Progress in Asia Pacific Partnership Transport Sector

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TOKYO 002724 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP/J AND OES/EGC FOR HARLAN WATSON WHITE HOUSE FOR CEQ - JAMES CONNAUGHTON, LANDON VAN DYKE NSC FOR JONATHAN SHRIER USDOC FOR NOAA CLIMATE CHANGE OFFICE - SID THURSTON DOT FOR LINDA LAWSON AND CAMILLE MITTELHOLTZ FAA FOR CARL BURLESON EPA FOR CHRIS GRUNDLER USDOE FOR S-3 PASS TO USAID E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ELTN SENV EWWT PREL JA SUBJECT: Progress in Asia Pacific Partnership Transport Sector Workshop in Japan, Discussion of Possible Follow-on Task Force TOKYO 00002724 001.2 OF 002 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED - PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP) members explored areas for cooperation in conserving energy and reducing CO2 emissions in road transport during the first APP Road Transport Sector Workshop in Tokyo September 18-19. Following detailed presentations on domestic efforts to conserve energy and reduce emissions by participants, all delegations expressed a desire to follow up on areas of cooperation discussed in the workshop. The Japanese plan to provide a readout of the workshop to the Policy and Implementation Committee (PIC) meeting in Vancouver October 29-30, with the aim of supplying additional information on what a potential Road Transport Task Force might entail. The PIC may decide at the Vancouver meeting to go forward with this new Task Force, or could defer a decision until a future meeting. End Summary. ¶2. (U) Japan hosted the first APP Road Transport Sector Workshop in Tokyo September 18-19 as an initial step toward establishing a Road Transport Sector Task Force. Delegations from Australia, Canada, China, India, Japan, Korea, and the U.S. attended. At the APP Policy Implementation Committee (PIC) meeting May 20, 2008 in Seattle, Japan proposed forming the Road Transport Task Force to enhance sustainable transportation systems by conserving energy and reducing CO2 emissions in the transport sector. The PIC recommended holding the workshop to determine the best path for a possible new task force and to identify potential areas of collaboration between members. ¶3. (U) The meeting began with participants' presentations on domestic efforts to conserve energy and reduce CO2 emissions in road transport. For the U.S., DOT's Director of the Office of Safety Energy and Environment Linda Lawson gave a well-received presentation on U.S domestic policies to address energy and climate in road transport. Deputy Director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality Hans Christopher Grundler also explained the EPA's SmartWay public/private transportation partnership. A representative from the Society of Indian Automotive Engineers gave a presentation on industry initiatives to develop new vehicles and alternative fuels. Korean delegates discussed the results of bus system reform in Seoul. Australian delegates gave a presentation on their country's current policies to increase purchases of low-emission vehicles through enhanced market information. Canadaian delegates outlined GOC policy initiatives for infrastructure improvement, consumer information, fuel efficiency standards and biofuel research. The Chinese Association of Automobile Manufacturers participated in the workshop, but did not give a presentation. ¶4. (U) Japan gave several presentations on improving traffic flow, developing an integrated transport system, and encouraging more economical driving and routing for commercial vehicles. Officials from Japan's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) identified three barriers to effective development of national strategies to save energy and reduce CO2 emissions in the transport sector. They recommended the following activities to address these shortcomings and encourage international collaboration: -- Develop reliable national statistics on road transport; -- Develop a comprehensive list of best practices, supported by analysis of their applicability and effectiveness, and; -- Develop a globally-shared analytical model to optimize political decisions in countries with different circumstances in their transport sectors. TOKYO 00002724 002.2 OF 002 ¶5. (SBU) Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry (METI) DG for Natural Resources and Energy Policy Kazuhiko Hombu expressed satisfaction at the positive discussions that took place. He indicated Japan would provide a readout on the workshop to the Policy and Implementation Committee (PIC) meeting in Vancouver October 29-30, while noting it would be the PIC's decision to create a Road Transport Task Force. Hombu suggested three broad areas for cooperation that such a task force could consider: -- Modes of transit (auto, bus, truck, rail, two/three wheelers, etc.); -- System efficiencies (logistics and freight, infrastructure, intelligent transport systems, etc.) and; -- Statistics/data collection (data compilation practices and capacity). Hombu concluded by expressing his hope the positive atmospherics in Tokyo would carry over to the PIC meeting. ¶6. (SBU) Delegates agreed the workshop was useful in facilitating cooperation on energy conservation and reducing CO2 emissions in road transport. All delegations indicated they would return to their capitals and consult further, with most noting interest in following up on the areas of cooperation discussed in the workshop. In its concluding remarks, the U.S. delegation agreed on the the workshop's usefulness, while noting the U.S. participants would need to consult on the next steps upon their return. In his closing remarks, Grundler noted that the incoming Administration will surely review the U.S. engagement on international climate issues, and that this may be a factor as to how we proceed. ¶7. (SBU) Canada suggested using the October PIC meeting to seek agreement for a new task force and subsequently to charge members with exploring the scope of work such a task force might undertake by drafting an Action Plan (something task forces have created, based on a loose formula of elements). Should the PIC decide to proceed with a task force in Vancouver, the Action Plan could be approved during the following PIC meeting in Australia, tentatively scheduled for May 2009. ¶8. (U) This message was cleared by its delegation subsequent to their return to Washington. SCHIEFFER