charting the path to a sustainable mobility future
TRANSCRIPT
www.TransformingTransportation.org
Charting the Path to a Sustainable
Mobility Future: Three Revolutions in Global Transportation by 2030/2050
Lew Fulton, UC Davis, ITS STEPS Program
Presented at Transforming Transportation 2017
Charting the Path to a Sustainable Mobility Future: Three
Revolutions in Global Transportation by 2030/2050
Lew Fulton
UC Davis, ITS STEPS Program Transforming Transportation
January 13, 2017
Passenger Transport “Revolutions”
1. Streetcars (~1890)
2. Automobiles (~1910)
3. Airplanes (~1930)
4. Limited-access highways (1930s….1956)
2010+
1. Vehicle electrification
low carbon vehicles and fuels
2. Real-time, shared mobility
less vehicle use
3. Vehicle automation (2025?)
Uncertain impacts
Heaven… or Hell
• Ride sharing, multimodal (transit/NMT) ecosystem
• More compact, livable cities
• “Right-sizing” of vehicles
• Reduction in traffic/travel times
• Fuel efficiency improvements/ electrification/lower CO2
• More single-occupant (and zero occupant) vehicles
• More sprawl/car-dependence
• Bigger vehicles
• Longer trips/ time spent traveling/ increased traffic congestion
• Higher energy use/CO2
Vehicle Automation Increases or Reduces
Energy Use (and GHGs)?!
Wadud et al, 2015
Questions and conflicts
• Automation – lower per-trip costs, lower “time cost” for being in vehicles – longer trips?
– Empty running (zero passengers) of vehicles
• For-hire vehicles – giving discounts for sharing may be less interesting with no driver costs
• Ride sharing – at conflict with public transit use?
• Private vehicles – decreased negative costs may mean less public sharing?
• Assumed electrification with automation – but not necessarily
3 Revolutions study builds on two previous
ITDP / UC Davis studies
Global High Shift Scenario
• High future urban mode shares of transit and active transport around the world; cut car use in half
• Much lower CO2, significantly cheaper transportation system costs
Global HS Cycling Scenario
• Added very high cycling and e-biking mode shares to previous study
• Cut CO2 use an additional 10% and lowered costs
Study scope – two main aspects
• Investigate and report on the current (2016) status of a range of types of new mobility services around the world
• Create 3 Revolutions urban passenger/vehicle travel scenarios to 2030, 2050
Creating 3 Revolutions scenarios to 2030, 2050
• Explore scenarios related to how much the technologies and services could grow and shape future transport
• How may patterns vary in different countries?
• What types of overall mobility, energy and environmental impacts might these services have in the context of broader urban transport system developments?
• Explore interactions between the three revolutions
• Develop narratives on how each scenario could develop
• Identification of policies that could steer existing trends to maximize mobility and sustainability benefits to cities
Rough guide to the three scenarios
Electrification
AutomationShared
Vehicles
Urban Planning/
Pricing/TDM Policies
Aligned with 1.5 Degree
Scenario
Scenario 1: Business as usual (BAU), Limited Intervention
Low Low Low Low No
Scenario 2: Technology-dominant 2R
HIGH HIGH Low Low YES
Scenario 3: Avoid Shift Improve 3R
HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH YES
Supportive Policies – to be linked to scenarios
• 2R Scenario:– Subsidies for automation & Electrification– Little restriction on automation (after early 2020s)
• 3R Scenario:– Compact Urban Development policies– Tax policies– Investment in Transit/walking/cycling– Heavy promotion of sharing and public transit, eg VKT tax, graduated
by occupancy:• ZOV = highest fee• SOV = high fee• Shared rides = low/no fee• Minibus = no fee?• Bus, BRT, Transit = subsidized
– Scrappage or conversion incentives -> Shared AV/EV
Passenger kms of travel, aggregated modes, USA
• Automated vehicle travel not significant by 2030 in any scenario, but dominates in 2050. Results in much higher travel in 2R
• US remains car dominated to 2050 - increase in travel mode mix in 3R, but mostly due to TNCs. Also significant minibus travel. Non-car travel reaches 18% in 3R
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
Base Year BAU 2R 3R BAU 2R 3R
2015 2030 2050
United States
Bill
ion
kilm
oe
ters Other
Bus/rail
Minibus
Public AV
Public LDV
Private AV
Private LDV
US LDV sales evolution by scenario
• BAU Case – sales rise slowly with little change in vehicle types
• 2R Case – sales rise slowly with major changes in private vehicles, but few public vehicles
• 3R Case - Sales decline fast through 2035, then recover somewhat
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Sale
s, m
illi
on
s
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
sale
s, m
illi
on
s
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Ve
hic
le s
ale
s, m
illi
on
s
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV
US LDV energy use by scenario
• BAU - liquid fuels (green) dominates but drops due to efficiency improvements
• 2R – electricity (blue) dominant by 2050
• 3R – electricity use in 2050 about 40% lower than 2R level due to mobility changes
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilio
n lit
ers,
gaso
line
equi
v.
TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilio
n lit
ers,
gaso
line
equi
v.TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilio
n lit
ers,
gaso
line
equi
v.
TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity
Next Steps
• Refine results, add 1R, finish cost analysis
• Develop full narratives and integrate policy requirements
• Deeper visualizations to output set
• Report launch in March 2017 (I hope)