A fair method for the calculation of the external costs of road traffic noise according to the Eurovignette Directive

Texto completo

(1) . . Título artículo / Títol article: A fair method for the calculation of the external costs of road traffic noise according to the Eurovignette Directive. Autores / Autors. Moliner Santisteve, Enrique ; Vidal Nadal, María Rosario ; Franco, Vicente. Revista:. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment Volume 24, October 2013. Versión / Versió:. Preprint de l’autor. Cita bibliográfica / Cita bibliogràfica (ISO 690):. MOLINER, Enrique; VIDAL, Rosario; FRANCO, Vicente. A fair method for the calculation of the external costs of road traffic noise according to the Eurovignette Directive. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2013, 24: 52-61.. url Repositori UJI:. http://hdl.handle.net/10234/88129. .

(2) Afairmethodforthecalculationoftheexternalcostsofroad trafficnoiseaccordingtotheEurovignetteDirective EnriqueMoliner*,RosarioVidal,VicenteFranco Engineering Design Group, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering and Construction, Universitat Jaume I, Av. Sos Baynat s/n, 12071Castellón,Spain *Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+34964729252. EͲmailaddress:[email protected](E.Moliner).. Highlights x x x x. Anewmethodisprovidedtocalculatetheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoise. Themethodusesnoiseweightingfactorsforvehicleclassesandtimesoftheday. Improvedweightingfactorsaredevelopedforvehicleclassesandtimesoftheday. ThesefactorscanberegardedassuitabletobegeneralizedtoanyroadinEurope.. Abstract ThelatestamendmentoftheEurovignetteDirectiveallowsEUMemberStatestolevyinfrastructurecharges (i.e.roadtolls)inordertocompensatefortheexternalcostsofnoisecausedbyheavygoodsvehicles(HGVs).To thisend,itprovidesamethodforthecalculationoftheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoise.Thismethodrequires the use of different weighting factors according to the vehicle class and time of the day. However, the Eurovignette Directive does not provide specific values or guidelines to calculate these weighting factors. For thisreason,weightingfactorsbothfordifferentvehicleclassesandfordifferenttimesofthedayaredeveloped inthispaper.Thesefactorsaremorereliablethanthosefoundinearlierstudies,astheyarehighlydifferentiated to better account for the influence of key cost drivers, namely vehicle class, speed and time of the day. The methodoftheEurovignetteDirectivefocusesonthechargingofHGVsfordayandnight.Analternativemethod is devised to extend the calculation of noise costs to other vehicle classes and time periods by applying the weightingfactorsdevelopedherein. Keywords:Roadtrafficnoise;Externalcosts;EurovignetteDirective;Weightingfactors;Strategicnoisemaps. 1.Introduction The estimation and internalisation of external costs of transport has been an important issue in transport research and policy in Europe for many years. The European Commission addressed the matter of cost internalisationinseveralstrategypapers(EuropeanCommission,1995,1998,2001,2006a,2008,2011),inwhich it stated that transport pricing should be based on marginal social cost (i.e. the social cost caused by an additional transport unit). Pricing instruments for the internalisation of external costs of transport have been implemented through EU Directives. The soͲcalled Eurovignette Directive (European Commission, 1999) was initiallyadoptedtoallowEUMemberStatestochargeheavygoodsvehicles(HGVs)fortheuseofmotorwaysto coverconstruction,maintenanceandoperationcosts.Itwaslateramended(EuropeanCommission,2006b)to extend the charges to all roads in the transͲEuropean road network and to allow a limited differentiation of charges according to the amount of congestion and certain environmental criteria. This first amendment also required to develop a reliable model for the assessment of all external costs to serve as the basis for future calculationsofinfrastructurecharges.Tothisend,theEuropeanCommissioncommissionedtheIMPACTproject (Maibachetal.,2008),whichprovidedanoverviewofthestateoftheartandbestpracticeintheestimationof.

(3) externalcostsoftransport.BasedonthefindingsoftheIMPACTproject,anewamendmentoftheEurovignette Directivewasrecentlyadopted(EuropeanUnion,2011).ThislatestrevisionoftheEurovignetteDirectiveallows EUMemberStatestochargeHGVsforthecostsofairpollutionandnoise,andprovidesmethodsforcalculating both environmental costs. In the case of noise, the calculation method provides average costs per vehicleͲ kilometre.Theseaveragenoisecostsaredifferentiatedaccordingtoasetofkeycostdrivers,namelylocation, vehicleclassandtimeoftheday.Thelocationoftheroadsistakenintoaccountbydistinguishingtwotypesof road:suburbanroads,whicharesubjecttohighernoisecostsastheyarelocatedclosetopopulatedareas;and interurban roads, which are subject to lower noise costs as they are located in sparsely populated areas. The calculationmethodrequirestheuseofweightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclassestoaccountfordifferences innoisecostsbetweendifferentvehicleclasses.Theuseofweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedayisalso requiredtodistinguishbetweennoisecostsfordayandnight. The latest revision of the Eurovignette Directive (European Union, 2011) shows some limitations. Most notably,itreferstotheuseofweightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclasses anddifferenttimesofthedayin ordertocalculatedifferentiatednoisecostsbyvehicleclassandtimeoftheday,butitdoesnotprovidespecific values or guidelines to calculate these factors. Moreover, each EU Member State can only determine a single specific charge for each combination of vehicle class, type of road and time period. The method of the EurovignetteDirectiveappliesatopͲdownapproachtocalculatethenoisecostsfortwodifferenttypesofroad. Thisapproachusesaggregateddatafromalargesetofroadsofthesametypetocomputethetotalnoisecosts, which are then divided by the total amount of traffic on these roads to obtain the average noise costs to be appliedtoallsuchroads.AbottomͲupapproachmightbepreferabletoassessthenoisecostsofeachparticular road, or at least more detailed differentiation should be made between roads to take into account other key driversinfluencingnoisecosts. Thispaperprovidesdifferentiatedandreliableweightingfactorstocalculatetheexternalcostsofroadtraffic noise in compliance with the Eurovignette Directive (European Union, 2011). The method of the Eurovignette Directive focuses on the charging of HGVs for day and night. An alternative method is devised to extend the calculationofnoisecoststoothervehicleclassesandtimeperiodsbyapplyingtheweightingfactorsprovided herein. A case study is presented in order to illustrate the application of the extended method. The average noise costs per vehicleͲkilometre by vehicle class and time of the day are thus calculated for three different Spanishmotorways.. 2.Materialandmethods Themethodforthecalculationoftheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoiseispresentedbelow,aswellasthe inputsthatserveasthebasisforthecalculations.. 2.1.ExternalcostsofroadtrafficnoiseandtheEurovignetteDirective TheEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011)providesamethodtocalculatethenoisecostschargeable toHGVsaccordingtothe typeofroad(suburbanandinterurban)andtime period(dayandnight). Underthis method,noisecostsarecalculatedbyapplyingthefollowingformulas: ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௝ǡௗ௔௜௟௬ ൌ ݁ ή. σ௞ ܰ‫ܥ‬௝௞ ή ܱܲܲ௞ ܹ‫ܶܦܣ‬. (1). ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௝ǡௗ௔௬ ൌ ݂ௗ௔௬ ή ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௝ǡௗ௔௜௟௬ . (2). ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௝ǡ௡௜௚௛௧ ൌ ݂௡௜௚௛௧ ή ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௝ǡௗ௔௜௟௬ . (3). whereNCVjisthenoisecostofoneHGVonroadtypej(in€/vehicleͲkm),NCjkisthenoisecostperdayper person exposed to noise level k from road type j (in €/person), POPk is the population exposed to daily noise level k per kilometre of road (in person/km), WADT is the weighted average daily traffic (in passenger car.

(4) COSTALLOCATIONANDRESULTS COST ALLOCATION AND RESULTS CALCULATIONS CALCULATIONS. INPUTS INPUTS. eq quivalent),e isanequivaalencefactorrbetweenHG GVsandpassengercars,andfdayanddfnightarewe eightingfacto ors fo ordayandnigghtperiods. The Eurovignette Direcctive (European Union, 22011) also provides p the following m maximum chargeable noise co ostspervehiicleͲkilometrre:1.1€ctfo orsuburban roadsduringgday,2.0€cctforsuburbbanroadsdu uringnight,0 0.2 €cctforinterurrbanroadsd duringday,a and0.3€ctfforinterurbaanroadsdurringnight.If thenoiseco ostscalculatted fro omEq.(1)to oEq.(3)exceeedthemaxiimumchargeeablecosts,thelatterareusedinsteaad. Themetho odoftheEurrovignetteD Directive(EurropeanUnio on,2011)foccusesontheechargingoffHGVsford day an nd night, but it is extended here to o other vehi cle classes and a time periods by appplying more differentiatted weightingfacttors.Aschem maticreprese entationofttheextended dmethodissshowninFig .1. Numberofperso ons exxposedtonoiseeby 5dBAintervals: PO OPk. Noisecostsperday perpe ersonexposed by5dBAintervals: NCk. Totalnoiseecosts:. Weightingfactoors fordifferentve f ehicle classes:eCATi. Weigghtingfactors ford differenttimeso of thed day:fT. Weigghtedaveraged dailytraffic:. ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡௡ ൌ ෍ ܰ‫ܥ‬௞ ή ܱܲܲ ܲ ௞ ௞. Averagedaailytraffic byvehicleclass: ADTCATi. ܹ‫ܣ‬ ‫ ܶܦܣ‬ൌ ෍ ݁஼஺ ஺்௜ ή ‫ܶܦܣ‬஼஺்௜ ௜. Noisecostpe ervehicleͲkmbyyvehicleclass: ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௘௡ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ܹ‫ܦܣ‬ ‫ܶܦ‬. Noisecostpe ervehicleͲkmbyyvehicleclassaandtimeofthe e day: ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ்݂ ή ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺஺்௜ . Fig.1.Overviewofthe extendedmeethod:inputs,calculations,costallocatioonandresults.. 2.2.Traffican ndnoiseexp posuredata aandtheEnnvironmenttalNoiseDirrective Dailynoiseelevelsarem measuredbyusingthedaayͲeveningͲn nightnoisein ndicator(Ldenn),whichrep presentsthe AͲ weighted longgͲterm averaage sound level determ mined over all a 24Ͳhour periods of aa year. Lden in AͲweightted de ecibels (dBA) is defined in the soͲca alled Environnmental Noise Directive (European CCommission, 2002) by the t fo ollowingform mula: ‫ܮ‬ௗ௘௡ ൌ ͳͲ ή ቆ. ௅೐ೡ೐೙೔೙೒ ାହ ௅೙೔೒೓೟ ାଵ଴ ௅೏ೌ೤ ͳʹ Ͷ ͺ ଵ଴ ή ͳͲ ଵ଴ ൅ ή ͳͲ ൅ ή ͳͲ ଵ଴ ቇ ʹͶ ʹͶ ʹͶ. (4). whereLday,,Leveningand Lnightarethe eAͲweighteddlongͲtermaaveragesoun ndlevelsdetterminedresspectivelyovver alltheday(122h),evening(4h)andnight(8h)perriodsofayear.Thesenoiselevelsareemeasuredatthepositiion offthereceivers(normallyatthemostexposedfaççadeofdwellings).Then numberofpeersonsexpossedtoLdenbyy5 dB BAintervalsismultipliedbyunitvalu uesfornoise exposureco osts(i.e.costtsperpersonnexposed)tocalculatetthe.

(5) totalnoisecosts.Trafficdata(volume,compositionbyvehicleclass,andspeed)arethenrequiredtoallocatethe totalnoisecoststoindividualvehiclesofdifferentclasses. Allofthetrafficandnoiseexposuredatarequiredbythecalculationmethodarepubliclyavailablethrough strategic noise maps drafted under the Environmental Noise Directive (European Commission, 2002). EU MemberStateswererequiredtomakestrategicnoisemapsforalltheirmajorroads(i.e.roadswithmorethan threemillionvehiclesperyear)before30June2012.Theinformationfromthestrategicnoisemapshadtobe submitted to the European Commission within six months of the above date. The data reported so far by EU MemberStatesareavailableonthewebͲbasedpublicinformationsystemsReportnet–EIONET1andNOISE2.. 2.3.Noisecostsperpersonexposed AnextensivereviewofstudiesontheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoisewasperformedwithintheIMPACT project(Maibachetal.,2008).Basedonthisreview,thevaluesfromtheHEATCOproject(Bickeletal.,2006)for thenoisecostsperpersonexposedperdBAwererecommended.Thesecostscomprisethewillingnesstopayfor reducingannoyanceandthequantifiablecostsofhealtheffects.TheHEATCOprojectprovidescountryͲspecific valuesforthecostsperyearperpersonexposedforallcountriesoftheEUͲ25andSwitzerlandfortheyear2002.. 2.4.Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclasses The total noise costs are allocated to individual vehicles of different classes based on their corresponding sharesintotalnoiseemissions,estimatedviatrafficvolumesbyvehicleclass.Sincevehiclesemitdifferentnoise levels depending on their class, weighting factors for different vehicle classes must be applied to correct for differencesinnoiseemissionsbetweenclasses.TheEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011)referstoa weightingfactorofnomorethan4betweenHGVsandpassengercars,butdoesnotprovidespecificvaluesor guidelines to calculate it. An internationally agreed set of weighting factors is lacking, and studies applying weightingfactorshaveshownlargedifferencesamongthem(Maibachetal.,2008).TheEuropeanConferenceof MinistersofTransport(1998)usedaweightingof10:10:1fortherelativenoisenuisancefromHGVs,busesand cars, while the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD/INFRAS/Herry, 2003) used a weighting of 3:2.5:1. The IMPACT project (Maibach et al., 2008) recommends using the weighting factors for differentroadvehicleclassesprovidedbyCEDelft(vanEssenetal.,2004).TheseareshowninTable1. Table1 Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclasses(Source:vanEssenetal.,2004). Vehicleclass Passengercarpetrol Passengercardiesel PassengercarLPG Moped Motorcycle Bus Van HGVsolo<12tonsGVW HGVsolo>12tonsGVW HGVwithtrailer. Urbanroads(50km/h) 1.0 1.2 1.0 9.8 13.2 9.8 1.5 9.8 13.2 16.6. Otherroads(80km/horhigher) 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 4.2 3.3 1.2 3.0 4.2 5.5. TheweightingfactorsinTable1showsomelimitations.Thesefactorswerecalculatedfromnoisereference values for light, medium heavy and heavy vehicles presented in the Dutch instruction for measuring and 1 2. Reportnet–EIONET(EuropeanEnvironmentInformationandObservationNetwork):http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu NOISE(NoiseObservationandInformationServiceforEurope):http://noise.eionet.europa.eu.

(6) calculating road traffic noise (VROM, 2002). Factors for mopeds and motorcycles were based on expert assumptions. These factors are therefore specific for the Netherlands, while factors for the average European roadvehicleswouldbepreferable.Moreover,althoughdifferentfactorsareprovidedforawiderangeofvehicle classes,suchfactorsareonlydifferentiatedaccordingtotwotypesofroad:urbanroads,wherethespeedis50 km/h;andotherroads,wherethespeedis80km/horhigher.Theratiobetweenthenoiseemissionlevelsof differentvehicleclassescanvarysignificantlydependingonthespeedofeachvehicleclass,whichmaynotbe the same for all vehicle classes, even on the same road. Hence, more differentiated and accurate weighting factors that take into account various speeds would be more convenient. These should be based on noise emissionvaluesrepresentativeofthevehiclecharacteristicsoftheaverageEuropeanfleet.. 2.5.Weightingfactorsfordifferenttimesoftheday Nuisance due to noise exposure varies depending on the time of the day. To take this cost driver into account,theEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011)establishestheuseofweightingfactorsfordayand nightperiods.However,itdoesnotprovidespecificvaluesorguidelinestocalculatethesefactors.Timeofthe dayisonlyconsideredinafewstudiesestimatingmarginalnoisecostsfortransport,suchastheUNITEproject (Bickeletal.,2003;Nashandpartners,2003)orstudiesbyINFRAS/IWW(Schreyeretal.,2004)andbytheSwiss AgencyfortheEnvironment,ForestsandLandscape(MüllerͲWenkandHofstetter,2003).Duetothelogarithmic natureoftheunittypicallyusedfornoise(i.e.thedecibel),marginalnoisecostsaresensitivetoexistingtraffic volumes; if the existing traffic volume is high, adding one extra vehicle will result in a small increase in the existingnoiselevels,andviceversa.Sincestudiesthatestimatemarginalnoisecostsarebasedonspecificcase studiesandmarginalnoisecostsarehighlydependentonthetrafficsituation,substantialdifferenceshavebeen foundbetweentheresultsofthedifferentstudies(Maibachetal.,2008).Consequently,theratiosbetweenthe marginalnoisecostsfordifferenttimesoftheday,whichcanbeobtainedfrommarginalcoststudiesbasedon specifictrafficsituations,arehardlytransferabletootherEuropeanroads.Thisjustifiestheneedfordeveloping weightingfactorsfordifferenttimesoftheday,whichshouldbeapplicabletoanyroadinEurope.Theseshould preferablybedifferentiatedaccordingtothreetimeperiods,namelyday,eveningandnight.. 3.Developmentofimprovedweightingfactors Thissectiondealswiththetheoreticaldevelopmentofweightingfactorsforthecalculationoftheexternal costs of road traffic noise. The approach for noise cost allocation used here as the basis for developing the weightingfactorsisfirstpresented.Thedevelopmentofweightingfactorsbothfordifferentvehicleclassesand fordifferenttimesofthedayisthenexplainedandmathematicalexpressionsforthesefactorsareprovided.. 3.1.Approachfornoisecostallocation Thetotalnoisecostsarecalculatedasafunctionofthepopulationexposedtodailynoiselevels,whichare measured by the noise indicator Lden (see Eq. (4)). This indicator uses a weighted noise measure to take the impactoftimeofthedayintoaccount;eveningnoisecarriesapenaltyof5dBAandnightnoisecarriesapenalty of10dBA.Thesenoiselevelsrelatetosoundpressurelevelsmeasuredatthepositionofthereceivers.Because noise exposure levels are directly caused by noise emissions from traffic, the total noise costs should be allocated to individual vehicles of different classes in each time period based on their shares in total noise emissions,butalsoconsideringtheweightednoisemeasurementionedabove.Tothisend,adayͲeveningͲnight noiseemissionlevel(LW,den)isassumedhere.LW,dencanbedefinedbythesameformulaasLden butusingsound powerlevelsemittedbythetrafficduringeachtimeperiodinsteadofsoundpressurelevelsatthepositionof the receivers. The equivalent sound power level per unit length as emitted by a flow of vehicles of the same classiduringatimeperiodT(LW,T,CATi,indBA/m)canbecomputedasfollows(Kephalopoulosetal.,2012):.

(7) ‫ܮ‬ௐǡ்ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ‫ܮ‬ௐǡ଴ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͳͲ ή ቆ. ܳ ்ǡ஼஺்௜ ቇ ͳͲͲͲ ή ‫் ݒ‬ǡ஼஺்௜. (5). whereLW,0,CATiistheinstantaneoussoundpowerlevelemittedbyasinglevehicleoftheclassi(indBA),QT,CATi isthenumberofvehiclesoftheclassipassingperunittimeduringthetimeperiodT(inveh/h),andvT,CATiisthe average speed of the vehicle flow of the class i during the time period T (in km/h). LW,0,CATi values can be calculatedwithatrafficnoiseemissionmodel(e.g.CNOSSOSͲEU(Kephalopoulosetal.,2012))accordingtoaset ofinputvariables,likevehicleclass,speedandsoforth. TheequivalentsoundpowerlevelcausedbythetotaltrafficduringatimeperiodT(LW,T,indBA/m)canthen becalculatedthroughthelogarithmicsumofthesoundpowerlevelsassociatedwiththeflowsofthedifferent vehicleclasses.Thesumofequivalentsoundpowerlevelsiscomputedasfollows: ‫ܮ‬ௐǡ் ൌ ͳͲ ή ൬෍ ͳͲ ௜. ௅ೈǡ೅ǡ಴ಲ೅೔ ଵ଴ ൰. (6). The definition of the noise emission level LW,den together with the above formulas constitute the basis for noisecostallocationtoindividualvehiclesofdifferentclassesineachtimeperiod.However,eventhoughsound isusuallymeasuredindecibels,thesoundpowerlevelisnottherightmeasuretoconductnoisecostallocation. Instead,thesoundpowerlevelvaluesmustbetranslatedfromthelogarithmicunitdecibelintoanenergyunit that can be linearly disaggregated. The mathematical relationship between the sound power level in decibels andthesoundpowerinwattsisgivenbythefollowingformula: ‫ܮ‬ௐ ൌ ͳͲ ή ቆ. ܹ ቇ ܹ௥௘௙. (7). whereLWisthesoundpowerlevelindecibels,Wisthesoundpowerinwattsproducedbythesource,and Wrefisareferencesoundpowerof10Ͳ12watts. ThesoundpowerlevelLW,dencanbeconvertedtosoundpowerthroughtherelationshipinEq.(7).ThedayͲ eveningͲnightsoundpower(Wden,inW/m)isthusexpressedasfollows: ܹௗ௘௡ ൌ. ହ ଵ଴ ͳʹ Ͷ ͺ ή ܹௗ௔௬ ൅ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ൅ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ ʹͶ ʹͶ ʹͶ. (8). where Wday, Wevening and Wnight are the sound power for the day, evening and night periods (in W/m). The soundpowerWTforeachtimeperiodT(day,eveningandnight)canbeobtainedbysubstitutingEq.(7)intoEq. (6)andEq.(5),whichresultsasfollows: ்ܹ ൌ ෍ ்ܹǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ෍ ܹ଴ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ௜. ௜. ்ܳǡ஼஺்௜ ͳͲͲͲ ή ‫்ݒ‬ǡ஼஺்௜. (9). where WT,CATi is the sound power per unit length emitted by a flow of vehicles of the class i for the time periodT(inW/m)andW0,CATiistheinstantaneoussoundpoweremittedbyasinglevehicleoftheclassi(inW). Atthispoint,noisecostallocationcanbeconductedonthebasisofthesharesoftheindividualvehiclesof different classes for each time period in total noise emissions, which are expressed through the dayͲeveningͲ nightsoundpowerWden.Thetotalnoisecostscanfirstbeallocatedtothedifferenttimeperiodsasfollows: ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ൌ ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௔௬ ൅ ܰ‫ܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ൅ ܰ‫ܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ . ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௔௬. ܰ‫ܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚. ͳʹ ή ܹௗ௔௬ ൌ ʹͶ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹௗ௘௡. ହ Ͷ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ʹͶ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹௗ௘௡. (10) (11). (12).

(8) ܰ‫ܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧. ଵ଴ ͺ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ ʹͶ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹௗ௘௡. (13). whereNCden,NCday,NCeveningandNCnightarethetotalnoisecostsperdayandkilometreofroadduringthedayͲ eveningͲnight,day,eveningandnightperiods,respectively. Thetotalnoisecostsforeachtimeperiodcanthenbeallocatedtotheflowsofthedifferentvehicleclassesas follows: ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜. ܰ‫ܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜. ͳʹ ή ܹௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܹௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௔௬ ൌ ʹͶ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹௗ௔௬ ܹௗ௘௡. ହ Ͷ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ʹͶ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ܹௗ௘௡. ܰ‫ܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜. ଵ଴ ͺ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ ൌ ʹͶ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ ܹௗ௘௡. (14). (15). (16). whereNCday,CATi,NCevening,CATiandNCnight,CATiarethenoisecostsperdayandkilometreofroadforthevehicle flowoftheclassiduringtheday,eveningandnightperiods,respectively. Finally,theaveragenoisecostspervehicleͲkilometrebyvehicleclassandtimeofthedaycanbeexpressedas afunctionofthetotalnoisecostsasfollows: ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜. ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜. ͳ ή ܹௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ʹͶ ൌ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ͳʹ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܹௗ௘௡. ହ ͳ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ʹͶ ൌ ൌ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ Ͷ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܹௗ௘௡. ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜. ଵ଴ ͳ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ൌ ʹͶ ή ܰ‫ܥ‬ௗ௘௡ ͺ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܹௗ௘௡. (17). (18). (19). whereNCVday,CATi,NCVevening,CATiandNCVnight,CATiaretheaveragenoisecostspervehicleͲkilometreforavehicle oftheclassiduringtheday,eveningandnightperiods,respectively.. 3.2.Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclasses Trafficvolumesbyvehicleclasscanbeusedtoallocatethetotalnoisecoststoindividualvehiclesofdifferent classes.Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclassesmustbeappliedtothecorrespondingtrafficvolumesto correct for differences in noise emissions between vehicle classes. Each weighting factor describes the relationshipbetweenthecostspervehicleͲkilometreforagivenvehicleclassandthecostspervehicleͲkilometre for a vehicle class taken as a reference (usually passenger car). Based on this relationship and using the equationspresentedinSection3.1,theweightingfactorforavehicleclassiandatimeperiodT(eT,CATi)canbe expressedasfollows: ்݁ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ. ்ܹǡ஼஺்௜ ή ்ܳǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ܹ଴ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ‫்ݒ‬ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ൌ ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ்ܹǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ή ்ܳǡ஼஺்௜ ܹ଴ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ή ‫்ݒ‬ǡ஼஺்௜. (20). Hence, it can be observed that weighting factors for different vehicle classes depend only on the instantaneoussoundpoweremittedbysinglevehiclesofthedifferentclassesandtheaveragespeedofthese vehicles.Theinstantaneoussoundpowerdoesnotdependonthetimeofthedayandtheaveragespeedcanbe.

(9) asssumedtobeethesamefforalltimep periods;onlyyafewcase eshavebeen nfoundinst rategicnoise emaps3wheere th he speed forr the night period p is sligghtly higher (about 5 km m/h) than fo or other timee periods. As A a result, the t weightingfacttorscanbecconsideredin ndependent ofthetimeo oftheday,asexpressed below: ݁஼஺஺்௜ ൌ. ܹ଴ǡ஼஺஺்௜ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஼஺்௜ ൌ ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺஺்௥௘௙ ܹ଴ǡ஼஺஺்௥௘௙ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜. (2 21). W0valuesccanbecalcu ulatedwithasuitabletra fficnoiseem missionmode elaccording toasetofinputvariables, ndsoforth.T Thenoiseem missionmode elfromtheC CNOSSOSͲEU Uproject(Kephalopoulosset likkevehicleclaass,speedan al., 2012) hass been used d herein. This model prrovides the instantaneo ous sound ppower level of an averaage Eu uropeanroad dvehicleun nderasetoffreferencecconditionsassafunction ofspeedfoordifferentvvehicleclasses: ligght motor vvehicles (CATT1), medium m heavy ve hicles (CAT2 2), heavy ve ehicles (CATT3), mopedss (CAT4a), and a motorcycles(C CAT4b).Theeinstantaneo oussoundppowervaluessderivedfro omtheCNOSSSOSͲEUmo odelhavebeeen insertedinEq.(21)tocalcculateaseto ofweighting factorsford differentveh hicleclasses accordingto othespeedssof th hevehicles.TThesefactorsshavebeencalculatedfformultipleccombination nsofvehicle speedsranggingfrom50to 13 30km/hinin ntervalsof10 0km/handassumingth atthespeed dsofthediffferentvehicleeclassesdiffferbynomo ore th han 50 km/h h from the speed of th he referencee vehicle claass. The weighting factoors thus obtained for the t differentvehiccleclassesareshownas pointsinFigg.2.Theweightingfacto orsforCAT1 (whichinclu udespassengger caars,vansч3.5tons,sportutilityvehiccles,andmuultiͲpurposevehiclesincludingtrailerrsandcarava ans)arealwaays 1becauseCATT1istakenassthereferen ncevehiclecclass.. Fig.2.Weigghtingfactorssfordifferent vehicleclasse esaccordingtothespeeds ofthevehicle es.. 3. The strateegic noise maps for Spanish major roadds have been consulted through the Spaanish Informa ation System on No oisePollution:http://sicaw web.cedex.es.

(10) ThesurfacefittingsoftwareTableCurve3D®hasbeenusedtoconverttheseriesofdatapointsshowninFig. 2 for each vehicle class into simplified surface equations. The weighting factors for each vehicle class can be definedbyrationalfunctionswiththefollowingform: ݁஼஺்௜ ൌ. ଶ ଶ ‫݌‬଴ǡ଴ ൅ ‫݌‬଴ǡଵ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ൅ ‫݌‬ଵǡ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ൅ ‫݌‬ଵǡଵ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ൅ ‫݌‬଴ǡଶ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ൅ ‫݌‬ଶǡ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ଶ ଶ ͳ ൅ ‫ݍ‬଴ǡଵ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ൅ ‫ݍ‬ଵǡ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ൅ ‫ݍ‬ଵǡଵ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙ ൅ ‫ݍ‬଴ǡଶ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௜ ൅ ‫ݍ‬ଶǡ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬஼஺்௥௘௙. (22). ThecoefficientsofEq.(22)havebeencomputedforeachvehicleclassusingthesurfacefittingsoftware.The coefficient of determination (r2) and the standard error (SE) of the equations for each vehicle class have also beencomputed.TheequationcoefficientsandthefitstatisticsareshowninTable2. Table2 CoefficientsandfitstatisticsofEq.(22)fordifferentvehicleclasses. Coefficient p0,0 p0,1 p1,0 p1,1 p0,2 p2,0 q0,1 q1,0 q1,1 q0,2 q2,0 r2 SE. CAT2 1.088E+01 Ͳ5.349EͲ02 Ͳ1.161EͲ02 Ͳ3.686EͲ04 1.918EͲ03 2.135EͲ05 5.674EͲ03 Ͳ2.580EͲ02 Ͳ2.150EͲ04 Ͳ2.886EͲ06 1.504EͲ03 1.000E+00 5.225EͲ03. CAT3 9.247E+00 Ͳ1.107EͲ01 7.633EͲ02 Ͳ8.047EͲ04 3.457EͲ03 Ͳ2.091EͲ04 1.077EͲ02 Ͳ5.621EͲ02 7.427EͲ05 Ͳ6.369EͲ05 1.312EͲ03 1.000E+00 1.194EͲ02. CAT4a 2.819E+00 Ͳ3.888EͲ03 Ͳ3.127EͲ02 Ͳ2.035EͲ05 2.639EͲ04 1.033EͲ04 Ͳ3.718EͲ02 4.984EͲ02 Ͳ5.864EͲ04 3.164EͲ04 1.222EͲ04 1.000E+00 6.796EͲ03. CAT4b 1.571E+00 Ͳ9.645EͲ03 Ͳ1.459EͲ02 1.444EͲ04 Ͳ2.750EͲ05 1.082EͲ05 Ͳ2.245EͲ02 1.479EͲ02 Ͳ2.540EͲ04 1.548EͲ04 1.319EͲ04 9.980EͲ01 4.075EͲ02. The above weighting factors and their mathematical expressions have been calculated under a set of reference conditions: (1) constant vehicle speed; (2) a flat road; (3) an air temperature of 20 °C; (4) a virtual referenceroadsurface,consistingofanaverageofdenseasphaltconcrete0/11andstonemasticasphalt0/11, between2and7yearsoldandinarepresentativemaintenancecondition;(5)adryroadsurface;(6)avehicle fleet for which the characteristics correspond to the values found for the European average (Peeters and van Blokland,2007);and(7)nostuddedtyres.TheCNOSSOSͲEUmodel(Kephalopoulosetal.,2012)includesseveral correction factors to account for variations in noise emissions due to regional variations in vehicle fleet characteristics, meteorological conditions, road properties or driving behaviour. The effects of regional variations have also been investigated by performing a sensitivity analysis of regional parameters to estimate theirinfluenceontheweightingfactors.TheresultsofthesensitivityanalysisareshowninTable3. It should be noted that regional variations are considered a secondͲorder effect. The acceleration and decelerationofvehiclesmayhaveasignificanteffect,butitisrestrictedtothevicinityofcrossingswithtraffic lights and roundabouts. Moreover, the uncertainty in the estimation of acceleration and deceleration of the traffic can be higher than the effect on noise emissions. Most of the attention was therefore focused on developing weighting factors that account for the vehicle classes and speeds in European roads under the referenceconditions..

(11) Table3 Sensitivityanalysisofregionalparametersinfluencingweightingfactors. Correctionfactor Accelerationand deceleration. Referencevalue |x|ш100m(distancetothe nearestcrossingwithtraffic lightsorroundabout). Roadgradient. s =0%(averageslopealong theroadsegment). Airtemperature. T =20°C(yearlyaverageair temperature). Studdedtyres. ps =0%(yearlyaverage proportionoflightvehicles equippedwithstudded tyres). Variabilityininputs |x|=100 to50 m. Variabilityinoutputs eCAT2=0.0%to215.3% eCAT3=0.0%to202.8% eCAT4a=0.0%to42.1% eCAT4b=0.0%to42.1% s =Ͳ1to1% eCAT2=0.0%to16.3% eCAT3=0.0%to13.6% eCAT4a=0.0% eCAT4b=0.0% T =15to25°C eCAT2=Ͳ6.9%to7.4% eCAT3=Ͳ6.8%to7.2% eCAT4a=Ͳ8.1%to8.8% eCAT4b=Ͳ8.1%to8.8% ps=0 to10%(30%oflight eCAT2=0.0%toͲ9.7% vehiclesequippedwith eCAT3=0.0%toͲ9.7% eCAT4a=0.0%toͲ9.7% studdedtyresfrom December1sttoMarch31st) eCAT4b=0.0%toͲ9.7%. 3.3.Weightingfactorsfordifferenttimesoftheday Thetotalnoisecostsperdayandkilometreofroadcanbeallocatedtoindividualvehiclesofdifferentclasses by using the weighting factors for different vehicle classes presented in Section 3.2. The daily noise costs per vehicleͲkilometrethusobtainedforeachvehicleclasscanthenbeconvertedtonoisecostspervehicleͲkilometre byvehicleclassandtimeoftheday.Tothisend,weightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedaymustbeapplied to account for differences in impacts of noise emissions between times of the day. Each weighting factor describestherelationshipbetweenthecostspervehicleͲkilometreforagiventimeofthedayandthedailycosts per vehicleͲkilometre (i.e. the costs for the dayͲeveningͲnight period). Thus, the weighting factor for avehicle classiandatimeperiodT(fT,CATi)canbeexpressedasfollows: ்݂ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ. ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺்௜. (23). BasedonthisrelationshipandusingtheequationspresentedinSection3.1,theratiosbetweentheweighting factorsfordifferenttimesofthedayareexpressedasfollows: ଵ଴. ଵ଴. ݂௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ൌ ൌ ݂ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܹௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ‫ݒ‬௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ହ. (24). ହ. ݂௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܹ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ‫ݒ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ൌ ൌ ݂ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܹௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ‫ݒ‬௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜. (25). Hence,itcanbeobservedthatratiosbetweentheweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedaydependon theaveragespeedofthevehiclesforeachtimeperiod.Asmentionedabove,theaveragespeedcanbeassumed tobethesameforalltimeperiods,thusresultinginconstantratiosbetweentheweightingfactorsforthesame vehicleclass,asexpressedbelow: ଵ଴. ݂௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ݂ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ହ. ݂௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ͳͲଵ଴ ή ݂ௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ . (26) (27).

(12) TheconstantsinEq.(26)andEq.(27)arisefromtheformulathatdefinesthenoiseindicatorLden(seeEq.(4)), which was devised to take into account the impact of time of the day. This indicator uses a weighted noise measurethatincreaseseveningnoiseby5dBAandnightnoiseby10dBA.Thesepenaltiesfordifferenttimesof theday,whenexpressedintermsofsoundpower(seeEq.(8)),leadtotheaforementionedconstants. Itcanalsobedemonstratedthatweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedayarethesameforallvehicle classes,asfollows: ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ͳ ்݂ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ή ൌ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൌ ͳ ݁஼஺்௜ ்݂ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௥௘௙ ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺்௜. (28). Moreover,inordertocoverthetotalnoisecosts,thefollowingequationmustbesatisfied: ෍ ‫ܶܦܣ‬஼஺்௜ ή ܰ‫ܸܥ‬ௗ௘௡ǡ஼஺்௜ ൌ ෍ ෍ ‫்ܶܦܣ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ܰ‫்ܸܥ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ௜. ௜. ். (29). where ADTCATi is the average daily traffic for the vehicle class i during the dayͲeveningͲnight period (in veh/day)andADTT,CATiistheaveragedailytrafficforthevehicleclassiduringthetimeperiodT(inveh/day).Eq. (29)canbedevelopedtoobtainanadditionalrelationshipbetweentheweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesof theday,asshownbelow: ෍ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ‫ܶܦܣ‬஼஺்௜ ൌ ෍ ෍ ‫்ܶܦܣ‬ǡ஼஺்௜ ή ݁஼஺்௜ ή ்݂ ௜. ௜. ். (30). TheweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedaycanbederivedbycombiningEq.(30)withEq.(26)and Eq.(27).Theweightingfactorsthusobtainedareexpressedasfollows: ݂ௗ௔௬ ൌ. σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൫ͳʹ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൯. ହ ଵ଴ σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൬ͳʹ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൰. ݂௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ ൌ. ݂௡௜௚௛௧ ൌ. (31). σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൫ͳʹ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൯. ହ ହ σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൬ͳʹ ή ͳͲିଵ଴ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ͳͲଵ଴ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൰. (32). σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൫ͳʹ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൯. ଵ଴ ହ σ௜ ݁஼஺்௜ ή ൬ͳʹ ή ͳͲିଵ଴ ή ܳௗ௔௬ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ Ͷ ή ͳͲିଵ଴ ή ܳ௘௩௘௡௜௡௚ǡ஼஺்௜ ൅ ͺ ή ܳ௡௜௚௛௧ǡ஼஺்௜ ൰. (33). 4.Casestudy A case study is presented here in order to illustrate the application of the improved weighting factors to calculatetheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoise.Thecalculationmethodusedinthecasestudyismorecomplete thanthemethodoftheEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011)becauseitallowscalculating thenoise costsofvariousvehicleclasses(passengercarsandHGVs)forthreetimeperiods(day,eveningandnight).The average noise costs per vehicleͲkilometre by vehicle class and time of the day were thus calculated for three different Spanish motorways (Fig. 3). Data from strategic noise maps for these roads for the year 2006 were used as inputs for the calculations. The strategic noise maps were obtained from the Spanish Information System on Noise Pollution (Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment, 2007). Traffic and noise exposuredatausedforthecalculationsareshowninTable4andTable5..

(13) Fig.3.View woftheroad dsunderstudy y. Ta able4 Traffic flows aand speeds by b vehicle cla ass and timee of the dayy (Source: Spanish Ministrry of Agriculture, Food and a nvironment,2007). En R Roadname. m) Length(km. APͲ7North. 221.5. APͲ7South. 147.6. APͲ4. 93.4. Timeo oftheday Ligghtvehicles(C CAT1) Floow(veh/h) Speed(km//h) Day 10079 120 Evenin ng 7999 120 Night 1779 120 12295 Day 120 ng 9559 Evenin 120 Night 1550 120 12266 Day 120 ng 12203 Evenin 120 Night 1559 120. Heavvyvehicles(CA AT3) Flow(veh/h) Speed(km/h) S 362 100 1 477 100 1 100 1 156 100 1 434 100 1 572 100 1 131 100 1 157 100 1 134 100 1 68. Ta able5 Nu umberofperssonsexposedtonoiseperkkilometreofrroad(Source:SpanishMinistryofAgricu lture,Foodan ndEnvironmeent, 20 007). Roadname APͲ7North APͲ7South APͲ4. NoiseleevelsLdenby5 5dBAintervalss 55Ͳ60 60Ͳ65 90.29 26.19 226.96 54.88 61.03 13.92. 65Ͳ70 0 4.06 10.16 6 2.14. 70Ͳ75 0.45 1.36 0.00. >75 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0. In addition n to traffic and noise exposure dataa, the calculaation method requires tthe followingg inputs: noise co osts per persson exposed d to road traffic noise, weighting faactors for different veh icle classes and weightiing factorsfordiffferenttimessoftheday. ThenoiseccostsforSpainperdayp perpersonexxposedwere ebasedontthe.

(14) HEATCOproject(Bickeletal.,2006).TheHEATCOvalueswereadjustedtoyear2006forpurchasingpowerparity (i.e.thevalueswereexpressedas€2006PPP)andwerebundledin5dBAintervalsasshowninTable6. Table6 NoisecostsforSpainperyearperpersonexposedtoroadtrafficnoise. NoiselevelsLdenby5dBAintervals 55Ͳ60 60Ͳ65 65Ͳ70 70Ͳ75 75Ͳ80. Noisecostsperyearperpersonexposed (€2006PPP/person/year) 58 99 141 226 303. Theweightingfactorsforlightvehicles(CAT1)arealways1becausetheyaretakenasthereferencevehicle class.Theweightingfactorsforheavyvehicles(CAT3)werecalculatedaccordingtothevehiclespeedsbyusing Eq. (22).Theweightingfactorsfordifferent times oftheday werecalculatedaccording tothe traffic flowsby vehicleclassandtimeofthedaybyusingEq.(31)toEq.(33).Theweightingfactorsbothfordifferentvehicle classesandfordifferenttimesofthedayareshowninTable7. Table7 Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclassesandtimesofthedayfortheroadsunderstudy. Roadname APͲ7North APͲ7South APͲ4. Weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicleclasses: eCATi Lightvehicles(CAT1) Heavyvehicles(CAT3) 1.00 2.02 1.00 2.02 1.00 2.02. Weightingfactorsfordifferenttimesoftheday:fT Day Evening Night 0.39 0.44 0.44. 1.24 1.39 1.41. 3.92 4.40 4.44. Noiseexposuredatawerecombinedwithnoisecostsperdayperpersonexposedtocalculatethetotalnoise costs. Data on traffic flows by vehicle class and weighting factors for different vehicle classes were used to translate the total noise costs into the average noise costs per vehicleͲkilometre by vehicle class. Weighting factorsfordifferenttimesofthedaywereappliedtodeterminetheaveragenoisecostspervehicleͲkilometreby vehicleclassandtimeoftheday.Thetotalandaveragenoisecostsforeachoftheroadsstudiedareshownin Table8. Table8 Totalandaveragecostsoftrafficnoisefortheroadsunderstudy. Roadname. APͲ7North APͲ7South APͲ4. Totalnoisecosts:NCden Averagenoisecosts:NCVT,CATi (€ct2006 PPP/vehicleͲkm) (€2006PPP/km/day) Lightvehicles(CAT1) Heavyvehicles(CAT3) Day Evening Night Day Evening 23.30 0.028 0.088 0.279 0.056 0.178 55.72 0.065 0.205 0.648 0.131 0.414 14.30 0.023 0.074 0.233 0.047 0.149. Night 0.563 1.309 0.471. 5.Discussion Theweightingfactorsdevelopedhereallowthecalculationoftheexternalcostsofroadtrafficnoisewithin the framework of the Eurovignette Directive (European Union, 2011). These factors have a high level of differentiationinordertoprovidereliablenoisecostsofvariousvehicleclassesfordifferenttimesoftheday. The benefits of these factors can be exposed by comparing them with those found in previous work..

(15) DifferentiatedweightingfactorsforawiderangeofvehicleclassesareavailablefromCEDelft(vanEssenetal., 2004),buttheseonlydistinguishtwotypesofroad:urbanroads,wherethespeedis50km/h;andotherroads, where the speed is 80 km/h or higher (see Table 1). A single set of weighting factors is given by CE Delft for variousvehicleclassestravellingonurbanroads.However,thefactorsforurbanroadsmaybehighly variable because they are subject to large variations in regional parameters (e.g. acceleration and deceleration) that influencethem(seeTable3).Althoughurbanroadsareoutsidethescopeofthisstudy,sincetheEurovignette Directivedoesnotapplytothem,itshouldbenotedthatimprovedfactorsforurbanroadscouldbeobtainedby taking regional variations into account (provided that their values are known) with a suitable traffic noise emissionmodel.AnothersinglesetofweightingfactorsisgivenbyCEDelftforvariousvehicleclassestravelling onotherroads,whichincludebothsuburbanandinterurbanroadstowhichtheEurovignetteDirectiveapplies. Thesamefactorsarethusappliedtosuburbanandinterurbanroads,ormoregeneraltoallroadsclassifiedas otherroads,i.e.roadswherethespeedis80km/horhigher.However,weightingfactorsfordifferentvehicle classesvarydependingonthespeedofthevehicles.Totakethisvariabilityintoaccount,thefactorsdeveloped hereinaredifferentiatedaccordingtothespeedsofthevehicles(seeEq.(22)).Moreover,theweightingfactors for different vehicle classes given by CE Delft are specific for the Netherlands, while factors for the average Europeanroadvehicleswouldbemoreconvenient.Thefactorsdevelopedherearebasedonthetrafficnoise emissionmodelCNOSSOSͲEU(Kephalopoulosetal.,2012),whichprovidesnoiseemissionvaluesfortheaverage Europeanroadvehicles.ThesefactorscanthereforeberegardedasEuropeanaveragevalues,thusbeingmore suitable to be generalized to any road in Europe. With respect to differentiation according to time period, weighting factors for different times of the day are not available from previous work. Some studies have estimatedmarginalnoisecostsfordifferenttimesofthedaybasedonspecificcasestudies(Bickeletal.,2003; Nashandpartners,2003;MüllerͲWenkandHofstetter,2003;Schreyeretal.,2004).However,theresultsofcase studies are hardly transferable to any European road because marginal noise costs are sensitive to existing trafficflows.Toovercomethislimitation,theweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedaydevelopedherein are expressed as a function of the traffic flows by vehicle class and time of the day (see Eq. (31) to Eq. (33)). These factors distinguish three time periods, namely day, evening and night periods, while the Eurovignette Directiveandtheaforementionedstudiesonlydistinguishdayandnight periods.Theinclusionofthe evening periodispreferablesincenoiseeffectsduringeveningaredifferentfromnoiseeffectsduringdayornight.The factors provided here are therefore more reliable than those found in earlier studies, as they are highly differentiatedtobetteraccountfortheinfluenceofkeycostdrivers,namelyvehicleclass,speedandtimeofthe day. In addition to key cost drivers, there are some regional parameters that may have significant effects on weighting factors (see Table 3). The CNOSSOSͲEU model includes correction factors to take into account the variationsinregionalparameters.SiteͲspecificweightingfactorscouldthusbeobtained,althoughdatarequired forthecalculationsarescarce,especiallywhenatopͲdownapproachisapplied. Thelackofdifferentiationaccordingtovehiclespeedintheweightingfactorsprovidedinearlierstudiescan leadtoamisjudgementofthenoisecostsattributabletovehiclesofdifferentclasses.Iftheweightingfactorsfor differentvehicleclassesgivenbyCEDelft(vanEssenetal.,2004)hadbeenusedinthecasestudyinsteadthe improvedfactors,theerrorinvolvedwouldhavevariedfromͲ37.36toͲ24.27%forthecostofonepassengercar andfrom30.24to57.46%forthecostofoneHGV,dependingontheroadassessed.Therefore,thechargesto be borne by HGVs would have been highly overestimated in this case, which would have not been consistent withthepolluterpaysprinciplethatshouldguidethechargingfortheuseofroadinfrastructure.Itshouldalso benotedthatabottomͲupapproachwasappliedinthecasestudyinsteadofatopͲdownapproachasstatedby theEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011).Asaresult,significantdifferenceswereobservedbetween theaveragenoisecostsforthedifferentroadsassessed(seeTable8);thecostsforAPͲ7Southweremorethan doublethecostsforAPͲ7NorthandalmosttriplethecostsforAPͲ4.These differencescouldhavebeeneven greaterifthevehiclespeedshadbeendifferentforeachroad.IfatopͲdownapproachhadbeenappliedinthe case study, the average noise costs would have been the same for all roads assessed, which would have also beeninconsistentwiththepolluterpaysprinciple.ThebottomͲupapproachisbetterfromatheoreticalpointof view,sinceittakesintoaccountlocalfactorsthatdirectlyinfluencethesizeofnoisecosts(e.g.trafficconditions and population density close to the road). Despite this, the bottomͲup approach has not been widely applied.

(16) because it has usually required more data and time. However, the lack of data has been resolved by the publicationofthestrategicnoisemapsrequiredbytheEnvironmentalNoiseDirective(EuropeanCommission, 2002).EUMemberStatesareobligedtoperiodicallyprovidetrafficdataandmapsonnoiseexposureforalltheir majorroads.AbottomͲupapproachcouldthusbeappliedtocalculatethenoisecostsforeachmajorroadbased ondatafromstrategicnoisemapsandapplyingtheweightingfactorsdevelopedhere.Infact,thecalculationof externalcostofroadtrafficnoisecouldbecomepartoftheactionplansthattheEnvironmentalNoiseDirective requiresEUMemberStatestoadopt.. 6.Conclusions TheEurovignetteDirective(EuropeanUnion,2011)providesamethodtocalculatetheexternalcostsofroad traffic noise. This method requires the use of weighting factors for different vehicle classes to account for differencesinnoisecostsbetweenvehicleclasses.Theuseofweightingfactorsfordifferenttimesofthedayis alsorequiredtodistinguishbetweennoisecostsfordayandnightperiods.However,theEurovignetteDirective does not provide specific values or guidelines to calculate these weighting factors, and research findings are scarce and do not seem to be clearly substantiated. For this reason, improved weighting factors both for differentvehicleclassesandfordifferenttimesofthedayhavebeendevelopedherein.Thesefactorsaremore reliablethanthosefoundinpreviousstudies,astheyarehighlydifferentiatedtobetteraccountfortheinfluence ofkeycostdrivers,namelyvehicleclass,speedandtimeoftheday.OthersecondͲordercostdriversthatmay influence weighting factors could be taken into account with a suitable traffic noise emission model. Unlike weightingfactorsgiveninearlierstudies,theimprovedfactorscanberegardedassuitabletobegeneralizedto anyroadinEurope.ThemethodoftheEurovignetteDirectivehasbeenextendedtovehicleclassesotherthan HGVsbyapplyingtheweightingfactorsprovidedhere.Likewise,ithasbeenextendedtoconsidernotonlythe dayandnightperiodsbutalsotheeveningperiod.. References Bickel,P.,Friedrich,R.,Burgess,A.,Fagiani,P.,Hunt,A.,DeJong,G.,Laird,J.,Lieb,C.,Lindberg,G.,Mackie,P.,Navrud,S., Odgaard,T.,Ricci,A.,Shires,J.,Tavasszy,L.,2006.DevelopingHarmonisedEuropeanApproachesforTransportCosting andProjectAssessment(HEATCO)ͲDeliverableD5:ProposalforHarmonisedGuidelines.InstituteofEnergyEconomics andtheRationalUseofEnergy(IER),UniversityofStuttgart,Stuttgart. Bickel, P., Schmid, S., Tervonen, J., Hämekoski, K., Otterström, T., Anton, P., Enei, R., Leone, G., van Donselaar, P., Carmigchelt, H., 2003. Unification of accounts and marginal costs for transport efficiency (UNITE) Ͳ Deliverable 11: Environmentalmarginalcostcasestudies.InstituteofEnergyEconomicsandtheRationalUseofEnergy(IER),University ofStuttgart,Stuttgart. European Commission, 1995. Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport Ͳ Policy options for internalising the external costsoftransportsintheEuropeanUnion,GreenPaper,COM(1995)691final.EuropeanCommission,Brussels. EuropeanCommission,1998.FairPaymentforInfrastructureUse:Aphasedapproachtoacommontransportinfrastructure chargingframeworkintheEU,WhitePaper,COM(1998)466final.EuropeanCommission,Brussels. EuropeanCommission,1999.Directive1999/62/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof17June1999onthe chargingofheavygoodsvehiclesfortheuseofcertaininfrastructures.OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities, EU. EuropeanCommission,2001.Europeantransportpolicy2010:timetodecide,WhitePaper,COM(2001)370final.European Commission,Brussels. EuropeanCommission,2002.Directive2002/49/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof25June2002relating totheassessmentandmanagementofenvironmentalnoise.OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities,EU. European Commission, 2006a. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Ͳ Keep EuropemovingͲSustainablemobilityforourcontinentͲMidͲtermreviewoftheEuropeanCommission’s2001Transport WhitePaper,COM(2006)314final.EuropeanCommission,Brussels..

(17) European Commission, 2006b. Directive 2006/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 amendingDirective1999/62/EConthechargingofheavygoodsvehiclesfortheuseofcertaininfrastructures.Official JournaloftheEuropeanUnion,EU. EuropeanCommission,2008.CommunicationfromtheCommissiontotheEuropeanParliamentandtheCouncilͲGreening Transport,COM(2008)433final.EuropeanCommission,Brussels. EuropeanCommission,2011.RoadmaptoaSingleEuropeanTransportAreaͲTowardsacompetitiveandresourceefficient transportsystem,WhitePaper,COM(2011)144final.EuropeanCommission,Brussels. EuropeanConferenceofMinistersofTransport,1998.EfficientTransportforEuropeͲPoliciesforInternalisationofExternal Costs.ECMTPublications,Paris. European Union, 2011. Directive 2011/76/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 amendingDirective1999/62/EConthechargingofheavygoodsvehiclesfortheuseofcertaininfrastructures.Official JournaloftheEuropeanUnion,EU. Kephalopoulos,S.,Paviotti,M.,AnfossoͲLédée,F.,2012.CommonNoiseAssessmentMethodsinEurope(CNOSSOSͲEU).To be used by the EU Member States for strategic noise mapping following adoption as specified in the Environmental NoiseDirective2002/49/EC.PublicationsOfficeoftheEuropeanUnion,Luxembourg. Maibach,M.,Schreyer,C.,Sutter,D.,vanEssen,H.P.,Boon,B.H.,Smokers,R.,Schroten,A.,Doll,C.,Pawlowska,B.,Bak,M., 2008. Handbook on estimation of external costs in the transport sector. Produced within the study Internalisation MeasuresandPoliciesforAllexternalCostofTransport(IMPACT).CEDelft,Delft. MüllerͲWenk,R.,Hofstetter,P.,2003.Monetisationofthehealthimpactduetotrafficnoise.Environmentaldocumentation no.166.SwissAgencyfortheEnvironment,ForestsandLandscape(SAEFL),Bern. Nash,C.,withcontributionsfrompartners,2003.Unificationofaccountsandmarginalcostsfortransportefficiency(UNITE) ͲFinalReportforpublication.InstituteforTransportStudies(ITS),UniversityofLeeds,Leeds. OECD/INFRAS/Herry, 2003. External costs of transport in Central and Eastern Europe, for the OECD Environment Directorate, Working Party on National Environmental Policy, Working Group on Transport. INFRAS/Herry Consulting, Zurich/Vienna. Peeters, B., van Blokland, G., 2007. Improved Methods for the Assessment of the Generic Impact of Noise in the Environment(IMAGINE)ͲThenoiseemissionmodelforEuropeanroadtraffic.Deliverable11oftheIMAGINEProject. TNO,Vught. Schreyer, C., Schneider, C., Maibach, M., Rothengatter, W., Doll, C., Schmedding, D., 2004. External costs of transport Ͳ Updatestudy.INFRAS/IWW,Zurich/Karlsruhe. SpanishMinistryofAgriculture,FoodandEnvironment,2007.MapasEstratégicosdeRuidodelasAutopistasdelaReddel Estado:AutopistaAPͲ7(TarragonaͲValencia),AutopistaAPͲ7Sur(ValenciaͲAlicante),AutopistaAPͲ4(SevillaͲCádiz). DocumentoResumen.<http://sicaweb.cedex.es>(September2012). vanEssen,H.P.,Boon,B.H.,denBoer,L.C.,Faber,J.,vandenBoss,M.A.,Vervoort,K.T.H.,Roche,C.,2004.Marginalcostsof infrastructureuseͲtowardsasimplifiedapproach.CEDelft,Delft. VROM,2002.RekenͲenmeetvoorschriftwegverkeerslawaai2002.VROM,TheHague..

(18)