Issue - decisions

Matter for Decision

Cambridge City Council declared a climate emergency in February 2019. The Council is keen to reduce its own emissions as close to zero as possible, as soon as is feasible; within the resourcing, technological and service obligation constraints it works within. The Council’s vehicle fleet of 113 vehicles currently accounts for 24% of all the council’s emissions. We have been incrementally moving our fleet from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to ultra-low emission vehicles (ULEV) over recent years and currently there are 10 electric vans.  Of the remainder 41 of the diesel/petrol fleet are Ultra Low Emission Zone compliant and 10 have stop/start technology. The climate emergency creates an imperative to accelerate that transition, and this paper sets out a road map to achieve that.

 

The Decarbonising Cambridge City Council Vehicle Fleet paper appended to the Officer’s report set out the approach to decarbonising Cambridge City Council’s vehicle fleet, seeking to commit to replace old vehicles with ULEVs whenever possible.

 

A key enabler for the transition to ULEVs is the provision of suitable solution infrastructure primarily based at the depot location.   

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Climate Change, Environment and City Centre

Agreed to:

i.      Acknowledge the opportunities and detriments when converting to ULEVs as set out in the appended Decarbonising Cambridge City Council Vehicle Fleet paper.

ii.     Endorse the recommended approach notably:

o   The key area for action is a formal commitment to always, where there is a suitable ULEV alternative and the infrastructure allows, to procure ULEVs when replacing Council vehicles.

o   Where there is no ULEV alternative possible then this is only to be procured after a detailed business case has been written.

o   That services will actively monitor the usage of their vehicle assets and, through service reviews, seek to streamline the way work is carried out, with the twin aims of cutting carbon emissions and increasing service efficiency via a decrease in the miles driven, and over time, a decrease in the total number of vehicles required.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Head of Commercial Services.

 

The Head of Commercial Services said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          There were no plans to purchase ULEVs in 2021-22, unless they were needed to replace existing ICE vehicles as a matter of urgency eg they were unsafe or there was a justifable business case to support any new purchase.

     ii.          In order to manage the impact on the public purse, ICE vehicles would be replaced with ULEVs and electric vehicles, plus supporting infrastructure such as charging points, in incremental stages rather than through wholesale change [ie all vehicles at once]. The procurement of electric vehicle infrastructure was complex.

   iii.          Vehicles would be replaced as and when needed at the end of their working life cycle. By replacing vehicles at the end of their life cycle, their full capital value could be realised. If the council replaced ICE vehicles with ULEVs mid-life cycle, the full financial and environmental cost savings may not be realised, so the council may in fact not realise its aim of saving money and carbon emissions by changing vehicles too early.

   iv.          At the time of writing, the Office for Low Emission Vehicles provided a discount on the price of brand new low-emission vehicles through a grant the government gives to vehicle dealerships and manufacturers. The Council’s Scientific Officer could provide further information on this upon request.

    v.          Electric vehicles had not been in service for 12 years, so it was hard to compare them with the 6 years service life span expected from ICE vehicles. However, 12 years seemed probable.

   vi.          There were fewer moving parts in electric vehicles compared to ICE ones, so they should have a longer working life span.

 vii.          There were no ULEV vehicle alternatives to a limited number of ICE vehicles such as cherry pickers. Where there is no ULEV alternative possible, then an ICE vehicle would be procured after a detailed business case has been written [to evidence that an alternative was not available].

 

Councillor Matthews proposed a new [additional] recommendation 2.3:

 

Sign up to Global Action Plan's "Clean Van Commitment", which publicly pledges the Council to move to a zero emission fleet by 2028.

 

https://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/clean-air/clean-van-commitment

 

The Executive Councillor said she was happy with existing recommendation wording and actions taken by the council to decarbonise the city. There seemed no point in replacing serviceable ICE vehicles with ULEVs until they were at the end of their life cycle.

 

Councillor Matthews withdrew his proposal after a discussion by committee where the Executive Councillor welcomed the idea to work with Councillor Matthews and officers in future on ways to decarbonise the city. She would look at details then consider what to sign up to in future.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.