Potential Changes in Emissions Due to Improvements in Travel Efficiency

Transcription

1 Potential Changes in Emissions Due to Improvements in Travel Efficiency Introduction to: TravelEfficiencyAssessmentMethod Rudy Kapichak U.S. EPA - Office of Transportation and Air Quality NTAQS August 2012

2 Overview Background and Context Project Goals Methodology and Analysis (Travel Efficiency Assessment Method) Conclusions/Summary of Results 2

3 Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) and Transportation After industry, transportation is leading source of U.S. GHG emissions Tg CO 2 Eq. U.S. GHG Emissions by Economic Sector, (with Electricity distributed to End-Use Sectors) 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Industrial Transportation Residential (purple) Commercial (blue) Agriculture 0 Transportation is among the fastest growing sources of GHG emissions Growth in GHG Emissions, (Tons CO2 Eq.) Industry 27.9 Transportation Residential Commercial Agriculture Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks,

4 U.S. Transportation GHG Emissions by Source Other Non-Road 7% Light duty passenger vehicles contribute largest share of GHG emissions from transportation Aircraft 9% Ships and Boats Other Aircraft Buses Rail Commercial Aircraft 7% Medium- and Heavy-Duty Trucks 20% Pipelines Lubricants Light-Duty Trucks 28% Passenger Cars 34% Light-duty Vehicles 63% Motorcycles Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks,

5 State and Regional Activities State Climate Action Plans Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets Climate Change Commissions and Advisory Groups Regional Initiatives GHG Reporting and Registries Climate Adaptation Plans Co-benefits of criteria pollutant emissions reductions 5

6 The Need for Guidance How effective are the strategies? HOV/ Rideshare Employer-Based Programs Public Transit Bicycle / Pedestrian Programs Parking Management Road Pricing Transit Oriented Development Mixed Use Development Increased Density Are available tools and methods capable? Travel Demand Models Off-Model Sketch Planning Spreadsheet-Based Calculators Fuel sales based emissions MOVES emission model Well to Wheels vs Pump to Wheels Default values vs Area specific 6

7 Study Goals To provide a reliable EPA assessment of the effectiveness of travel efficiency strategies to inform Federal, State and local policy and planning efforts Assess the multi-pollutant (GHG, NOx, VOC and PM) emission reductions from smart growth and other travel efficiency strategies Develop and evaluate a methodology (TEAM) for using MPO level data, sketch tools and MOVES to estimate emission reductions from travel efficiency strategies Build a bridge between national travel efficiency studies (Moving Cooler) and local MPO data and modeling tools Provide a starting point for state and local governments to evaluate potential GHG reductions strategies from the transportation sector. 7

8 Strategies and Model Selection Sources of Information Strategies Models Existing research MPO travel forecasting data National experts Candidate strategies were based on what MPOs are currently implementing, planning for, or are considering in their Transportation Plans Numerous strategies grouped into 6 categories Region-Wide TDM, Land Use/Smart Growth, Transit Fare Reduction, Transit Service Improvements, Road Pricing, and Parking Pricing Scenarios were specified ranging from least to most aggressive 10 models evaluated for sensitivity to strategies, input requirements, and output capabilities (See Report Appendix) TRIMMS 2.0 (Trip Reduction Impacts for Mobility Management Strategies) is best fit Developed by the Center for Urban Transportation Research (USF) Capable of capturing synergistic, short term, and long term effects MOVES 2010 Light Duty Emissions 8

9 What is the: TravelEfficiencyAssessmentMethod? TEAM is a methodology, to assess GHG and criteria emission reductions from travel efficiency strategies at the local, state and national level The TEAM was designed to estimate national urban emission reductions for select strategies by using: Local transportation data TRIMMs* (an existing transportation sketch planning model sensitive to the strategies selected) MOVES EPA s emissions model *Trip Reduction Impacts for Mobility Management Strategies, CUTR, USF) 9

10 Travel Efficiency Assessment Method U.S. Urban areas grouped by size and transit share. Data from sample of 15 MPOs. 2-3 MPOs data represents each group (cluster) Use of spreadsheetbased TRIMMS model* to analyze representatives for 7 scenarios Results were averaged Use of EPA MOVES model for emissions analysis of clusters Results combined at national scale based on cluster share of national urban VMT National scale results as well as value added at cluster/mpo scale * TRIMMS: Trip Reduction Impacts for Mobility Management Strategies, CUTR, USF 10

11 Urban Area Groups (Clusters) and Representative Areas Cluster Definitions and Representative Areas Cluster Definition Population 2.9 million High Transit Share (>9%) Population 2.9 million Low Transit Share (9% or less) Population 1,500,000-2,899,999 High Transit Share (>4%) Population 1,500,000-2,899,999 Low Transit Share (4% or less) 5 Population 750,000-1,499,999 6 Population 250, ,999 7 Population < 250,000 Representative Areas San Francisco, CA Washington, DC San Diego, CA Seattle, WA Portland, OR Denver, CO Sacramento, CO Salt Lake City, UT Memphis, TN Raleigh-Durham, NC Fresno, CA Knoxville, TN Rochester, NY Number of U.S. Cities Represented Share of National Daily Urban VMT 6 17% 9 22% 7 6% 8 7% 21 12% 87 18% Burlington, VT % Wilmington, NC Total % 11

12 Strategies and Assumptions TCM Strategy Example measures Employer-initiated TDM strategies Land use policies Transit projects and policies Flexible work hours Guaranteed ride home Ride sharing/ ride matching Incentives for transit, ped/bike modes, carpooling, telecommuting TOD, smart growth, increase in density, mixed use developments Transit frequency and access improvements Fare discounts, subsidies, or free transfers 30% of employers region-wide offer these programs 5% reduction in transit and walk/bike travel times; 5% increase in auto travel time due to density/ congestion 50% of employers regionwide offer these programs 10% reduction in transit and walk/bike travel times; 10% increase in auto travel time due to density/ congestion Note: Access time taken as proxy for trip length. 5% reduction in transit travel time 10% reduction in transit fares 10% reduction in transit travel time 20% reduction in transit fares Pricing policies Parking charges $2 increase per day $5 increase per day VMT fees/congestion pricing $0.10 increase per mile $0.25 increase per mile 12

13 Strategy Combinations (Scenarios) Scenarios Strategy Combinations Scenario Region-wide TDM Land Use/Smart Growth Transit Fare Reduction Transit Service Improvements Pricing Mileage Fees Pricing Parking Fees Baseline Current conditions without any of the above strategies Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Scenario 7 13

14 National Urban VMT Reduction from Future Baseline 14

15 National Urban Onroad Light Duty Emission Reductions Scenario Strategies Emission Reductions in 2030 Emission Reductions in Region-wide TDM 2 Plus: Smart Growth 3 Plus: Transit Fare Reductions 4 Plus: Transit Service Improvements 5 Plus: Parking Fees 6 Plus: Mileage Fees, Minus: Parking Fees VOC 0.10% 0.10% 0.10% 0.09% 0.26% 0.26% 0.26% 0.25% 1.01% 1.01% 1.00% 0.98% 2.97% 2.96% 2.93% 2.86% 1.40% 1.40% 1.39% 1.36% 4.19% 4.18% 4.16% 4.08% 1.44% 1.44% 1.43% 1.41% 4.30% 4.29% 4.28% 4.23% 2.92% 2.92% 2.91% 2.90% 6.98% 6.94% 6.87% 6.68% 1.94% 1.93% 1.92% 1.87% 6.28% 6.25% 6.17% 5.95% 7 All Strategies 3.42% 3.42% 3.40% 3.35% 8.83% 8.78% 8.65% 8.29% 15

16 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Scenarios Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6 Cluster 7 16 % VMT Reduction Regionwide TDM Land use changes + TDM Land use changes + Transit fare change + TDM Land use changes + Transit fare change + Transit service improvements + TDM Land use changes + Transit fare change + Transit service improvements + Parking Fees + TDM Land use changes + Transit fare change + Transit service improvements + MileageFees + TDM Land use changes + Transit fare change + Transit service improvements + Parking Fees + Mileage Fees + TDM Cluster Response to Scenarios in 2050

17 Emissions Findings Travel efficiency strategies can result in substantial emission reductions, especially in high growth areas with long trip length and limited strategies currently in place The largest reduction in emissions comes from Mileage and Parking Fees, followed by Smart Growth strategies. Traditional Transportation Demand Management Strategies had a relatively smaller impact on emissions Some areas may benefit substantially more from travel efficiency strategies than other areas. For example: Areas that had high VMT growth, high drive alone rates and low parking costs showed the greatest reductions. VMT reductions from Scenario 7 was on average 8.8% by 2050, while it ranged from 3.1% in group 2 to 15.8% in group 4. 17

18 Conclusions The TEAM approach demonstrates that: Existing data, tools and methods are capable of supporting State and local GHG planning and initial strategy evaluation The TEAM approach represents a unique procedure to estimate GHG emission reductions from travel efficiency strategies for many areas Provides consistency between data, tools and procedures used for national assessments and those used by States and MPOs Provides a new method for local governments to assess multi-pollutant benefits of travel efficiency strategies 18

19 Next Steps Conduct new TEAM analysis using more TE scenarios Go beyond initial analysis that focused on strategies already implemented by MPOs Would use the latest version of MOVES to produce results for Could be informed by plans adopted under state laws, e.g., California SB 375 Investigate how to include additional TE strategies in MOVES: ecodriving, speed limits, ITS (e.g., ramp metering, variable speed limits) Considering Conducting TE Case Studies Would request letters of interest from areas and establish selection criteria Would select a small number of areas (e.g.,1-3) and offer contractor-based technical assistance to, for example, analyze criteria and GHG benefits, integrating EPA s MOVES GHG guidance Contractor assistance could include: Creating a GHG baseline, based on our MOVES guidance Modeling scenarios of control strategies using a TEAM-based analysis 19

20 Resources/Further Information Potential Changes in Emissions Due to Improvements in Travel Efficiency Final Report available at: Supplemental Report: Analysis of Potential Co-Benefits Guide to the TEAM Approach 20

21 Appendix 21

22 State Climate Action Plans Plans propose specific policies and programs for consideration by the state legislature or implementation by state agency Source: Pew Center on Global Climate Change, online 22

23 Sources of Information Consideration of Existing Research Growing Cooler/Moving Cooler Multi-pollutant Emissions Benefits (FHWA) TRB and NCHRP Studies MPO Regional Planning Studies Available MPO Travel Forecasting Data Population/Workers, Trip Length, Travel Time Vehicle Occupancy, Travel Cost, Mode Share Elasticities of Demand, Assumptions from Travel Forecasting Models National Experts Keith Bartholomew - University of Utah Caroline J. Rodier - University of California, Berkeley Nigel H.M. Wilson - M.I.T. Philip L. Winters - University of Southern Florida, CUTR Sisinio Concas - University of Southern Florida, CUTR 23

24 Participating MPOs Capital Area MPO (Raleigh, North Carolina) Chittenden County MPO (South Burlington, Vermont) Council of Fresno County Government (Fresno, California) Denver Regional COG (Denver, Colorado) Genesee Transportation Council (Rochester, New York) Knoxville Urban Area MPO (Knoxville, Tennessee) Memphis MPO (Memphis, Tennessee) Metro (Portland, Oregon) Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco, California) Metropolitan Washington COG (District of Columbia) Puget Sound Regional Council (Seattle, Washington) Sacramento Area COG (Sacramento, California) San Diego AOG (San Diego, California) Wasatch Front Regional Council (Salt Lake City, Utah) Wilmington Urban Area MPO (Wilmington, North Carolina) 24

25 Note: Reductions are Onroad Light Duty Emissions only 25

26 Note: Reductions are Onroad Light Duty Emissions only 26

27 Note: Reductions are Onroad Light Duty Emissions only 27

28 Note: Reductions are Onroad Light Duty Emissions only 28

29 Note: Reductions are Onroad Light Duty Emissions only 29

30 Strategies and Scenario Assumptions TCM Strategy Specific Strategy Strategy Information Employer-based TDM Flexible work hours, Incentives for carpooling, Guaranteed ride home programs, Ride sharing/ ride matching, TDM outreach/public outreach programs, Subsidies/discounts for transit, pedestrian and bike modes, Telecommuting Whether or not employer offers to take these programs into consideration (TRIMMS asks for a yes/no answer) 30% of employers Region-wide offer these programs; includes all TDM strategies except walk and bike subsidies 50% of employers Region-wide offer these programs; includes all TDM strategies Land Use Policies TOD, smart growth, increase in density, mixed use developments Change in travel times for all modes, change in average trip lengths 3% reduction in all access times, 5% reduction in transit travel time and walk/bike times; 5% increase in auto travel time due to density/ congestion effects 6% reduction in all access times, 10% reduction in transit travel time and walk/bike times; 10% increase in auto travel time due to density/ congestion effects 30

31 Strategies and Scenario Assumptions TCM Strategy Specific Strategy Strategy Information Transit projects and policies Transit service expansion/increase in frequency, improved access Improvement in transit travel time and access time Fare discounts, Change in transit fares reduction, subsidies, or free transfers Pricing policies Parking charges Increase in auto parking costs VMT fees or congestion pricing Increase in peak hour driving costs 5% reduction in transit travel time 10% reduction in transit fares 10% reduction in transit travel time 20% reduction in transit fares $2 increase per day $5 increase per day $0.10 increase per mile $0.25 increase per mile 31