Open Access

The maritime part of all transport via the port of Rotterdam is linked to the brunt of all CO2 emissions (87 %) the port can potentially influence. This report aims to quantitatively grasp the maritime transport of the Port of Rotterdam, in terms of ships, total tonnages, energy consumption and CO2 emissions in respect to types of cargo and regions. In the first and broad part of the report, the emissions and energy demands of sailing ships are assessed. Emissions and energy demand for the port itself are subject of a separate part at the end.

Germany and Japan have both gained substantial experience with hydrogen production and applications, albeit with focus on different sectors. They also share similar drivers for hydrogen development and, of course, similar technical and economic opportunities and challenges. However, there also are relevant differences in the policy priorities and approaches. Notwithstanding differing emphases and patterns, the two countries share three main drivers for hydrogen development and deployment: climate mitigation and other environmental goals, energy supply diversification, and technological leadership. In this context, hydrogen has been identified by the German and the Japanese governments during the Energy Policy Dialogue as having potential for closer cooperation. The authors of this study provide an overview of demand-side deployment by sector (residential, transport, industry, power generation and power-to-x) for both countries, as well as of their hydrogen policy debates, key institutions, R&D programs and demonstration projects. They also present a short survey on relevant international platforms and initiatives in which Japan and Germany participate. On the basis of a meta-analysis of the role of hydrogen in 18 long-term energy system scenarios for Germany and 12 scenarios for Japan, this study draws conclusions on the possible role of hydrogen in the long term energy policy debates of both countries. Subsequently, the authors discuss sustainability criteria and certification schemes for clean hydrogen, compare the greenhouse gas intensity of different hydrogen supply chains and provide a data-based analysis to identify countries which could become important suppliers of clean hydrogen.

The transformation of urban mobility systems causes financial costs for the procurement and operation of innovative products and services and for the adaptation of existing infrastructure. While public budgets are limited, investments in infrastructure and transport services compete against other spending priorities, and private investors often are reluctant to invest into sustainable transport projects. Thus, cities need to seek additional funding and financing options and to develop business models to attract private sector investments in the development of the urban transport system. Moreover, financing schemes should cover the entire SUMP (Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning) cycle, starting from planning, to project implementation and procurement up to the operation and maintenance of services and infrastructures. This requires the blending of different revenue sources, including: project related revenue sources such as public transport fares and the lease of advertising space in buses; the extension of the local tax base, for example through the introduction of road user charges and parking fees or the use of value capture mechanisms; National, bilateral, and European grants; Debt financing through loans and other instruments such as issuing green bonds. Finally, a prudential engagement of the private sector in infrastructure development and service provision can reduce the direct burden on public budgets while enhancing service quality. The applicability of specific financing options critically depends on the national legislative environment. Many of the instruments and case examples presented here may not be transferred to other Member States due to the different distribution of responsibilities and powers between the political levels in the Member States. This report, however, can inspire the search for potential funding and financing sources and is therefore aimed not only at local and regional authorities but also at decisionmakers at the national level. Still, whether a specific instrument can be used in a Member State needs to be assessed on a case-by-case base.

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement establishes mechanisms for Parties to "pursue voluntary cooperation in the implementation of their nationally determined contributions to allow for higher ambition in their mitigation and adaptation actions [...]" (Article 6.1). I. e. the mechanisms are explicitly designed to foster higher ambition. However, without additional guidance and rules, the economic incentives of carbon markets may work against increasing host country ambition. For example, setting ambitious NDC targets may directly reduce the amount of mitigation outcomes that go beyond the NDC target and that a host country can transfer abroad. The report presents four options on how the risks can be ad-dressed and ambition can be increased: (1) Strengthening reporting, transparency and comparability; (2) Reconciling the design of the Article 6.4 mechanism with ambition raising of host countries; (3) Supporting the host country to raise ambition through the Article 6.4 mechanism; (4) Fostering the acquiring country to raise ambition through the Article 6.4 mechanism. These options are assessed and recommendations are provided on how they could be implemented.