by government that meets the needs of practice, policy and science.

Assessment framework – (3) Society-oriented

• Internal committee with a permanent composition from different perspectives: senior researcher as well as professor on social and demographic developments, director of economic statistics, directors/managers of policy-making, legislation, methodology and communication;

• The right people are immediately involved to provide advice on research projects where ethical questions occur;

• External experts are invited in complicated cases and for reflection.

Composition

• Demand-driven and provides advice to the management involved;

• Committee-meeting every two weeks: ethical cases are discussed with the submitter and the committee provides advice;

• Working method is based on the so-called PJD-decision model (perception, judgment, decision-making);

• Management decides whether or not to follow the advice. In the event of deviation from the advice, a manager must consult the director-general of Statistics Netherlands for taking a decision.

Current way of working

• Curfew riods during Covid; • Suïcide among farmers; • Violence by police officers; • Incidents involving people with confused behavior; • Property owners in case of illegal property use; • Asylum children with youth care; • Study progress and cultural diversity.

Case examples

 How do we ensure that we are sufficiently equipped to provide advice on complex AI-issues?

 Right now we are anchored in the exploratory phase of request for statistical research. In which parts of the organisation should we also be embedded in the future: new datasources, innovative methods,..? And how?

Questions

March 19, 2024 Joint OECD/UNECE Seminar on SEEA Implementation - Geneva, Switzerland.

Measuring stocks in the urban mine to monitor circular economy with SEEA

Jocelyn van Berkel

• Policy and data needs • Scope • Data sources and methods • Results for the Netherlands • Conclusions and next steps

Content

Policy and data needs

• Dutch economy 50% circular in 2030 and 100% in 2050 • Shift from raw material use to secondary materials use • Shift from geological mines to urban mines • Monitor this transition

Policy needs

• Statistics Netherlands measures material flows (Material Flow Monitor) • Explores measuring material stocks (Material Stock Monitor)

• Objective: support policy on secondary materials use from stocks instead of importing or extracting raw materials

• Macro-economic perspective

Data needs

Insight in materials in society (stocks)

Product lifespan / plans to renovate

Insight in available materials:

urban mine

Scope

All products in the economy and from households: 1. Buildings (houses, offices, etc.) 2. Infrastructure (roads, rails, bridges, sewerage, etc.) 3. Energy system (electricity and heat) 4. Transportation (cars, etc.) 5. Electronics and machines (laptops, airco, etc.) 6. Consumer goods (furniture, etc.) 7. Textile (clothing, etc.)

Scope

All materials in the products: 1. Construction materials (concrete, isolation material,

sand, glass, etc.) 2. Metals (iron, steel, aluminium etc.) 3. Biomass (wood, biobased textile and other biobased

materials) 4. Critical raw materials (silicon, magnesium, cobalt, etc.) 5. Other (plastic, non-biobased textile, other)

Scope

• Urban mine: accumulated stock of materials in products (lifespan >2 years) in the economy and society, that – at one point - can be recovered and reused

Scope

• SEEA focuses (also) on stocks of environmental assets: natural resources and land

• Material Stock Monitor focuses on stocks of economic assets  sustainable secondary use of the materials in these assets

Data sources and methods

• Quantity of the product (building surface, amount of wind turbines, length of roads): geographical registers and national statistics

• Lifespan or planning: literature studies • Consumer goods: international trade statistics,

production statistics • Material intensity: several datasets with breakdown

per product, literature studies, research of expert organisations (interviews)

Data sources

• Maps of buildings (BAG) and physcial objects e.g. infrastructure (BGT)

• Detailed information: • Type of building,

construction year, surface m3

• Type of bridge, streetlights, etc.

Data sources: geographical registers

1. Buildings, infrastructure, energy and transport: Material stock = quantity * material intensity

2. Consumer goods, electronics, machines and textile: Put on market (inflow) + lifespan + waste accounts

Methods

Results for the Netherlands

Results for the Netherlands

15

Results for the Netherlands

16

Buildings • Material intensity in

kilograms per m2

• Possibility to zoom in on materials (wood, iron, etc.)

• Possibility to zoom in on product groups (houses, offices, etc.)

Results for NL

Conclusions and next steps

• Demand for statistics directly related to key national environmental policy themes

• Multiple applications possible: zoom in on specific materials or products, insight in circularity

• Bulk materials in buildings and infrastructure • Most biomass materials in buildings • Many data sources needed, complexity, frequent updates are a challenge

Next steps: • Improved statistical data on material intensity of products • Improved statistical data on lifespan and durability of products

Conclusions and next steps

Climate mitigation investments

Sjoerd Schenau

• Policy and data needs • Scope and definitions • Data sources and methods • Results for the Netherlands • Conclusions

Content

• Size and distribution of costs and benefits: households, companies, distribution

• Government climate account: prices of fossil consumption and the energy transition (subsidies, taxes, etc.). So also: who pays and who receives?

• Energy and climate-related Investments

Policy needs for climate related expenditures

International • Data gaps initiative (IMF) • Eurostat  legal base environmental accounts

National • Monitoring National Energy plan • Input for scenario analysis and policy evaluation

Statistcial data needs

Scope and definitions

Gross fixed capital formation: resident producers’ acquisitions less disposals of fixed assets during a given period. Fixed assets are produced assets used in production for more than one year (SNA)

Climate mitigation: involves human interventions to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases by sources or enhance their removal from the atmosphere by “sinks” (UNFCCC) Climate adaptation: the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects (UNFCCC)

Definitions

Scope (1) Primary purpose

Specific products

Capital goods that have been specifically produced, designed and manufactured for purposes of reducing GHG emissions or lowering GHG atmospheric concentrations

Cleaner and resource efficient goods

Capital goods whose primary use is not an environmental one, but that emit less GHG emissions when produced or used than equivalent “normal” goods which have the same usage and provides an equivalent service.

Capital mitigation expenditure consists of: 1. Capital expenditure on mitigation products e.g.

purchase of solar panels, insulation etc. 2. Capital expenditure incurred for mitigation

(production) activities It also includes expenditure in non-environmental products.

• Renewable energy production • Energy saving activities

Scope (2)

Scope (3): Classification of environmental purposes Primary activities 0101 Reduction and control of greenhouse gases

010101 Prevention of greenhouse gases emissions 010102 Treatment of greenhouse gases 010103 Monitoring and measurement of greenhouse gases 010199 Others for reduction and control of greenhouse gases n.e.c.

0201 Energy from renewable sources 020101 Production of energy from renewable source 020102 Equipment and technologies for renewable energy 020103 Supporting services for renewable energy 020104 Monitoring and measurement of energy from renewable sources 020199 Others for energy from renewable sources n.e.c.

0202 Energy savings and management 020201 Energy savings through in-process modifications 020202 Energy efficient buildings; other efficient energy-demand technologies 020203 Monitoring and measurement for energy savings and management 020299 Others for energy savings and management n.e.c.

0701 R&D for reduction and control of air emissions 070101 R&D for reduction and control of greenhouse gases

0702 R&D for energy 070201 R&D for renewables 070202 R&D for energy savings

Scope (3): Classification of environmental purposes

Secondary activities 0502 Protection of biodiversity and landscape

050301 Reforestation, afforestation and forest-related land management 050302 Protection against forest fires

0402 Materials recovery and savings 040203 Reduction of the intake of fossil fuels for non-energy uses

Not in scope GEP (and SEEA) Activities related to the production of crops for energy use; Activities related to the transmission and distribution of energy; Public transport as a whole Nuclear energy production

Data sources and methods

1. National accounts and investment statistics 2. Energy statistics and price statistics 3. Mitigation subsidies and related transfers data 4. Specific surveys

Data sources

• Multiple data sources needed • Existing classification often do not suffice (e.g. CPC,

COFOG) • Cleaner and resource efficient goods  only include

extra costs (?), e.g. electric cars • Adaptation investments: not yet well defined • Integration into accounting framework

Methodology and issues

Results for the Netherlands

Investments in renewable energy • Wind mills • Solar panels • Heat pumps / biomass

Investments in isolation / energy efficiency • Households • Companies

Scope for the Netherlands

Climate mitigation investments (current prices)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

M ill

io n

eu ro

Energy saving Renewable energy

Share in total investments

0,0

1,0

2,0

3,0

4,0

5,0

6,0

7,0

8,0

9,0 %

Investments in renewable energy

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

heatpumps biomass solar wind

M ill

io n

eu ro

2010 2016 2022

Energy related investments by sector (2019)

0 500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000 3 500 4 000 4 500 5 000

Agriculture

Mining

Manufactering

Energy production

Services

Households

Million euro

Energy saving renewabale energy fossil energy

• Investments in CCS  Not yet important

• Investments related to reduction in other greenhouse gasses

 overlap with other environmental investments

• Investments in Electrification, including electric vehicles

What is still missing ?

• High demand for the data on climate expenditures! • Mitigation investments become more important • Scope issues: what to include… • Methodological issue: Extra costs calculation • Adaptation investments: a new challenge….

Conclusions

Sustainability and

automation

Peter Striekwold, RDW

WP.29, March 2024

WInformal Document2WP.29-192-10 (192nd WP.29, 5-8 March 2024

Agenda Provisional item 2.3.) Transmitted by the representative of the Netherlands

GEVOELIG

17 UN Sustainable

Development goals

2

Road Safety : 3, 9, 11

Sustainability : 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

GEVOELIG

Illustration EU Innovation Budget

(Source: Horizon 2020)

3

Sustainability: 1.000.000

million Euro (2020-2030)

Vehicle automation: 97

million Euro (2020-2027)

GEVOELIG

Claimed effect of vehicle

automation on sustainability

4

Dutch Ministry IenW:

“…cooperative ITS systems.

Innovations in this field should allow

us to improve traffic flows on our

roads in terms of safety, efficiency

and environmental impact,…..”

UNECE: “…would ensure

the benefits that ITS could

provide in terms of safety,

environmental

protection, infrastructure

development, energy

efficiency and traffic

management..”

EU/ERTRAC: “ ... Also,

smoother traffic will help to

decrease the energy

consumption and

emissions of the

vehicles.”

GEVOELIG

Claimed effect of vehicle

automation on sustainability (2)

5

co-leader McKinsey Center for Future Mobility (Russell Hensley): “.. So, we move toward huge societal benefits in terms of reduced carbon emissions and far safer vehicles, ideally with far fewer accidents and far fewer fatal accidents.”

GEVOELIG

However: these claims do not take into account emissions resulting

from a number of data processes required for vehicle automation

6

Examples

1) Research and development

2) CPU power in operation for the DDT /OEDR

3) Telecommunication

4) Data Storage (DSSAD, ISMR, etc)

5) Security

6) Related services (updates, infotainment, remote management etc.)

GEVOELIG

# Deaths worldwide related

emissions & roadsafety (WHO)

7

➢ PS1: # deaths due to CO2/climate

varies between 250.000 (WHO,

2021) and 5.000.000 (Lancet, 2021)

➢ PS2: # deaths varies based on

geography, prosperity etc.

➢ PS3: # severe injuries/health

problems is a multiple of # deaths

WHO 2023

0

1.000.000

2.000.000

3.000.000

4.000.000

5.000.000

6.000.000

7.000.000

8.000.000

Pollutant emissions CO2 (Climate) Roadsafety

# deaths/year worldwide

GEVOELIG

# Deaths related to potentially

automated road traffic

8

➢ 10% of pollutant emissions are

related to road traffic (EEA, 2022)

➢ 15% of CO2 emissions are related to

road traffic (IPCC, 2023)

➢ 20% of all fatalities in road traffic is

related to the area where vehicle

automation is being introduced

(SWOV, 2019)

0

100.000

200.000

300.000

400.000

500.000

600.000

700.000

800.000

Pollutant emissions CO2 (Climate) Roadsafety

# deaths/year worldwide, relevant for roadtraffic

GEVOELIG

Recent publications

9

University Delft (2021): “… The

outcomes show that for most

scenarios and situations, the CO2

emission from the data-induced

emission sources are higher than the

propulsion-based CO2 norms of

vehicles.”

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.horiz.2023.100082

GEVOELIG

Opposite effects of vehicle

data/connectivity/automation

on # deaths (indicative)

10

➢ Reduction road fatalities

➢ Increase in environmental fatalities

due to more pollutant emissions and

more CO2 resulting from increased

energy consumption/production

0

100.000

200.000

300.000

400.000

500.000

600.000

700.000

800.000

Pollutant emissions CO2 (Climate) Roadsafety

# deaths/year worldwide, relevant for roadtraffic

GEVOELIG

Important factors influencing

these developments, e.g.

11

Decreasing emissions compared to TU Delft research:

+ increased energy efficiency for data processes

+ increased percentage of green energy

GEVOELIG

Yes but….

12

➢ Due to growing population and

prosperity, the worldwide energy

consumption increases.

Consequently, the share of

renewable energy hardly increased

since 1990. [IEA (2020)]

➢ “Jevons Paradox”: improved energy

efficiency can increase overall

energy consumption

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Share of renewables (%)

GEVOELIG

Important factors influencing

these developments, e.g.

13

Decreasing emissions compared to TU Delft research:

+ increased energy efficiency for data processes

+ increased percentage of green energy

+ delayed deployment

+ optimization of local/central data

Increasing emissions compared to TU Delft research:

- increased data volumes

- increased security requirements

- increasing amount of data processes even when the vehicle is not driving

- increased number of software updates due to higher security and increasingly

complex software

- increased travel distances due to self driving vehicles

GEVOELIG

Conclusions

14

1. The negative impact of vehicle automation on sustainability (and

potentially # deaths) is underestimated

2. This impact depends on how vehicle automation will be developed

(from a regulatory, commercial and technological perspective)

3. This effect is not restricted to vehicle automation, but relates to all

processes using generation, processing, exchange and storage of

data (e.g. electification)

4. The common claim that vehicle automation will contribute to

sustainability will require actions from WP.29 in order to make it

happen!

GEVOELIG

Recommendations

15

1. Further research including emperical data is needed to get a better

picture of the impact of vehicle automation (and other data consuming

processes) on sustainability

2. GRPE already has the mandate to cover Lifecycle Assessment (LCA).

Collaboration between experts from GRVA and GRPE could help to

improve and maintain the models and corresponding values for LCA

3. Include WP.1 and ITC in this discussion

GEVOELIG

16

Thank you for your attention!

Technology has a role.

We have a much bigger role

(Gerry McGovern)

Submitted by the experts from the Netherlands Informal document GRVA-18-10 18th GRVA, 22-26 January 2024 Provisional agenda item 8(c)

1

Proposal for a new supplement to UN Regulation No. 13

The text below was prepared by the experts from the Netherlands. The modifications to the existing text of the Regulation are marked in bold for new or strikethrough for deleted characters.

I. Proposal

Paragraph 4.5 of Annex 15., amend to read:

“4.5. Type II test (downhill behaviour test):

4.5.1. This test is required only if, on the vehicle-type in question, the friction brakes are used for the Type-II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.6 or 1.8.2.5 (b).

4.5.2. Brake linings for power-driven vehicles of Category M3 (except for those vehicles required to undergo a Type-IIA test according to paragraph 1.6.4. of Annex 4 to this Regulation) and Category N3, and trailers of Category O4 shall be tested according to the procedure set out in paragraph 1.6.1. of Annex 4 to this Regulation.

Brake linings for power-driven vehicles of Category M3 and Category N3 required to undergo a Type-IIA test according to paragraph 1.6.4. of Annex 4 to this Regulation and only complying with this requirement by application of provisions of paragraph 1.8.2.5 of Annex 4 to this Regulation, shall be tested according to the procedure set out in paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b) of Annex 4 to this Regulation.”

II. Justification

1. This amendment is to clarify the need to apply, when relevant, the Type II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b) in Annex 15 for alternative brake lining purposes.

2. During the September 2020 GRVA session document GRVA/2020/36 as modified by informal GRVA-07-73_rev1 was adopted, essentially reflecting the possibility to use, in case of vehicles with electric regenerative braking possibilities, the Type II endurance test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b) as alternative to a regular endurance brake as required by Annex 1.6. In this case, the friction brake is used when storing energy in the traction battery is not possible only because the maximum state of charge of the battery has been reached.

3. At the time, the procedure and requirements of Annex 15 on alternative brake lining have not been amended and refer only to the Type 0, I, II as requested by Annex 4 paragraph 1.6 and the Type III test.

4. In case of a manufacturer making use of the above standing Type II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b), applying a certain (‘standard’) brake lining and this manufacturer later on wants to apply an alternative brake lining, it can make use of the existing procedure as described in Annex 15. However, this Annex does not refer to the Type II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b).

Based on paragraph 1.3 of the same Annex 15 it is possible to demand additional tests according to Annex 4 – so also the Type II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b) - however in such case the test needs to be executed twice so with and standard an alternative brake lining which is double work:

2

1.3. The Technical Service responsible for conducting approval tests may at its discretion require comparison of the performance of the brake linings to be carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions contained in Annex 4 to this Regulation.

5. To overcome such double work and to ensure a level playing field, it is proposed to clarify the need to use, when relevant, the Type II test as required by Annex 4 paragraph 1.8.2.5 (b) in Annex 15.

List of tables

Table1

Table2

Table 2a

Table 2b

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 5a

Table 6

Table 6a

Table 6b

Table 6c