• Air Toxics
• CMAQ
• Conformity
• It All Adds Up

• Laws and Regulations
• Maps
• Policy and Guidance
• Research
  • General Practice
  • Air Quality Planning and SIPs
  • Emissions Analysis
  • Land Use
  • Multi-Jurisdictional (Complex) Areas
  • Project Level Conformity
  • Small Urban and Rural Areas
  • Tools & Methodologies
  • Transportation Control Measures
• Resources
• Models & Methodologies
• Training
• Air Quality Newsletter

Multi-Pollutant Emissions Benefits of Transportation Strategies-FHWA

2. Summary of Findings

This section provides an overview of findings regarding the impacts of each type of strategy on each of the seven pollutants examined. It is important to note that the primary purpose of this study is to identify the impacts of each strategy on emissions of each pollutant in terms of direction (e.g., positive, negative, uncertain). This document does not address the relative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of individual strategies. Within each type of strategy, a wide range of impacts might occur, depending on the scope of implementation (e.g., statewide, regional, local), stringency (e.g., mandatory, incentive-based, or voluntary program; level of financial incentive provided, etc.), and demographic and geographic characteristics (e.g., existing mode shares and levels of travel, availability of travel options, land use patterns, etc.). Moreover, the effectiveness of many of these strategies is enhanced (or conversely, may be inhibited) due to combination with other strategies.

Factors Affecting Emissions Impacts

Type of Strategy Effects

Transportation strategies generally affect emissions by having one or more of the following effects:

• Reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and/or vehicle trips;
• Reducing vehicle idling;
• Shifting travel times (e.g., shifting from peak to off-peak travel times);
• Improving traffic speeds or traffic flow; or
• Altering vehicle fleet characteristics (e.g., vehicle type, size, fuel, or emissions control technology).

Strategy effects are summarized below by major type of effect:

Strategies that reduce vehicle travel - A reduction in vehicle travel can occur in several ways, including shifts from driving to other modes (i.e., transit, bicycling, walking), increasing vehicle occupancy, reducing the number of trips made (e.g., through telecommuting), or reducing vehicle trip lengths (e.g., through better land use mixing). Strategies that reduce vehicle miles traveled (assuming no other effects) will reduce emissions of all pollutants. Each mile that a vehicle travels, it emits more pollution, so reducing vehicle travel mileage will reduce emissions of all seven gases.⁵ However, in conducting emissions analysis, it is important to examine not only the reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), but also the reduction in the number of vehicle trips. During the first portion of a vehicle trip, when the vehicle engine starts cold, the vehicle emits some pollutants at a much higher rate than during the remainder of the trip, since emissions control technology does not operate as efficiently as when the vehicle is warm. Some strategies reduce VMT by shortening vehicle trip lengths but do not reduce the number of vehicle trips. For instance, development of a park-and-ride lot may reduce VMT by encouraging carpools, but the park-and-ride lot generally does not reduce vehicle cold starts, only running emissions, since individuals must drive to the lot in the morning. On the other hand, most bicycle/pedestrian projects reduce vehicle trips entirely, and will eliminate both cold start and running emissions. Consequently, VMT-reducing strategies may result in different percentage reductions in different pollutants, depending on whether or not vehicle trip cold starts are reduced.

In MOBILE 6.2, incremental emissions associated with a cold start only occur for VOCs, NOx, and CO. In general, among the types of vehicles affected, a reduction in VMT that occurs entirely through vehicle trip elimination (such as a bicycle project) will result in a nearly proportional reduction in emissions of all pollutants from light-duty motor vehicles. For instance, reducing light-duty vehicle commute travel by 5 percent due to mode shifts should result in approximately a 5 percent reduction in emissions of all pollutants by light-duty vehicles on work trips, assuming the same emissions factors and not accounting for emissions from the other mode (transit).⁶ On the other hand, a strategy, like a park-and-ride facility, which reduces vehicle trip lengths but does not eliminate cold starts, will most likely result in a lower percentage reduction in VOCs, NOx, and CO than other pollutants, since the first few miles of the trip produce a higher share of total trip emissions.

Strategies that reduce vehicle idling - Strategies that reduce vehicle idling (assuming constant emissions factors and no other effects that would further impact emissions) will reduce emissions of all pollutants, since some of each pollutant is producing during engine operation even if a motor vehicle is not moving. Specifically, the combustion process results in exhaust emissions of all seven pollutants. Running loss evaporative emissions also occur during idling, as the hot engine and exhaust system vaporizes gasoline, causing additional release of VOCs. Emissions factors during vehicle idle can be generated using MOBILE6.2 In addition, EPA has developed specific guidance and emissions factors for examining long-duration idling; this guidance, however, currently only addresses NOx and PM.⁷

Strategies that affect vehicle speeds and traffic flow - Strategies that affect vehicle speeds and traffic flow conditions will have different impacts on different pollutants, and may reduce emissions of some pollutants while increasing or having no effect on emissions of others. In MOBILE6.2, emissions rates for VOCs, NOx, and CO vary with vehicle speed. However, in general, MOBILE6.2 emissions rates for PM-10, PM-2.5, SOx, or NH3, do not vary with vehicle speeds. PM emissions are affected slightly due to tire and break wear. Figure 2-1 shows emissions factors by speed for CO, VOCs, NOx, and the four other pollutants (all have less than 0.1 g/mi). As a can been seen here, strategies that result in higher average speeds might reduce VOCs but could increase CO and NOx emissions. Strategies that involve shifting traffic from peak to off-peak periods, therefore, could also increase CO and NOx emissions. The direction of the impact depends on the speeds of traffic without and with the strategy implemented.

Figure 2-1: Emissions Factors by Speed for Light-Duty Vehicles and Trucks, 2006 (arterials)

Strategies that alter vehicle fleet characteristics - Strategies that affect vehicle age, fuels, engine technologies, or emission control technologies will have effects that differ by pollutant. Many emission control technologies (catalysts, filters, etc.) and alternative fuels are designed to reduce only selected pollutants. For example, diesel oxidation catalysts (a common retrofit for older trucks and construction equipment) reduce PM emissions but have no effect on NOx emissions. Biodiesel blends have been found to reduce emissions of VOCs, CO, and PM, but to lead to slight increases in NOx; higher percentage biodiesel blends produce larger VOCs, CO, and PM reductions and larger NOx increases. Additionally, it is important to recognize the distinction between national engine and fuel standards that are set by the EPA and strategies that can be carried out at the state or local level to alter fleet characteristics for emissions reductions.

Types of Vehicles Affected and Share of Inventory

In determining which strategies will be most effective at reducing specific pollutants, it is useful to understand what share of the emissions inventory for that pollutant comes from the types of vehicles that are being affected by the strategy. The share of emissions coming from individual sources differs widely among regions, depending on types of industries, amount of freight traffic, and other factors. Using national figures, however, some general patterns are apparent (see Figure 2-2).

Figure 2-2: Contribution of Mobile Sources to U.S. Emissions
From National Emissions Inventory Air Pollutant Emissions Trends Data, 2002

• CO, VOCs, and NH3 are largely produced by gasoline combustion, with the largest mobile sources being light-duty gas vehicles (including passenger cars, motorcycles, and trucks) and non-road gasoline sources e.g., lawn and garden equipment and light commercial equipment). Consequently, if a region needs to reduce these pollutants, it should focus its strategies on those that target reductions in emissions from light-duty gasoline vehicles and gasoline equipment. It should be noted that while transportation is a large share of the total inventory of CO and VOC, mobile sources produce a relatively small share of NH₃ nationally.
• The largest source of transportation-related PM-10 and PM-2.5 emissions is fugitive dust from unpaved and paved roads. As a result, specific strategies to reduce the amount of dust that is kicked up from vehicles on roadways are often implemented to reduce particulate matter. Diesel vehicles and equipment are the largest contributors of direct PM-10 and PM-2.5 exhaust emissions from transportation. Therefore, PM reductions strategies may be most effective when focused on diesel vehicles and equipment.
• Transportation-related NOx and SOxemissions are not dominantly produced by any one category of vehicles. Light-duty vehicles, heavy-duty vehicles, and off-highway mobile sources each contribute a moderate share toward transportation NOX and SOX emissions. Thus, if a region needs to reduce these pollutants, it may implement strategies that focus on any of these sources. Since there are a smaller number of heavy-duty vehicles on the road, some heavy-duty vehicle strategies, in fact, may be very effective in reducing NOxand SOx. Although mobile sources make up a substantial portion of the NOx inventory (54 percent nationally), they contribute only a very small share of the SO₂ emitted in the U.S. (less than 5 percent).

Summary Impacts of Strategies

A summary of the types of transportation system effects and the general direction of emissions impacts, by strategy, is presented below. These impacts are based on reviews of reference documents and case studies, understanding of EPA's existing emissions models, and professional judgment. It should be noted that some types of effects have not been quantified by EPA; for instance, in MOBILE6.2, PM, SOx, and NH₃ emissions are not affected by changes in travel speeds, and EPA guidance does not quantify the impacts of some retrofits on certain pollutants. In these cases, impacts are recorded as no effect or not available.

Impacts are indicated in general terms, and are not intended to represent magnitude. In some instances, reductions or increases of one pollutant may be much larger than for another; the sample strategies provide an indication of the relative magnitude of impacts for each pollutant.

General Emissions Impacts of Transportation Demand Management Strategies

Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies focus on changing travel behavior - trip rates, trip length, travel mode, time-of-day, etc. Most TDM projects and programs reduce emissions by reducing trips and/or vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by personal motor vehicles, or by shifting trips from peak periods to less congested periods. In general, strategies that reduce VMT will reduce emissions of all pollutants. Transportation analysts should be aware that some specific strategies have the potential to increase one or more pollutants, but this would generally not be the case for a program aimed at emissions reductions.⁸ In addition, strategies that reduce vehicle travel may also have an indirect impact on travel speeds; however, these effects are generally minor and would not be large enough to offset emissions reductions. The table below provides a summary of the general emissions impacts of selected TDM strategies.

Table 2-1: General Emissions Impacts of TDM Strategies

Strategy	Category of Primary Effect						General Pollutant Effect
	Reduce VMT	Reduce vehicle trips	Shift travel time	Reduce idling	Change speeds	Change vehicle stock or fuels	PM-2.5	PM-10	CO	NOx	VOCs	SOx	NH3
1. Park-and-Ride Facilities		-
2. HOV Lanes
3. Ridesharing
4. Vanpools
5. Bicycle/Pedestrian
6. Transit Service Enhancement
7. Transit Marketing, Information and Amenities
8. Transit Pricing
9. Parking Pricing/ Management
10. Road Pricing
11. VMT Pricing
12. Fuel Pricing
13. Employer-based TDM Programs
14. Non-Employer-based TDM
15. Land-use Strategies

General Emissions Impacts of Transportation System Management Strategies

Transportation system management (TSM) strategies focus on changing the operation of the transportation system, typically with a primary focus on improving traffic flow and reducing traveler delay. TSM programs can reduce emissions by changing vehicle speeds, reducing rapid vehicle accelerations and decelerations, and reducing vehicle idling. Many of these strategies are under the umbrella of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). In addition, some strategies focus directly on encouraging changes in driving behavior through educational information, incentives, or restrictions on driving speeds, operating patterns, and idling.

The table below provides a summary of the general emissions impacts of selected TSM strategies. Note that strategies that affect vehicle travel speeds will generally show no effect on PM, SOx, and NH₃, and might result in either an increase or decrease in CO, NOx, and VOC, depending on the starting vehicle speeds and level of speed change. On the other hand, strategies that reduce vehicle idling will generally reduce all pollutants. Some strategies can either affect both travel speeds or vehicle idling time, or affect both.

Table 2-2: General Emissions Impacts of TSM Strategies

Strategy	Category of Primary Effect						General Pollutant Effect
	Reduce VMT	Reduce vehicle trips	Shift travel time	Reduce idling	Change speeds	Change vehicle stock	PM-2.5	PM-10	CO	NOx	VOCs	SOx	NH3
16. Signal Synchronization/Intersection Improvements	-	-
17. Incident Management/Traveler Information
18. Speed Control
19. Shifting/Separating Freight Movements
20. Vehicle Idling Restrictions/Programs

General Emissions Impacts of Vehicle, Fuel and Technology Strategies

Vehicle, fuel, and technology projects and programs are designed to change the emissions rates of vehicles either by changing the fuel being used, the type of vehicle or emissions control technology, or a combination of both. Some programs also focus on eliminating gross polluters, or vehicles whose emissions controls have failed. The methodologies for these strategies generally involve estimating the number of vehicles affected, and then calculating the change in the emissions factors based on changes in vehicle stock or equipment. The specific emissions reductions depend on the type of technology and/or fuel used. The table below provides a summary of the general emissions impacts of selected vehicle, fuel, and technology strategies. It is important to note that the emissions impacts of these strategies vary considerably based on the specific types of technologies and fuels that are used. For instance, some diesel engine retrofits target reducing PM while others focus on NOx.

Table 2-3: General Emissions Impacts of Vehicle, Fuel and Technology Strategies

General Emissions Impacts of Vehicle, Fuel and Technology Strategies

Strategy	Category of Primary Effect						General Pollutant Effect
	Reduce VMT	Reduce vehicle trips	Shift travel time	Reduce idling	Change speeds	Change vehicle stock	PM-2.5	PM-10	CO	NOx	VOCs	SOx	NH3
21. Idle Reduction Facilities
22. Accelerated Retirement/Replacement of Buses
23. Accelerated Retirement/Replacement of Heavy Duty Trucks
24. Diesel Engine Retrofits
25. Clean Diesel Fuel
26. Inspection & Maintenance Programs

General Emissions Impacts of Non-road Transportation Strategies

Non-road vehicles and equipment include railroads, marine vessels, airport ground support equipment, lawn and garden equipment, construction and agricultural equipment, and other mobile equipment. There are a wide range of technologies and operational strategies available to address these sources. The strategies presented in this report focus on policies and programs that can be implemented at the state and local level. The table below provides a summary of the general emissions impacts of selected non-road transportation strategies. It should be noted that diesel engine retrofits and clean diesel fuels strategies (#24 and 25 above) can also be applied to non-road diesel engines with similar results.

Table 2-4: General Emissions Impacts of Non-Road Transportation Strategies

Strategy	Category of Primary Effect						General Pollutant Effect
	Reduce VMT	Reduce vehicle trips	Shift travel time	Reduce idling	Change speeds	Change vehicle stock	PM-2.5	PM-10	CO	NOx	VOCs	SOx	NH3
27. Locomotive Replacement/Repowers
28. Rail Electrification
29. Locomotive Idling Reduction
30. Marine Vessel Replacement/Repowers
31. Marine Vessel Operational Strategies
32. Transportation Equipment Replacement/ Repowers

General Emissions Impacts of Road Dust Strategies

Road dust reduction strategies focus on limiting the amount of particulate matter that is kicked up by the movement of vehicles on roadways. These strategies reduce PM-2.5 and PM-10 from road dust, but typically have no effect on other pollutants, as shown in the table below. In the case of street sweepers, there may be a small increase in emissions of other pollutants if the emissions from the street sweeping equipment are considered.

Table 2-5: General Emissions Impacts of Road Dust Strategies

Strategy	Category of Primary Effect						General Pollutant Effect
	Reduce VMT	Reduce vehicle trips	Shift travel time	Reduce idling	Change speeds	Change vehicle stock	PM-2.5	PM-10	CO	NOx	VOCs	SOx	NH3
33. Unpaved Road Dust Mitigation
34. Road Paving	-	-
35. Street Sweeping

Interactions between Strategies and Effects

While strategies are classified independently, it is important to recognize that many strategies are not typically implemented in isolation, and consequently should not be evaluated as such. Specifically:

• Many strategies are commonly implemented in combination and separating out the impacts of individual program elements is often difficult. Consequently, strategies should often be evaluated together as integrated packages. For example, an expanded bus service strategy may include additional transit service provision, using new CNG vehicles, combined with enhanced marketing and new bus shelters. Analyzing this project as an integrated package of strategies helps both to avoid double-counting and to account for effects that are not additive, due to synergies between strategies or competition.
• Some strategies can have both positive and negative affects on emissions. For example, employer flex-time policies tend to discourage co-worker carpooling, but encourage family carpool arrangements. Park-and-ride lots can encourage transit use, but also increase auto access to transit, thus creating a cold start. Strategies that increase transit ridership may not only reduce personal motor vehicle travel, but may also require additional transit services.

⁵ In some cases, strategies may have other impacts, such as also altering vehicle speeds, which may increase emissions of one or more pollutants.

⁶ Emissions reductions will depend on all else remaining equal, i.e., reducing VMT on a facility could cause higher speed thus higher emissions.

⁷ See EPA's document "Guidance for Quantifying and Using Long Duration Truck Idling Emission Reductions in State Implementation Plans and Transportation Conformity," 2004, http://epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420b09037.pdf.

⁸ For instance, an expansion in transit services could potentially increase PM and NOx emissions if new buses do not take enough cars off the road to offset the emissions associated with increased bus operations. However, in general, a transit service expansion would only be considered as an emissions reduction strategy if there is sufficient ridership expected to yield net emissions benefits.