The Rail Diesel Study

Markus Halder1, Henning Schwarz2, Sujith Kollamthodi3

1Swiss Federal Railways SBB, Rail Environmental Center, Bern, Switzerland, 2Deutsche Bahn AG, Railway Environmental Centre, Berlin, Germany, 3AEA Technology Environment, Didcot, UK

Abstract

The Rail Diesel Study is an important step in the development and assessment of measures and strategies that could be use to reduce NOx and PM10 emissions from the rail fleet across Europe. The study has provided an initial assessment of the feasibility of applying technical and operational measures to the existing diesel fleet, as well as providing first estimates of the costs and benefits of applying some of these options to a proportion of the existing fleet over the next five years. Furthermore, the study has provided initial estimates of the costs, benefits, and technical implications associated with ensuring that future vehicles meet future EU emission limit values. The study has also provided estimates of the contribution of rail emissions to pollutant concentrations in possible air quality hot-spots.

Introduction

The environmental benefit demonstrated by the railways over other modes of transport is a vital precondition in ensuring social and political support for this mode of transport. The railways have shown that on specific consumption of resources and specific emissions of carbon dioxide their values are lower than those obtained by their main competitors on the road (in particular due to the lower rolling resistance of rail vehicles and the higher passenger densities achieved on the railways). In addition to the depletion of resources and climate change impacts, the impacts of transport on the environment in the form of emissions of air pollutants such as NOx and PM10 are also important. With air quality limits being exceeded in some European conurbations, all possible emission sources are increasingly attracting the attention of public and authorities. Although air pollutant emissions from the railways only contribute to a small proportion of total emissions from the transport sector, the International Union of Railways (UIC) decided in October 2003 to produce the UIC Diesel Action Plan advocating pro-active measures to reduce diesel exhaust emissions. This Action Plan led to the initiation of a sector-wide “Rail Diesel Study”, co-funded by European Commission. The Rail Diesel Study was carried out by the International Union of Railways (UIC), the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER), the Union of European Railway Industries (UNIFE), the European Association of Internal Combustion Engine Manufacturers (Euromot) and AEA Technology as external consultant. Main aim is to assess possible measures that could be used to reduce NOx and PM10 emissions from the existi ng railway fleet. Furthermore, the study has provided initial analysis results that can contribute to the preparation for the technical review of the EC’s Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) Directive (97/68/EC, amended by Directive 2004/26/EC). The Rail Diesel Study has reviewed the current situation across Europe with regard to the utilisation of diesel traction units, and has developed projections for the likely uptake and use of diesel traction units between 2006 and 2020 (Work Package 1). A range of technical and operational measures for reducing emissions were assessed during this study to identify the feasibility of applying such measures to the existing fleet and the future fleet. Furthermore, the life-cycle costs associated with these measures were also assessed (Work Package 2). Air quality modelling was carried out to estimate the likely contributions of particular types of railway locations to ambient concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter (Work Package 3). The results from all of this work were then used to develop a series of proposed strategies that could be used for reducing emissions from varying proportions of the existing fleet and to provide initial indicative estimates of the costs and emissions benefits associated with ensuring that future rail vehicles meet the NRMM Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB limits (Work Package 4). The results of the Work Packages are summarized in the following:

Work Package 1: Status and development of the future fleet

The information that has been collected on the existing diesel fleet in Europe, and the estimates that have been made for the future development of the fleet, highlight the complexity of the topic. Several indicators were used to characterise the role of diesel traction in various countries or railway companies:

• Rail diesel traction has comparably high absolute operating performances in countries such as Germany, France, the UK, the Baltic States and further new EU Member States. The new EU 10 represent more than one third of the covered European diesel operating performance measured in gross tonne-kilometres hauled.

• In the Baltic States, Ireland and Greece, there is almost no electrified track, and diesel traction is the backbone of rail traffic. This is in contrast to most other countries such as Germany and France where diesel traction is typically used for feeder traffic on sparsely used lines. In a fully electrified country like Switzerland, diesel traction is only rarely used for some maintenance and shunting operations. On average, diesel traction accounts for 20% of European railway operations.

• Due to the fact that diesel traction is widely used also for shunting and civil engineering processes and on lines with low traffic density, average utilisation is much lower c ompared to electric traction, as shown by indicators like the average kilometres run per year and average gross-tonnes hauled per train.

As diesel exhaust emissions and the costs and benefits of applying emission abatement measures are directly related to the number of diesel engines, the investigations carried out for this study were aimed at identifying the number of diesel rail engines rather than the number of diesel rail vehicles. UIC members’ fleets represent around 85% of European diesel rail engines with around 17000 locomotive and 14000 railcar engines. Around 2700 locomotive and 2600 railcar diesel engines are used by non-UIC members. It has to be noted that these engines do not represent a homogenous entity, as some of them are intensively used in heavy haul freight trains or in passenger cross country or Intercity trains, others less intensively e.g. for shunting, civil engineering or on rural passenger lines, or they just fulfil the function of supplementary traction units. The latter is often the case for very old diesel traction units that still appear in railway rolling stock statistics. Emission factors for representative vehicles reported from UIC member railways are significantly lower for newer railcars and locomotives (classified as those that entered service after 1990) compared to older ones, however with a rather high range of values. This is in accordance with the development of the UIC emission requirements, with stricter limit values from stage to stage. A summary of the average emission factors for selected pre-1990 and post-1990 traction units is presented below in Figure 1. The values are based on some typical vehicle classes obtained from the responses to a questionnaire survey sent to European UIC member companies. It should be noted that for each type of traction unit, the average emission factors reported below cover a wide range of values. For comparison, the NRMM Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB emissions limits are presented below in Figure 2. It should be noted, that the Stage IIIB values are subject to review before End of 2007.

(a)

13.715.4

12.6

7.0

10.711.9

02468

1012141618

Railcars Mainlinelocomotives

Shuntinglocomotives

Emis

sion

fact

or (g

/kW

h)

Pre-1990Post-1990

(b)

0.53

0.34

0.55

0.14 0.16

0.27

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Railcars Mainlinelocomotives

Shuntinglocomotives

Emis

sion

fact

or (g

/kW

h)

Pre-1990Post-1990

Figure 1: Average emission factors for selected pre-1990 and post-1990 vehicles: (a) NOx. (b) PM10

(Source: UIC questionnaire) (a)

4.0 4.0

6.0

7.4

2.0

4.0 4.0 4.0

012345678

Railcars Locomotives(130-560

kW)

Locomotives(560-2000

kW)

Locomotives(>2000 kW)

Emis

sion

fact

or (g

/kW

h)

Stage IIIA limit values

Stage IIIB limit values

(b)

0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Railcars Locomotives(130-560

kW)

Locomotives(560-2000

kW)

Locomotives(>2000 kW)

Emis

sion

fact

or (g

/kW

h)

Stage IIIA Stage IIIB

Figure 2: Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB (subject to review!) emission limits: (a) NOx. (b) PM10 (Source: NRMM directive 97/68/EC, amended by 2004/26/EC)

When asked about expectations for the future development of their diesel fleets, UIC members assumed that on average there would be a decline in the total numbers of vehicles in their entire diesel fleets, but that there would be an increasing number of diesel railcars. It can furthermore be noticed that for many new rail operators on the market, diesel traction offers more flexibility and a quicker route to some form of interoperability especially in cross-border traffic. The main influencing parameters for scenarios to describe the future development of the diesel fleet in Europe are the life expectancy, or decommissioning age of the vehicles, and the anticipated market development for rail traffic (amended for diesel traction). Productivity development and the effects of market liberalisation have also been taken into account. A range of scenarios for the development of the future fleet were produced in order to attempt to quantify the future number of railcar and locomotives that will enter into service across the EU Railway 27 between 2005 and 2020. These scenarios were based on market assumptions for rail passenger and freight traffic, and on data collected from UIC members during the survey process. Based on basic assumptions for the different influencing parameters, it is expected that around 8,500 railcars, and between 9,000 new locomotives will be purchased in Europe between 2005 and 2020. However these values should be viewed as rough estimates as it was not possible within the scope of the Rail Diesel Study to carry out a very detailed assessment of the future development of the very complex rail diesel market.

Work Package 2: Technical and operational measures for reducing emissions

Work Package 2 formed the primary focus of the Rail Diesel Study and was central to the assessment of technical and operational measures for tackling emissions from the current fleet and from future rail vehicles. The activities that were included in this Work Package are summarised below:

• Preliminary identification (for screening) and definition of technical and operational measures that could be used to reduce pollutant emissions from the diesel fleet

• Selection of representative traction units for more detailed analysis of technical options • Collection of data on train operators’ experience of measures first through a survey/questionnaire,

and second with follow-up interviews with individual operators • Analysis of the costs and emissions benefits associated with each finally selected option

For the current fleet, detailed analysis of the life-cycle costs of applying technical options to specific representative traction units was carried out. This analysis took into account the practicalities of trying to retrofit emissions abatement equipment to existing vehicles (e.g. space and weight limitations, engine performance, and exhaust characteristics). The analysis also quantified the percentage reductions in NOx and PM10 emissions associated with each option. For new and future rail vehicles, a more general assessment of technical measures has been performed based on typical types of vehicles with reference to the limit values for Stage IIIA and IIIB of the NRMM Directive. The results of this analysis will contribute to the preparation for the technical review of the amended NRMM Directive (due to take place before the end of 2007). WP2 also included an investigation of operational measures for reducing emissions, although this assessment was much less detailed than the assessment of technical measures, and was based around case study examples from UIC member railways. Results of the assessment of technical measures for the existing fleet: For all types of vehicles examined, emission reduction technologies that could potentially be applied have been identified. However, there is very little experience in the railway sector of using technical measures for reducing pollutant emissions from diesel engines. Hence relatively little is known about the applicability, costs, and reliability of such measures. Although in most cases, it is very difficult to retrofit exhaust after-treatment equipment to existing rail vehicles, there are some possibilities – in particular, it may be possible re-engine older (pre-1990) traction units, or to fit open channel diesel particulate filters (DPF) to these types of vehicles. For newer traction units, it may be possible to fit other types of emissions abatement equipment such as closed channel DPFs, Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) systems or a combination from both, but more work is required to assess the feasibility of fitting such equipment. In particular, there may be significant space and weight restrictions. Furthermore, the maximum allowed limit values for exhaust-gas backpressure may be exceeded. The results indicated that on locomotives the system of locomotive engine and silencer offers less tolerance for enhanced exhaust gas back pressure than on railcars. Comparing mainline and shunting locomotives there is often more space available on shunting locomotives with enhancing the possibilities for retrofitting emission abatement technology. Results of the assessment of technical measures for future rail vehicles: The results of the study indicated that it is very likely that Stage IIIA emissions limits will be achieved mainly by using internal engine design measures, rather than by using exhaust after-treatment equipment. It is envisaged that the use of modern diesel combustion technology, improved injection and charging technology, optimised air-cooling, and possibly EGR will be the main methods by which the Stage IIIA limit values will be achieved. Low sulphur fuel will be required. The most significant consequences will be increased engine and vehicle purchase costs of 3 – 15 % and increased expenditure on maintenance of up to 10 %. An increase in fuel consumption of up to 6% is also expected. There is the anticipation that there will be a requirement to increase the amount of engine cooling, but significant increases to the weight and volume of the engine are not expected. Alternative

strategies, such as the use of exhaust after-treatment equipment for meeting the emissions limits whilst avoiding increases in fuel consumption are not to be expected because of disadvantages in costs, volume and weight. The study results indicated that in terms of meeting the PM10 emission limits specified for Stage IIIB of the NRMM Directive, diesel particulate filters are likely to be required. In order to achieve the NOx limit values without the use of after-treatment, further development of internal engine design measures will be necessary in order to achieve even greater reductions in NOx emissions. An additional increase in fuel consumption is considered a likely outcome. Alternatively, exhaust after-treatment technology such as SCR will need to be used. The decision with regard to which NOx reduction technology should be used must be based on developments and experience in the automotive sector, and the preferences that railway operators have. Technical and commercial benchmarks of the specific technologies will be necessary to finally decide which route is the most appropriate way to proceed. This benchmark is not yet possible because the necessary investigations are not complete at this point in time. To estimate the additional costs for achieving Stage IIIB limit as for Stage IIIA the effects of each technology on investment and operating costs, fuel consumption, the use of additives, vehicle and equipment mass, and the space required for after-treatment equipment have been considered. All estimates have been quoted in percentage terms relative to the baseline scenario of modern traction units that meet the UIC II regulations. The vehicle investment costs associated with meeting Stage IIIB are estimated to increase by between 8 % and 20 % compared to the current costs for new engine. The fuel consumption costs are expected - depending on the technology chosen - to change in between a reduction of 5 % and an increase of up to 9 %. Engine maintenance cost will increase in between 5 % and 15 %. For SCR equipment as a possible option for some railcars and locomotives the additional cost for urea consumption are assumed to account for up to 4 % of the fuel consumption cost. It has to be noted that the costs associated with setting up the infrastructure for the supply and distribution of the Ad-Blue urea were not taken into account as part of this study. Results of the assessment of operational measures: The study assessed a wide range of operational measures using a case study approach, and found that although in theory operational measures can be implemented more quickly than many technical measures, there are many planning and operational barriers that would need to be overcome. Furthermore, operational measures were found to be very site-specific, and there are no standard solutions that can be applied to a wide variety of situations. Best practice examples have been used for the following selected measures:

• Reductions in engine idling; • Work planning of traction units; • Energy efficiency improvements and driver training; • Reducing diesel traction on electrified tracks.

The examples can be used as a basket of options that railway operators could examine in more detail with a view to using as the basis of individual options tailored to meet their own circumstances.

Work Package 3: The contribution of rail diesel exhaust emissions to local air quality

The objective of Work Package 3 was to assess whether there are any types of locations where emissions from diesel rail vehicles significantly contribute to pollutant concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) or PM10. The European Commission’s Air Quality Framework Directive, and its associated Daughter Directive sets annual concentration limits for NO2 and PM10. These limits are as follows:

• From 2005, annual average PM10 concentrations in zones and agglomerations must not exceed 40 㯀g/m3

• By 2010, the annual average limit value for PM10 concentrations in zones and agglomerations must not exceed 20 㯀g/m3

• By 2010, annual average NO2 concentrations in zones and agglomerations must not exceed 40 㯀g/m3

In order to assess whether there are any locations with high pollutant concentration contributions from rail, it was necessary to identify possible problem locations and then carry out pollutant dispersion modelling to assess the concentration contributions at these locations. Three possible types of locations where railway emissions could significantly contribute to high pollutant concentrations were considered:

• Busy line sections with large volumes of daily rail traffic • Heavily utilised shunting yards • Major passenger rail termini with a large volume of diesel traffic

Air quality modelling was carried out for each of these three types of locations. The modelling results were then compared with the relevant Air Quality Framework Directive pollutant concentration limits for NO2 and PM10, in order to assess whether action is required to reduce railway emissions at these types of locations. The modelling results for NO2 and PM10 concentrations are presented overleaf in Figure 3 and Figure 4 The results include estimates for the contribution of the different types of railway location to ambient concentrations, as well as typical values for the concentration contributions of motorway road traffic and road traffic from a minor road with low levels of road traffic. As can be seen from the graphs, there is no single source that on its own would lead to an exceedance of either the NO2 or PM10 limit values. However, pollutant emissions at specific locations from combinations of different sources (e.g. road transport emissions combined with both railway and industrial emission sources) could lead to limit values being exceeded.

0.3 0.12.5

1.0

12.0

4.1

12.8

2.1

0

10

20

30

40

Very

bus

yra

il lin

e

Ave

rage

rail

line

Bus

ysh

untin

gya

rd

Ave

rage

shun

ting

yard

Bus

yte

rmin

alst

atio

n

Ave

rage

term

inal

stat

ion

Mot

orw

ay

Min

or ro

ad

NO

2 con

cent

ratio

n (㯀

g/m

3 )

2010 EC Air Quality Framework Directive concentration limit for NO 2: 40㯀g/m3

Figure 3: Estimated contribution of different types of rail and road locations to ambient concentrations of

NO2

0.02 0.001 0.4 0.143

1

8.7

1.30

10

20

30

40

Very

bus

yra

il lin

e

Ave

rage

rail

line

Bus

ysh

untin

gya

rd

Ave

rage

shun

ting

yard

Bus

yte

rmin

alst

atio

n

Ave

rage

term

inal

stat

ion

Mot

orw

ay

Min

or ro

ad

PM10

con

cent

ratio

n (㯀

g/m

3 )

2005-2010 EC Air Quality Framework Directive concentration limit for PM 10: 40㯀g/m3

2010 EC Air Quality Framework Directive concentration limit for PM 10: 20㯀g/m3

Figure 4: Estimated contribution of different types of rail and road locations to ambient concentrations of

PM10 The results of the dispersion modelling showed the following:

• Very busy line sections gave rise to insignificant concentrations of NO2 and PM10. • Very busy shunting yards can give rise to concentrations of NO2 that could be small, but

important, contributors to NO2 air quality hot spots. PM10 concentrations due to shunting yard activities are insignificant.

• At very busy terminal stations where there is a high amount of diesel activity, idling trains could potentially be significant contributors to NO2 and PM10 air quality hot spots. It is likely, however, that due to the high amount of diesel activity in the particular example used in this study, that this situation is very limited and would only occur in very few station environments in the EU Railway 27. In the majority of European countries, large city-centre terminal stations mainly operate with electric traction, as diesel activity tends to be concentrated in rural areas.

It has to be noted that the modelling technique used in this study is limited when assessing semi-enclosed environments like in most stations. It is therefore recommended that further work should be carried out to attempt to quantify more accurately especially the contribution of idling stations to pollutant concentrations. Also, further information is needed to estimate in more detail the number of shunting yards and terminal stations across the EU Railway 27 that could be contributors to air quality hot spots.

WP 4: Possible emission reduction strategies

Work Package 4 was concerned with the development of strategies that could be applied to the wider European fleet to reduce emissions of NOx and PM10 from diesel rail vehicles across Europe. The objective was to use the outputs from Work Packages 1, 2, and 3 to develop possible strategies that could be applied to existing pre-1990 and post-1990 railcars, mainline locomotives and shunting locomotives. Furthermore, Work Package 4 was used to provide a very initial assessment of the implementation costs, and impacts on emissions of ensuring that future rail engines meet the NRMM Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB emissions limits. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) techniques were used to provide initial estimates of the costs of implementing different Europe-wide strategies for the existing fleet and the future fleet. Additionally, the analysis was used to quantify the monetary value of emissions benefits associated with each strategy.

These benefits were quantified using the recently published Clean Air For Europe (CAFÉ) cost-benefit methodology that provides estimates for the damage costs per tonne of emission for a range of different air pollutants. These damage costs take into account the costs associated with the environmental impacts of air pollution, including damage to human health, damage to crops and ecosystems, and damage to buildings. The CBA methodologies used in this part of the study followed the EC’s Impact Assessment Guidelines. It must be stressed that the analysis carried out for Work Package 4 provides initial, indicative results only. It should further be noted that the CBA process used in this study has provided estimates of the costs and benefits to society as a whole, but that in the first instance the implementation costs associated with strategy options would probably be borne by the railway industry. Strategies for the existing fleet: The CBA results for the existing fleet indicated that re-engining, Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) technology, and combined SCR + Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) technology could all lead to net emissions benefits. Benefit-to-cost ratios were calculated for each of these options and re-engining was found to be the most favourable option in terms of the benefits that could be achieved for a given cost. The analysis results consistently showed that DPF technology when used on its own would lead to net costs rather than net benefits. A summary of the average benefit-to-cost ratios estimated for each technology option is presented below in Figure 5. For each strategy, two benefit-to-cost ratios have been calculated, based on low and high CAFE damage cost values. The low CAFE damage values are based on the lower estimates for the monetary values of environmental impacts caused by air pollution, whilst the high CAFE damage values are based on the upper estimates for air pollution damage costs. Benefit-to-cost ratios greater than 1 indicate that benefits are greater than costs, whilst ratios that are less than 1 indicate that there are net costs. As can be seen from the figure, re-engining has the highest benefit-to-cost ratio followed by SCR technology, and combined SCR+DPF technology. Re-engining also has further benefits in that in some cases there may be no net overall implementation costs associated with this option; this is because in some cases re-engining leads to significant reductions in fuel consumption and maintenance costs that can outweigh the implementation costs.

2.9

2.0

1.3

0.2

7.9

5.4

3.4

0.50

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Re-engining SCR SCR+DPF DPF

Ben

efit

to C

ost R

atio

s

Low CAFE damage values High CAFE damage values

Figure 5: Initial estimates of the average benefit-to-cost ratios for strategies for the existing fleet

Estimated costs and benefits associated with meeting the Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB limits The cost benefit analysis results for strategies to meet the Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB limits should be viewed as initial, indicative figures, as there is much uncertainty regarding the technologies that will be used. This is particularly the case for Stage IIIB where the technologies that will be used are still under development. Bearing all of this in mind, the study has shown that there are likely to be net costs rather

than net benefits associated with ensuring that new traction units meet the Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB emission limits. The net costs associated with meeting Stage IIIA could be greater than €2 billion between now and 2020. However, when assuming lower end implementation costs and high CAFÉ damage cost the analysis results indicated that there could be net benefits of approximately €700 million. The results for Stage IIIB indicated that there are likely to be net costs rather than net benefits under all scenarios. Initial estimates for the net costs ranged from €1.2 billion to €2 billion over the 2012-2020 time period if the low CAFE damage cost values are used. If the high CAFE damage values are used, the net costs were estimated to range from just over €100 million to more than €900 million.

Conclusions of the Rail Diesel Study

The key findings from the Rail Diesel Study can be summarized as follows: • Although the importance of diesel traction varies from country to country across Europe, diesel will

continue to have an important role in providing rail services in the future. • At a global level atmospheric pollutant emissions from the existing diesel railway fleet in Europe are

low, especially when compared to other transport modes and industrial sectors. With regard to air quality on local level, heavily trafficked line sections are insignificant contributors to atmospheric concentrations of NO2 and PM10. However, the contribution of very busy shunting yards to NO2 concentrations may be important, and the contribution of very busy terminal stations with a high proportion of diesel traction to NO2 and to a lower extent also to PM10 concentrations may be significant.

• For all types of vehicles examined, there are emission reduction technologies that could potentially be applied. However, only a limited number of technical options can be applied to the pre-1990 diesel fleet to reduce emissions. Re-engining (assuming that suitable engines are available) and open channel diesel particulate filters (DPF) were found to be the best options.

• A wider range of technical options may be possible for the post-1990 fleet, including SCR and closed channel DPF technology. However, there may be significant space and weight restrictions that limit the scope for applying such technologies, and it will always be necessary to conduct a full feasibility assessment for each specific class of traction unit. Furthermore there is nearly no practical experience with most exhaust gas after treatment technology in rail applications.

• For the future fleet, the Stage IIIA limits will be met without the need for exhaust after-treatment, but for Stage IIIB, diesel particulate filters will most probably be required as a minimum.

• Operational measures for reducing emissions were found to be very site-specific, and it is not possible to apply one solution to tackle a variety of different problems. The best practice case studies presented in this study could be used by railway operators as a basket of potential options.

• In assessing the costs and benefits of strategies that could be applied more widely to reduce rail emissions across the whole of Europe, it was found that re-engining existing traction units could provide the greatest net benefits. However, in practice, it may not always be feasible to re-engine existing vehicles due to a lack of suitable engines, or because significant modifications to off-engine support systems are required that may render re-engining an impractical solution.

• Generally strategies that tackle NOx emission show higher benefits than PM reductions as reduction rates are significantly higher for NOx. In consequence SCR technology and combined SCR+DPF technology were also found to give net emissions benefits, but at this point it is not clear how feasible it is to apply these technologies to existing vehicles.

• For the future fleet, the initial cost-benefit analysis results indicated that there are more likely to be net costs rather than net benefits associated with meeting the Stage IIIA and Stage IIIB limit values.

The findings from the Rail Diesel Study are the first steps towards developing strategies to reduce rail emissions. This study will form the basis of future activities in this area.

Acknowledgements

The authors want to thank all partners in the Rail Diesel Study for their valuable contributions and the European Commission for co-funding the work.