Emissions Analysis Techniques for TCMs
Introduction
Selecting
a Method
Descriptions
of Available Methods
Key
Inputs and Outputs for Each Method
References
List
of Acronyms
|
Forecasting Approaches
This section
provides a basic overview of travel and emissions forecasting approaches.
The overview is intended to assist the user in understanding the various
analytical approaches that underlie the methods described in the document.
The section first reviews the effects of CMAQ strategies that lead to
changes in emissions. Next, travel and emissions models commonly used
in metropolitan transportation planning are discussed. These models represent
the state of practice in travel and emissions forecasting at a regional
level, and often serve as a source of data for other forecasting methods.
Alternative analytical approaches to forecasting travel and emissions
impacts are then described. The methods documented typically utilize one
or more of these analytical approaches.
How CMAQ Projects Affect Emissions
The
implementation of a CMAQ project (or any other transportation-related
project) has a series of effects, as shown in
Figure 1. The effects depend upon the nature of the CMAQ project.
A CMAQ project may be primarily: 1) a travel demand management (TDM) project affecting travel behavior (e.g., ridesharing, transit incentives); 2) a transportation systems management (TSM) project affecting traffic flow (e.g., traffic signal timing, freeway ramp metering); or 3) a strategy affecting vehicle or fuel technology (e.g., alternative-fuel vehicles).
For
a TDM project, the effects can be described as follows:
- The CMAQ project creates changes in trip patterns (e.g., total person-trips,
origins and destinations, mode share, time of day of travel);
- Changes in trip patterns lead to changes in vehicle activity (e.g.,
total vehicle-trips, vehicle-miles of travel (VMT));
- Changes in vehicle activity affect traffic flow characteristics,
including travel speeds and acceleration characteristics; and
- Changes in vehicle activity and traffic flow characteristics lead
to changes in overall emissions.
For a TSM project, the resulting effects are as
follows:
- The CMAQ project affects traffic flow characteristics, such as speed
and acceleration; and
- The resulting changes in vehicle speed and acceleration in turn affect
the emission rates of vehicles.
For
example, a signal coordination project can smooth vehicular flow, thus
reducing acceleration and deceleration, which in turn reduces emissions.
Vehicle
and fuel technology-based CMAQ strategies do not affect travel demand
or traffic flow, but instead affect overall emission levels by changing
the emissions characteristics of vehicles.
Some
of the methods documented in this report use various assumptions to simplify
the analysis procedure, such as estimating vehicle trip and VMT changes
directly from CMAQ project implementation, or ignoring any changes in
traffic flow characteristics that may result from demand management strategies.
Other methods have a limited focus in that they only estimate travel impacts
or only convert travel into emissions impacts. These methods are documented
because they provide a valid analytical approach that can readily be applied
in conjunction with other approaches. For example, the FHWA TDM Evaluation
model provides a sound methodology for estimating VMT changes from TDM
projects, but does not estimate emissions changes. To estimate emissions
changes, the user would apply trip and/or VMT-based emission factors to
the model output.
-Top-
Standard Travel and Emissions Forecasting
Models
The
"benchmark" for travel forecasting in regional transportation
planning is an analysis tool known as the "four-step model"
or "regional travel model." Most metropolitan planning organizations
(MPOs) have a travel model that is specifically developed for their region.
The basis for the regional travel model is the division of the urban area
into traffic analysis zones (TAZs), and the definition of a network of
transportation facilities connecting the zones. The network is described
by the time and cost of travel, for each mode, between each pair of zones.
Inputs include proposed future transportation networks and forecast population
and employment characteristics by zone. Travel survey data and mathematical
models are then used to predict the number of trips generated in each
zone, the distribution of these trips (origin and destination zones),
modal shares, and the routes taken for trips.
Travel
models are typically used in developing an area's long-range transportation
plan to predict future traffic volumes, based on changes in development
and travel patterns, and to compare forecast volumes to roadway capacities
to identify deficiencies and needs. They are good for predicting the results
of major projects such as new or expanded facilities, but are not well-suited
for analyzing small-scale operational projects such as intersection improvements.
|
Range
of Emission Reductions from CMAQ Projects
The reported
benefits from past CMAQ projects can illustrate the range of emission
reductions that may be expected.
Figure 2 shows the frequency distribution of VOC reductions
for CMAQ projects funded in 1997. (These are self-reported benefits;
also, some projects did not report quantitative benefits and are
not reflected in this figure.) The majority of projects resulted
in VOC reductions of less than 10 kilograms per day (kg/day),
with most of the remainder falling between 10 and 100 kg/day.
The median benefit was 5.2 kg/day. Figure 3
and Figure 4 illustrate
the range of benefits for CO and NOx. The median reported benefits
were 37 and 4.0 kg/day, respectively. CO benefits are typically
higher because CO emission rates from vehicles are higher than
for VOC or NOx.
For
a metropolitan area with a population of one million, total daily
VOC emissions from mobile sources might be on the order of 25,000
to 30,000 kg. The regional impact of an individual "median"
CMAQ project would therefore be on the order of 0.02 percent.
This is not to diminish the benefit of the CMAQ project, but rather
to place it in a regional perspective. Multiple projects, or projects
with a broader scope, would of course result in a larger percentage
reduction in regional emissions.
|
CMAQ
strategies that can be translated into changes in the number of vehicle-trips
by TAZ (i.e., an area-wide employer trip reduction strategy) or changes
in transportation network characteristics (i.e., new transit service between
two points) can be analyzed using the MPO's standard regional travel model.
This requires working with the MPO travel forecasting staff and also may
require a significant level of effort to develop appropriate inputs and
run the model. The advantage of this approach is that changes in vehicle
miles of travel and speeds are identified across the entire transportation
network.
Once
outputs of the travel model are obtained, emission factors (expressed
in grams per mile or grams per trip) can be applied to VMT and/or vehicle-trips
by vehicle type and speed. The standard model used to develop emission
factors is EPA's MOBILE model. (A related EPA model, PART5, is used to
develop emission factors for particulate matter. In California, the Air
Resources Board's EMFAC model is used in place of MOBILE.) Emission factors
are typically developed by the State DOT, MPO, and/or air quality agency
using locality-specific data describing the mix of vehicles, fuel characteristics,
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program, and other factors that influence
emissions. MOBILE factors can be applied to travel model output using
a spreadsheet; software programs have also been written to automate the
processing of travel model outputs and emission factors.1
Even
if they are not used directly in assessing CMAQ strategy benefits, data
and methodologies from regional travel and emission models play an important
role in CMAQ evaluation strategies. For example, the Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments has used its mode choice model independently of
the four-step model to analyze a range of TCM strategies (FHWA, 1995).
Elasticities are sometimes obtained from model coefficients. Trip tables
and network data from the regional travel model can be used to obtain
average trip lengths for a particular area.
CMAQ
evaluation methods that calculate emissions should be able to incorporate
locality-specific emission factors as developed using MOBILE or EMFAC.
These locality-specific emission factors generally can be obtained from
the MPO, state DOT, or state environmental agency.
-Top-
Forecasting Travel Impacts
Forecasting
travel behavior impacts is typically the most difficult part of CMAQ project
analysis. A TDM strategy in particular can have a wide range of effectiveness
based on the details of the strategy and its implementation context. The
analyst should carefully consider the underlying data and analytical approaches
utilized in the chosen method(s).
Typical
approaches to estimating travel behavior and demand impacts include:
- Surveys
that assess the likely or actual impacts of a CMAQ project. For example,
a survey of employees at a suburban employment site may be performed
to determine how many people expect to use or have actually used a rideshare
matching service. Surveys that provide adequate data for forecasting
purposes are difficult to conduct. On the other hand, pre- and post-implementation
surveys of actual travel behavior are often both feasible and necessary
if the effectiveness of a CMAQ project is to be evaluated retrospectively.
- Experience
from other areas. For example, a study may have found that five
percent of office workers will telecommute one day a week if provided
the opportunity. This is the simplest methodology to apply and can be
used to assess programs that cannot be described in a quantitative manner
(i.e., travel time and cost changes). It involves considerable risks,
however, in assuming that results can be transferred from one situation
to another.
- Elasticities.
An elasticity says that an X percent change of an input variable (e.g.,
the cost of parking) produces a Y percent change of an output variable
(e.g., drive-alone mode share). Elasticities may be developed from direct
observation or from coefficients of a model such as a mode choice model.
While they can account for different levels of the input variable, they
are not necessarily valid outside the range for which they were developed.
For example, an increase in the cost of parking from $0.00 to $1.00
is an infinite percentage change, producing meaningless results. Also,
elasticities developed in one setting cannot necessarily be assumed
accurate in another setting.
- Logit
or pivot-point model. The logit model is a mathematical equation
that predicts a particular choice (i.e., auto versus transit mode) as
a function of differences in time, cost, or other quantifiable variables
affecting travel. Logit mode choice models are typically developed from
travel survey data as part of the four-step travel forecasting process.
The pivot-point model is a derivative of the logit model with simpler
input data requirements. The pivot-point model has the advantage that
it requires only a knowledge of baseline mode shares and changes in
travel time and cost. (Baseline travel time and cost information is
not required because this information is fully reflected in the baseline
mode share.) Logit-based models can account for the interaction of multiple
factors, i.e., changing the time and cost of travel simultaneously.
Beyond
the direct travel impacts of a CMAQ strategy, induced and offsetting travel
may also be of interest to the analyst. Under some circumstances, the
total travel and emission reductions resulting from CMAQ strategies may
be less than the nominal reductions based on the specific vehicle-trips
eliminated. Offsetting travel increases may come from two primary sources.
The first is additional vehicle-travel by the same traveler or other members
of the household. For example, a telecommuter may make an additional trip
from home during the day to run an errand they would normally have run
in conjunction with a work trip. The second is a "general" induced
demand effect, in which reductions in network travel times (as a result
of reduced vehicle-trips or improved traffic flow) are partially offset
by additional travel resulting from the improved network performance.
Induced travel may therefore occur as a result of TSM as well as TDM measures.
A few of the models in this guidebook include factors to account for various
types of induced and offsetting travel. Appropriate data on these factors,
however, can be difficult to develop.
Another
important consideration is interaction among strategies. Some strategies
may complement each other (e.g., parking management and ridesharing incentives),
leading to cumulative effects greater than the sum of the effects of the
strategies if applied individually. Conversely, in some cases the effects
of multiple programs may be smaller than the sum of their individual effects.
For example, some TDM projects may compete for the same market of travelers,
thus leading to diminishing returns as more projects are implemented.
Except where noted, the methods described in this report typically do
not account for the interactive effects of multiple strategies.
-Top-
Forecasting Emissions Impacts
To
translate travel changes into emissions changes, emission factors (i.e.,
grams per mile or grams per trip) are typically applied to changes in
VMT and vehicle-trips. In some methods, emission factors may vary according
to vehicle speed and/or vehicle type.
A
number of important analytical issues arise in translating travel impacts
into emissions impacts, or in forecasting the emissions impacts of traffic
flow improvements. Some of the most noteworthy include:
- Trip-end
versus VMT (distance)-based emission factors. Emissions at the beginning
of a vehicle-trip are typically much higher than emissions later in
the trip when the vehicle has warmed up. Therefore, some emission forecasting
approaches apply separate trip-based and VMT (distance)-based emission
factors. EPA's MOBILE5 model - the current source of emission factors
in most areas - does not calculate trip and VMT-based emission factors
separately; instead, cold-start and hot-start emissions are embodied
in the VMT-based factor. As a result, the use of standard MOBILE emission
factors will overestimate the benefits of strategies that do not reduce
trips, but only affect trip lengths (i.e., park-and-ride), and conversely,
will underestimate the benefits of strategies that reduce short trips
(i.e., bicycle/pedestrian facilities). CARB's EMFAC model produces both
trip-based and VMT-based emission factors, as will EPA's upcoming MOBILE6
model. Procedures have also been developed for identifying separate
trip and VMT-based factors from MOBILE5. A few methodologies also consider
emissions from work and non-work trips separately, under the assumption
that hot versus cold start percentages differ between the two types
of trips.
- Traffic
speed/flow impacts on emissions. CMAQ strategies such as signal
timing and ramp metering affect the speeds at which vehicles travel
on different facilities or affect other characteristics of traffic flow
such as idle times and acceleration rates. The way in which a vehicle
is operated can have a significant effect on emissions. Vehicles typically
emit pollution at higher rates (in grams per mile) at extremely low
or high speeds or under hard acceleration.
Speed
changes are typically assessed through equations relating traffic speed
to volumes and facility characteristics such as capacity. Such equations
are embodied within the regional travel model (see Standard Travel and
Emissions Forecasting Models), and may also be applied independently
for facility-level analysis. As an alternative, some sketch-planning
approaches apply elasticities of average travel speed versus total area-wide
VMT. Standard emission factor models such as MOBILE and EMFAC produce
emission rates as a function of vehicle speed.2
By applying speed-based emission factors, the emission impacts of strategies
affecting traffic flow can be estimated to some extent.
The
speed-based approach, however, does not account for changes in acceleration
or idle characteristics, as might be expected from (for example) a signal
timing project. To model traffic flow and emission impacts with greater
precision, traffic simulation models are typically used. These models,
which simulate actual traffic flows, incorporate emission factors that
are based on both speed and acceleration rates.
- Time-of-day
shifting. Some TDM strategies, notably shifted work hours and telecommuting,
may affect the time during which trips are taken as well as the total
number of vehicle-trips. Shifting trips from the peak to off-peak periods
can affect total emissions by changing the speeds at which these trips
are taken. Modeling of the emissions impacts of strategies that affect
the time of travel requires a knowledge of the speed characteristics
of vehicular travel during the peak and off-peak periods (as discussed
above).
- Vehicle
type. In addition to fleet-average factors, MOBILE and EMFAC produce
emission factors for different types of vehicles, such as passenger
cars, light trucks, and heavy trucks. Emission factors are typically
higher for heavier classes of vehicles. While some CMAQ strategies,
such as traffic flow improvements, will affect all types of vehicles,
others, including most travel demand management strategies, will primarily
affect passenger car and light truck travel. Emission factors used in
the CMAQ analysis should reflect the general composition of the vehicle
fleet affected by the strategy.
|
Example:
California Air Resources Board Project Evaluation
In
1995, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) evaluated a number
of emission reduction projects funded by state motor vehicle registration
fees. The projects analyzed are similar to the types of projects
commonly implemented under the CMAQ program. TDM projects were
evaluated using transit or workplace-based survey data, in conjunction
with the "California standardized methodology" described
in this report. TSM projects were evaluated based on before and
after travel speeds. Alternative fuel vehicle projects were evaluated
based on various assumptions about emission rates and vehicle
utilization.
The
estimated VOC emission reductions for various types of strategies
are shown in Table 1. Average benefits for the 18 projects are
roughly 6.0 kg/day for reactive organic gases (ROG)3
and 9.0 kg/day for NOx. The evaluation report illustrates that
a range of emission benefits might be expected, even for similar
types of projects, depending upon the specific details of the
project. While these results illustrate the order of magnitude
of emission reductions that might be expected, it should be noted
that overall effectiveness may not correspond directly to cost-effectiveness.
For example, a project with low total emission reductions could
be cost-effective if total costs were also low.
Table
1. Sample Emission Benefits of CMAQ-Type Projects in California
| |
|
Average
Benefits (kg/day) |
| Project
Type |
Number
of Projects |
ROG |
NOx |
| Alternative
Fuel Buses |
3 |
1 |
36 |
| Bicycle
Facilities |
2 |
1 |
0 |
| Electric
Vehicles |
2 |
0 |
2 |
| Employer
Trip Reduction |
3 |
16 |
14 |
| Telecommunications |
3 |
1 |
1 |
| Traffic
Signal Timing |
2 |
13 |
2 |
|
Transit
(Shuttle)
|
3 |
6 |
2 |
| All
Projects |
18 |
6 |
9 |
Source:
California Air Resources Board. "Evaluation of Selected Projects
Funded by Motor Vehicle Registration Fees." Sacramento, CA
(1995). Annual benefits from this report were converted to daily
benefits using an annualization factor of 260, since most projects
are worksite-based.
|
-Top-
|