An optimization model of energy and transportation systems: Assessing the high-speed rail impacts in the United States

This paper presents a long-term investment planning model that co-optimizes infrastructure investments and operations across transportation and electric infrastructure systems for meeting the energy and transportation needs in the United States. The developed passenger transportation model is integrated within the modeling framework of a National Long-term Energy and Transportation Planning (NETPLAN) software, and the model is applied to investigate the impact of high-speed rail (HSR) investments on interstate passenger transportation portfolio, fuel and electricity consumption, and 40-year cost and carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. The results show that there are feasible scenarios under which significant HSR penetration can be achieved, leading to reasonable decrease in national long-term CO₂ emissions and costs. At higher HSR penetration of approximately 30% relative to no HSR in the portfolio promises a 40-year cost savings of up to $0.63 T, gasoline and jet fuel consumption reduction of up to 34% for interstate passenger trips, CO₂ emissions reduction by about 0.8 billion short tons, and increased resilience against petroleum price shocks. Additionally, sensitivity studies with respect to light-duty vehicle mode share reveal that in order to realize such long-term cost and emission benefits, a change in the passenger mode choice is essential to ensure higher ridership for HSR.     

How will we fund our roads? A case of decreasing revenue from electric vehicles

Annual expenditures for transportation infrastructure have recently surpassed the funding available through tax and fee collection. One large source of revenue generation for transportation infrastructure is use fees that are charged through taxes on gasoline both on a federal and state level. A massive adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) in the United States would result in significantly lower gasoline consumption and thus reduce the revenue collected to maintain the U.S. transportation infrastructure. We investigate how different vehicles will change the annual fee collected on a marginal basis. In addition, we assess the effects of adoption of alternative vehicles on revenues using several projections of alternative vehicles adoption, both on a state-by-state basis and at the national level. We find that baseline midsize and compact vehicles such as the Toyota Camry and Honda Civic generate approximately $2500–$4000 in tax revenue over their lifetime. Under the current funding structure, battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) such as the Nissan Leaf generate substantially less at $400–$1300, while plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) such as the Chevrolet Volt generate $1500–$2700. Even in states with high lifetime fees due to fuel taxes, such as California, revenue generation can be upwards of 50% lower than in states with high registration fees such as Colorado. Total annual revenue generation decreases by about $200 million by 2025 as a result of EV adoption in our base case, but in projections with larger adoption of alternative vehicles could lead to revenue generation reductions as large as $900 million by 2025. Potential schemes that charge user fees on alternative fuel vehicles to overcome the decrease in revenue include a flat annual registration fee at 0.6% of the vehicle’s manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP) or 2

per mile fee.     

The revenue and environmental benefits of new off-peak commuter rail service: the case of the Pascack Valley line in New Jersey

Although researchers have long argued in favor of off-peak transit service, studies that have empirically estimated its benefits regarding revenue generation, trip diversions, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission are rare. This study provides important evidence about the benefits of off-peak commuter rail service by focusing on the Pascack Valley line in New Jersey, where off-peak service was introduced in October 2007. The research involved two focus groups and an onboard survey of passengers. Benefits were estimated regarding additional revenue generation and reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG emission. The research shows that the new off-peak service potentially reduced VMT by more than 12 million annually due to diversions from other modes. Although diversions from other modes resulted in a substantial reduction in GHG emissions, due to the additional diesel fuel used by the new trains, the net GHG savings were in the range of 28–49 %. The research further shows that both peak period and off-peak riders benefited from the new off-peak service. Evidence is found about an increase in new transit riders and a modest increase peak period usage because of the off-peak service.     

Establishing value of time for the inter-island passenger transport of the Western Visayas region,Philippines

Transportation infrastructure planning process requires cost–benefit analysis in the evaluation of project proposals. Value of time (VOT) facilitates the conversion of travel time savings, which is a significant proportion of benefits in monetary terms. In cases where VOT has not been established, planners resort to crude estimates that often results in erroneous or biased measurements of benefits. This is the case of the Western Visayas region in the Philippines where transportation studies are rare. Secondary cities and its peripheral regions have often been overlooked subjects of transportation studies. In this study, multinomial logit models using revealed preference data were estimated to facilitate the calculation of the VOT. The total cost, square of the total cost, and total time were identified as significant explanatory variables affecting mode choice. The square of the total cost term was introduced in the models in order to account for income effect. Results indicate that VOT estimates for the inter-island passenger transportation between Iloilo and Negros Occidental generally range from 78.15PHP to 179.15PHP (1.91USD to 4.37USD) depending on trip and traveller characteristics.     

The salience of megaregional geographies for inter-metropolitan transportation planning and policy making

Researchers have argued that megaregions are a crucial spatial scale to address infrastructure modernization, growth management, economic development and environmental impacts because processes affecting these domains are highly concentrated within megaregional spaces. This paper evaluates the conceptual issues and policy salience of megaregional planning in the U.S. by analyzing the results of a 2018 survey of 382 designated MPOs. Drawing upon the survey results, we find support for the notion that MPO partnerships operating at the megaregional scale are somewhat widespread and involve MPOs along with other partners, like state DOTs and councils of governments. A subset of common concerns—especially multi-modal freight, major transportation corridors, economic development, intercity rail service, and air quality—appear to motivate megaregional partnerships. MPOs were most likely to engage in megaregion-scale collaborations requiring relatively low levels organizational time and resources versus more substantive collaborative efforts to develop joint plans or coordinated project investments. At the same time, few MPO respondents viewed megaregional scale planning collaborations as a high priority or as highly effective. For the majority of MPOs, it appears likely that the costs of such collaborations currently outweigh prospective benefits. Survey respondents identified increasing staff funding, requiring state DOTs’ statewide plans to address megaregional issues, and facilitating and enabling inter-local agreements for megaregional planning as actions that would enhance the salience and effectiveness of megaregional planning. These actions will likely occur only if planning at this scale is embraced as an important priority by federal and state policy makers.     

Empirical analysis of transportation investment and economic development at state, county and municipality levels

Numerous studies have found positive correlation between transportation infrastructure investment and economic development. Basically these studies use a conventional production function model augmented by a public capital input, mainly highways, rail and other transportation facilities. While the range of the measured economic growth effects varies widely among studies, the positive elasticity between transportation investment and economic development is now commonly accepted. Still a major puzzling issue is that the magnitude of the measured effect seems to decline significantly as the econometric model is further refined, mainly with regard to space and time lags. That is, the use of national or state data produces elasticity results, which are much larger than when using county or municipality data. Similarly, when we introduce into the econometric model a lag between the times when the transportation investments are made and when the economic benefits transpire, the measured elasticities decline with the size of the lag. Thus, the main objective of this paper is to investigate these issues analytically and empirically and provide a plausible explanation. We do so by using alternative econometric models, applying them to a database, which is composed of longitudinal state, county and municipality observations from 1990 to 2000. The key result is that transportation investments produce strong spillover effects relative to space and time. Unless these factors are properly accounted for many reported empirical results are likely to be overly biased, with important policy implications.     

Appraising large-scale investments in a metropolitan transportation system

A package of large-scale investments in the transportation infrastructure in the Stockholm metropolitan region is currently being proposed. It contains new investments in the railway and subway systems as well as new links in the road system. This paper deals with the issue of appraising this kind of investment program. One major problem is the lack of a unique standard method, and it is argued that several tools should be used in a practical evaluation of large-scale investments in the transportation system.Four different approaches are presented and related to each other. First, one study uses a network-based mode-split/assignment model with a fixed trip matrix. The second study is complementary, as its aim is to also trace the impacts on the spatial distribution of population and jobs by applying an integrated transportation and land use model. Third, the long-run effects of the investments on regional economic growth are discussed within the framework of regional production functions. Fourth, an alternative approach is used, in which benefits from the investments are assessed through their estimated influence on aggregate land values.Abbreviations RA Reference Alternative - IP Investment Proposal - IMREL Integrated Model of Residential and Employment Location - RPFM Regional Production Function Model An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 31th European Congress of the Regional Science Association, Lisbon, August 1991.     

Planning for economic and environmental resilience

Climate protection will require major reductions in GHG emissions from all sectors of the economy, including the transportation sector. Slowing growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be necessary for reducing transportation GHG emissions, even with major breakthroughs in vehicle technologies and low-carbon fuels (Winkelman et al., 2009). The Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) supports market-based policy approaches that minimize costs and maximize benefits. Our research indicates that significant GHG reductions can be achieved through smart growth and travel efficiency measures that increase accessibility, improve travel choices and make optimum use of existing infrastructure. Moreover, we find such measures can deliver compelling economic benefits, including avoided infrastructure costs, leveraged private investment, increased local tax revenues and consumer vehicle ownership and operating cost savings (Winkelman et al., 2009).As a society, what we build – where and how – has a tremendous impact on our carbon footprint, from building design to transportation infrastructure and land-use patterns. The empirical and modeling evidence is clear – people drive less in locations with efficient land use patterns, high quality travel choices and reinforcing policies and incentives (Ewing et al., 2008). It is also clear that there is growing and unmet market demand for walkable communities, reinforced by demographic shifts and higher fuel prices (Leinberger, 2006, Nelson, 2007). Transportation policy in the United States must rise to meet this demand for more travel choices and more livable communities.The academic, ideological and political debates about the level of GHG reductions and penetration rates that can or should be achieved via smart growth and pricing on the one hand, or measures such as ‘eco-driving’ and signal optimization on the other, have served their purpose: we know which policies are ‘directionally correct’ – policies that reduce GHG emissions even though we may not know the scope of those reductions. Now is the time to implement directionally correct policies, assess what works best where, and refine policy based on the results. It is a framework that CCAP calls “Do. Measure. Learn.”The Federal government is poised to spend $500 billion on transportation (Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 2009). CCAP encourages Congress to “Ask the Climate Question” – will our transportation investments help reduce GHG emissions or exacerbate the problem? Will they help increase our resilience to climate change impacts or increase our vulnerability? And, while we’re at it, will our investment foster energy security, livable communities and a vibrant economy? Federal transportation and climate policies should empower communities to implement locally-determined travel efficiency solutions by providing appropriate funding, tools and technical support.     

Financing congressional earmarks: Implications for transport policy and planning

This research documents the primary strategies used by the US Congress to fund transportation earmarks from the early 1990s to the mid-2000s. It draws on careful analysis of funding bills and primary and secondary sources including government reports, industry and policy newsletters, scholarly articles, and publicly available data on earmarks. It is also informed by interviews with transportation stakeholders involved with earmarks at federal, state, and regional levels. By detailing how Congress pays for earmarks, I show that earmarks do more to redistribute than add to existing transportation resources, and that the intricacy of Congressional funding maneuvers can make earmarks’ fiscal impacts hard to discern. Several implications follow for transportation policy and practice. First, critiques that earmarks increase federal transportation spending are misplaced. While such claims make it easy to discredit national investment in transportation, skepticism is in order when earmarks are invoked to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Second, earmarks’ true costs are related not to increased deficits but rather to opportunity costs incurred when unplanned earmarks replace other investments, particularly projects identified through regional and state planning or competitive selection by an executive agency. Finally, this work suggests productive directions for future earmark reform, such as limiting earmarks to projects in regional or state plans and making explicit for any earmarks in a bill the funding mechanisms that support them. Such steps could lessen the opportunity costs (and administrative inefficiencies) of earmarks, increase transparency in earmarking, and potentially make the practice less objectionable if used to facilitate passage of the long overdue surface transportation authorization bill.     

Book Review

This paper examines the relationship between investment in transportation infrastructure capital and the debt-to-gross domestic product (GDP) ratio. We analyse the effect of bringing forward investment originally planned for future years to be executed during times of economic crisis and also consider the possible advantages of carrying out such investments with private sector financing. This paper presents a model which shows how policy aimed to encourage investment in transportation infrastructure projects through private sector participation may help raise long-term GDP and thus lead to a lower debt-to-GDP ratio. The theoretical model is then applied to current empirical data from Israel.     

Economic costs and environmental impacts of alternative fuel vehicle fleets in local government: An interim assessment of a voluntary ten-year fleet conversion plan

Vehicle fleets are widely viewed by policy makers as attractive first markets for introduction of alternative fuel technologies. Although, it is essential to understand the environmental benefits and economic challenges involved in fleet conversion, the literature provides little understanding of the implementation issues associated with alternative fuel vehicles. This paper examines the cost effectiveness and environmental impact of the conversion of a 180 plus vehicle fleet to alternative fuel vehicle technologies by a public organization at the mid-point of the project implementation. Using multi-year micro data on fuel usage, operational and capital expenditures, mileage and emissions, the paper examines conversion costs and infrastructure investments required, extent of user adoption, and emissions reductions achieved. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for managerial practice in local government fleet agencies and for future research.     

Efficiency of European Funds in the Accession Countries: The Case of Transport Infrastructure Investments in Latvia

ABSTRACT

A transport initiative, like any kind of public action, has an impact on the monetary cost, time cost, efficiency and comfort of the transportation of goods and people, in particular transport infrastructure investments. All such initiatives are subject to cost benefit analyses at the national and EU level to know whether the present value of total net benefits including environmental impacts exceeds their cost. However, several important policy issues remain unresolved in standard evaluation procedures. One issue is whether the so-called direct measurement of user benefit, which consists of quantifying changes in surplus of the users of the transport system, captures all welfare generated in the economy. Another issue is how the gains (or possibly losses) of a transport initiative are distributed among regions. The aim of this article is to perform a systematic and quantitative analysis of the socio-economic and spatial impacts of alternative transport investments by carrying out scenario simulations in order to improve the understanding of the impact of transportation policies on the short- and long-term spatial development in Latvia. The general result from the scenario simulations is that rail projects seem to be more effective in terms of promoting regional economic activity than road projects.     

Cost-effectiveness of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from High-Speed Rail and urban transportation projects in California

A rising trend in state and federal transportation finance is to invest capital dollars into projects which reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, a key metric for comparing projects, the cost-effectiveness of GHG emissions reductions, is highly dependent on the cost-benefit methodology employed in the analysis. Our analysis comparing California High-Speed Rail and three urban transportation projects shows how four different accounting framings bring wide variations in cost per metric tonne of GHG emissions reduced. In our analysis, life-cycle GHG emissions are joined with full cost accounting to better understand the benefits of cap-and-trade investments. Considering only public subsidy for capital, none of the projects appear to be a cost-effective means to reduce GHG emissions (i.e., relative to the current price of GHG emissions in California’s cap-and-trade program at $12.21 per tonne). However, after adjusting for the change in private costs users incur when switching from the counterfactual mode (automobile or aircraft) to the mode enabled by the project, all investments appear to reduce GHG emissions at a net savings to the public. Policy and decision-makers who consider only the capital cost of new transportation projects can be expected to incorrectly assess alternatives and indirect benefits (i.e., how travelers adapt to the new mass transit alternative) should be included in decision-making processes.     

The implications of travel profiles for transportation investment: The Bronx Center Project

Investment in transportation infrastructure is generally regarded as an effective means for inducing economic growth and employment in a region. However, the ability of such investments to achieve these objectives, to a large extent, depends on the degree to which travel results from these investments support or conflict with present travel patterns and needs in this region. Using this view as a basis, this paper analyzes travel conditions and choices in the Bronx New York, where large scale transportation and other development projects (commonly called the Bronx Center Project) are presently taking place. Using a large data base, composed of census tract information on socio-economic and travel behavior, the paper first examines the travel profile of the Bronx population, by estimating travel choice elasticities. On the basis of these elasticities it then assesses the impact of the Bronx Center Project on travel patterns and trends.     

Allocating Revenue Risk in Transport Infrastructure Public Private Partnership Projects: How it Matters

Abstract

Transport infrastructure public private partnership (PPP) projects are very diverse and complex in nature not only because of their mode-specific intricacies but also because of their inherent economic characteristics that relate to the scope of involvement of the private sector in the project, the large sunk costs incurred, and ultimately, the competition to which these projects are exposed. The allocation of revenue risk is of paramount importance for the successful implementation of such projects and a sub-optimal allocation may lead to project structuring that is unnecessarily expensive and vulnerable to failure. At the same time, the revenue risk depends critically on the remuneration model used (user-based versus budget-based) and may, in turn, take the form of demand risk, counterparty risk or combinations of the two. This review explores the issues related to revenue risk allocation for transport infrastructure PPP projects. Overarching principles for the allocation of revenue risk that transcend mode-specificity are identified and compared to case studies generated in the context of the COST Action TU1001. The results show that theory and practice are divergent, leading to sub-optimal structuring and exposing projects to potential failure.     

Mitigating environmental impacts in advance: Evidence of cost and time savings for transportation projects

The traditional model for mitigating a transportation project’s environmental impacts typically operates project-by-project and delivers the mitigation just-in-time. In contrast, the newer practice of advance mitigation comprehensively assesses and mitigates impacts from one or multiple transportation projects before or during project planning, sometimes long before project construction begins. The practice has gained adherents for its potential to improve ecological outcomes, by better aligning mitigation and conservation goals. Advance mitigation also stands to reduce mitigation costs, an important secondary benefit for transportation agencies with constrained resources. Evidence of cost savings, however, has been piecemeal and anecdotal. This paper advances knowledge of advance mitigation’s financial impacts in two ways. First, it critically assesses the evidence about cost savings realized through advance mitigation, both through avoided up-front costs and reduced project delay. Second, it directly estimates the project time savings that might accrue with advance mitigation of state highway projects in California. Overall, the balance of evidence is encouraging for transportation agencies that would introduce the practice, and general agreement exists on its financial benefits. Considering project delays related only to the environmental process, we estimate advance mitigation could reduce delivery times by 1.3–5.0 months per project. Still, we also identify factors limiting comprehensive analysis. Transportation agencies adopting advance mitigation practices into their operations could use a pilot approach that includes rigorous environmental and mitigation cost accounting; such pilots would build needed empirical evidence of advance mitigation’s financial and ecological outcomes.     

Intelligent transportation systems: an impact analysis for Michigan

Are Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) affecting transportation industry only? ITS are currently perceived as a contribution to transportation industry only; however, by quantitatively analyzing the economic impact of ITS on the state of Michigan, this work attempts to answer the posed question. The quantitative economic analysis is carried out through the well‐established Leontief's Input–Output (I‐O) model. This model is employed to establish ITS effects on each industry by detailing RIMS II I‐O tables for Michigan constructed from the national I‐O tables. Major savings by ITS identified as reduced time delays and fuel cost savings are quantitatively simulated thereby generating an overall cost reduction factor which is incorporated in Michigan I‐O tables to modify their characteristics. ITS impact on each industry in I‐O tables is achieved by maximizing effects on certain selected industries. Impact multipliers that are customary macro‐economic measures for I‐O analysis are then calculated for all the aggregated industries. Multipliers comparison for the three cases namely before ITS implementation, conventional improvement methods, and after ITS implementation is evaluated. These values suggest greater economic benefits that may be achieved by statewide implementation of the ITS. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A methodology to estimate the revenue anticipated from State-level alternative financing approaches in the US

A major issue that State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) in the US face relates to financing future transportation investments. Questions of interest to State DOT officials relate to the suitability and revenue potential of alternative financing approaches. This paper presents a methodology to estimate the potential levels of revenue associated with the use of selected combinations of financing approaches and to assess the adequacy of these revenues vis-a-vis various levels of investments being considered by decision-makers. The methodology is designed to accommodate a wide array of inputs such as major policy objectives and initial assumptions that may vary significantly from State to State in order to provide a greater flexibility of implementation. The application of this methodology is demonstrated with an illustrative example for Massachusetts. This paper should be of interest to State DOTs seeking an acceptable combination of financing approaches to support future transportation investments.     

Institutional issues in planning for more uncertain futures

Future travel demand has always been difficult to estimate. Recent trends of a slow down or stagnation in traffic growth combined with substantial demographic, economic, and technological shifts further complicate that task. This poses a significant planning challenge given that decision-making is often based on the benefits of infrastructure investments which accrue over periods as long as 60 years. In contrast to the changing ideas around what mobility in the future will look like and the types of demand it may need to service, the practice of forecasting future travel demand remains largely unchanged as do the decision-making processes which flow from this. Alternative approaches to thinking about futures such as scenario planning exist but have had more limited deployment in the transport sector. This paper explores the institutional issues surrounding the purpose, practice and barriers to changing the approaches of forecasting and decision-making through an exploration of the state of practice in the UK drawing on interviews with 23 practitioners. Drawing on Hall’s work on policy change, the research finds that there is a strong policy paradigm built around the relationships between transport investment and traffic growth. This has strengthened since the recession with an increased focus on the relationship between transport and job creation. The forecasting approaches in use today are an important part of a complex decision-making apparatus reflective of specialized policy arenas like transport. Challenges in acknowledging, representing and communicating uncertainty are identified leaving a growing tension between planning visions and planning practice. We conclude by reflecting on events which may stimulate a broader reframing of how we plan for transport futures whilst embracing key uncertainties.