How Can Self-Driving Cars Improve Mobility in Cities?

English: Disruptive Technology Graph (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

NACTO Policy Statement on Automated Vehicles (4 page pdf, National Association of City Transportation Officials, Jun. 22, 2016)

Also discussed here: NACTO Releases Policy Recommendations for the Future of Automated Vehicles - New disruptive technology has the potential to remake city streets, and policies must directly address their expected widespread impact on safety, mobility, and land use (Press Release, National Association of City Transportation Officials, Jun. 23, 2016)

Today we review a policy statement by an association made up of municipal transportation planners from 40 major cities in the USA that transforming cities constrained by congestion and old vehicle technology to future ones where automated cars improve mobility and safety by all modes of transportation, not just for cars but even that could be much better. Automated cars offer a way to dramatically increase the capacity of (and lower the capital and maintenance costs) city roads and highways as well as making them safer for pedestrians and cyclists by imposing a speed limit of 25 mph. They will also offer more space in cities for homes and businesses by virtually eliminating the need for on and off street parking – a function that today covers as much as 40% of urban areas in the form of parking lots and driveways




Key Quotes:

 “New technology has the capacity to reduce the footprint of vehicular travel, moving more people in new forms of medium and low density transit, while creating space for safe and inviting walking and cycling infrastructure.”  

Recommendations:

• “Plan for fully automated vehicles, not half-measures: …[half measures] have been shown to encourage unsafe driving behavior, with drivers reading more, texting more, and generally being inattentive while the vehicle is in motion.”

• “Rethink our streets and expressways: … technology will dramatically increase our current expressways’ capacity, making some currently planned expressway expansions potential ‘white elephants’ “.

• “Ensure safe operation on city streets, including limiting automated vehicles to a maximum speed of 25 miles per hour: “

• “Create data-sharing requirements for automated vehicles: …Requiring the sharing of high-quality, standardized data from automated vehicles would allow for cities to take a more data-driven approach to transportation.”

• “Change planning models to incorporate the expected disruptive impact of this technology: “

“Autonomous vehicles offer a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reset our streets and address the fundamental issues of traffic safety, congestion, and mobility as our cities grow ever larger.”[ Janette Sadik-Khan, Transportation Principal at Bloomberg Associates and NACTO Chair.]

 “Shared, automated vehicle technology can remove that expense and physical burden, and enable cities to redirect their limited resources away from storing cars and toward affordable housing, high quality transit, and active transportation.”

Related articles

• Making Streets Complete for More Mobility
• What are the Characteristics of Traffic Congestion?

A Congestion Charge for Downtown Toronto: An Analysis

English: Toronto Downtown Core, at nite from CN Tower. Español: El centro de Toronto visto de noche. Français : Le centre-ville de Toronto, vu de nuit. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Revenue Options Study: Cordon Congestion Charges (185 page pdf, KPMG for City of Toronto, Jun. 2016)

Also discussed here: Report lays out hundreds of millions in potential new tax dollars for Toronto (Jeff Gray, Toronto Globe and Mail, Jun. 21, 2016)

Today we review a report by KPMG for the City of Toronto in which the option of a morning rush hour congestion charge is considered in the Toronto downtown south of the 401 between Bathurst and Bayview. Another road pricing option:applying a toll on the Don Valley Expressway is not included in this study and is being considered separately. A daily charge of $5 to $20 at each cordon would yield up to $377M/year in net revenue with 33% overhead. This in turn would cost the average household in Toronto $120 /year with 35% of the revenue coming from visitors.

The overall conclusion: “In general, a cordon charge would have a positive impact by reducing traffic, decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing transit ridership.” and “The net revenue from cordon charges should have a high degree of stability in the long-term.” Implementation costs for congestion charges are high enough to consider as well the option of increasing parking rates in the downtown which would bring in similar revenues (and this seems to be favoured by the Mayor).


 Key Quotes:

Assumptions:

“The cordon charge will be applied only upon entry into the cordon zone between the hours of 6:00 am and 10:00 am on weekdays.”

"An electronic tolling system similar to the Highway 407 ETR will be used, which combines a transponder and licence plate recognition system. “

“The tolling of highways by the City is permitted under COTA; however, the highway or portion of road being designated as a toll road must first be approved by the Province. … COTA may need to be amended for Toronto to have the required authorities.”

 “It may be possible for the City to contract with the owners of Highway 407ETR (407 ETR Concession Company Ltd.) to operate and administer the City’s cordon charge program.

• An annual commuting cost of $3,954 was used for price elasticity calculations.
• There are 49 entry points into the cordon, based on the City of Toronto 2011 cordon analysis.
• A price elasticity of -0.3 was used and compares similarly to London and Singapore’s elasticity.

“The net revenue from cordon charges ($377M/yr with a $20 cordon charge) should have a high degree of stability in the long-term.”

“While a cordon charge has many attractive features… similar benefits may be achieved at lower implementation cost by applying a levy to commercial parking spaces in the downtown core. “

“Parking space levy: Other cities, including Vancouver, Los Angeles, Miami, Pittsburgh and Seattle, tax either parking spots or parking revenues. Current legislation would only allow Toronto to levy a per-spot tax on landowners. A $1-a-day per-spot tax could bring in $383-million a year, according to KPMG’s estimates”

Related articles

• Where is the Worst Traffic Congestion in Canada?
• Is Now the Time to Price Traffic Congestion in Large Canadian Cities?
• What are the Characteristics of Traffic Congestion?
• What are the Health Impacts from Roadside Emissions while Reducing Greenhouse Gases?

How Does Exposure to Air Pollution Vary by Race, Age and Location?

English: Smog and air pollution in Pasadena Highway, downtown Los Angeles فارسی: آلودگی شدید هوا در بزرگراه پاسادنا، مرکز شهر لس آنجلس (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Factors influencing time-location patterns and their impact on estimates of exposure: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and Air Pollution (MESA Air) (8 page pdf, Elizabeth W. Spalt, Cynthia L. Curl, Ryan W. Allen, Martin Cohen, Kayleen Williams, Jana A. Hirsch, Sara D. Adar and Joel D. Kaufman, Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, Apr. 29, 2015)

Key Quotes: 

“MESA Air aims to quantify the relation between individual-level estimates of long-term outdoor air pollution exposure and the progression of subclinical atherosclerosis and the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD)” 

“MESA Air is an ancillary study to the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA7), a long-term study of the progression of CVD in adults.” 

“Chinese participants spend more time indoors and less time outdoors compared with Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics participants…The amounts of time spent indoors by Black and Hispanic participants were similar, whereas White and Chinese participants spent ~ 2 h less and 3 h more time indoors, respectively, than Hispanic participants “ 

“standard factors can overestimate air pollution predictions and that the overestimation may increase with age. This analysis highlights important limitations of the existing literature regarding the time-location habits of US adults.”

“this analysis adds key time-location data to the literature by providing more recent information on an older and more ethnically/racially diverse population and describing potential demographic, socioeconomic, health, and built environment predictors of total time indoors and time indoors at home. “

Related articles

• As China Cleans Its Air, Are Air Pollution Deaths Decreasing?
• Air pollution's true costs
• What is the Impact of Air Pollution on the World- Present and Future?
• Being Stuck In Traffic Jams May Increase The Risk Of Cancer Says A New Study
• Air Pollution - a Leading Risk Factor for Strokes
• How is Traffic-Related Air Pollution Related to Dementia?
• Links between Particulate Pollution, Diabetes and Heart Attack Risk

Air Pollution – a Leading Risk Factor for Strokes

Global burden of stroke and risk factors in 188 countries, during 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (Abstract, Valery L Feigin, Gregory A Roth, Mohsen Naghavi, Priya Parmar, Rita Krishnamurthi, Sumeet Chugh,George A Mensah, Bo Norrving, Ivy Shiue, Marie Ng, Kara Estep, Kelly Cercy, Christopher J L Murray, Mohammad H Forouzanfar, The Lancet, Jun. 9, 2016)

Also discussed here: For the first time, air pollution emerges as a leading risk factor for stroke worldwide (Science Daily, Jun. 9, 2016)

Today we review research into 17 risk factors for stroke which affects 15 million people each year though death (6 million) or permanently disability (5 million) or other impacts. The risk of strokes from environmental air pollution (PM2.5) has increased by 33% from 1990 to 2003. The research showed that indoor and outdoor air pollution was responsible for 30% of strokes and made this the largest risk factor. Action by governments to tax high risk factors (such as salt, sugar and tobacco) and for public health to treat high blood pressure are seen as effective ways to reduce strokes.

   

Key Quotes:

” Every year, approximately 15 million people worldwide suffer a stroke -- of these, nearly six million die and five million are left with permanent disability. Disability may include loss of vision and/or speech, paralysis and confusion.”

“We evaluated attributable DALYs [stroke-related disability-adjusted life-years ] for 17 risk factors (air pollution and environmental, dietary, physical activity, tobacco smoke, and physiological) and six clusters of risk factors by use of three inputs: risk factor exposure, relative risks, and the theoretical minimum risk exposure level”

“Globally, 29·2% …of the burden of stroke was attributed to air pollution.”

“In 2013, 16.9% of the global stroke burden was attributed to environmental air pollution (as measured by ambient particle matter [PM] pollution of aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2·5 μm) -- almost as much as that from smoking (20.7%). From 1990 to 2013, stroke burden associated with environmental air pollution (PM25) has increased by over 33%.”

 “Governments have the power and responsibility to influence these risk factors through legislation and taxation of tobacco, alcohol, salt, sugar or saturated fat content, while health service providers have the responsibility to check and treat risk factors such as high blood pressure,"

Related articles

• Study: Everyone Can Squash This 3rd Leading Cause of Death
• 10 Commandments to Reduce Your Risk of Stroke
• Severe obesity revealed as a stand-alone high-risk factor for heart failure
• 9 Out of 10 Strokes Could Be Prevented, Study Finds
• Heart disease epidemic will rise in China - study
• Particulate Pollution, Narrow Arteries and Strokes
• How Much of a Health Threat is it to Live Near a Highway?
• How Does Air Pollution Cause Hypertension and Heart Attacks?
• How Does Urbanization Affect Urban Air Quality in China?

A Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Technique that Might Actually Work

Rapid carbon mineralization for permanent disposal of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions (4 page pdf, Juerg M. Matter, Martin Stute, Sandra Ó. Snæbjörnsdottir, Eric H. Oelkers, Sigurdur R. Gislason, Edda S. Aradottir, Bergur Sigfusson, Ingvi Gunnarsson, Holmfridur Sigurdardottir, Einar Gunnlaugsson, Gudni Axelsson, Helgi A. Alfredsson, Domenik Wolff-Boenisch, Kiflom Mesfin, Diana Fernandez de la Reguera Taya, Jennifer Hall, Knud Dideriksen, Wallace S. Broecker, Science, Jun.10, 2016)

Also discussed here: Climate change mitigation: Turning carbon dioxide into rock (Science Daily, Jun. 9, 2016)

Today we review research conducted in Iceland into a technique that converts atmospheric CO2 into a carbonate solid for storage underground rather than the better known CCS approach which attempts to store CO2 underground in its gaseous state, with all of the risks of it leaking back into the atmosphere later. Preliminary testing and drilling near Reykjavik indicate that up to 5,000 tonnes of CO2/year can be stored this way. The feasibility for this to significantly address global emissions will be tested when this technique is scaled up to much larger rates.

   

Key Quotes:

“The CarbFix pilot project in Iceland was designed to promote and verify in situ CO2 mineralization in basaltic rocks for the permanent disposal of anthropogenic CO2 emissions …. is situated about 25 km east of Reykjavik and is equipped with a 2000-m-deep injection well (HN02) and eight monitoring wells ranging in depth from 150 to 1300 m”

“greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO₂) can be permanently and rapidly locked away from the atmosphere, by injecting it into volcanic bedrock. The CO₂ reacts with the surrounding rock, forming environmentally benign minerals….Our results show that between 95 and 98 per cent of the injected CO₂ was mineralised over the period of less than two years, which is amazingly fast."

“The CO₂ is dissolved in water and carried down the well. On contact with the target storage rocks, at 400-800 metres under the ground, the solution quickly reacts with the surrounding basaltic rock, forming carbonate minerals.”

 "Carbonate minerals do not leak out of the ground, thus our newly developed method results in permanent and environmentally friendly storage of CO₂ emissions,"

 "Storing CO₂ as carbonate minerals significantly enhances storage security which should improve public acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage as a climate change mitigation technology,"

“The results of this study demonstrate that nearly complete in situ CO2 mineralization in basaltic rocks can occur in less than 2 years. Once stored within carbonate minerals, the leakage risk is eliminated and any monitoring program of the storage site can be significantly reduced, thus enhancing storage security and potentially public acceptance.”

Related articles

• Mapping Methane, the Greenhouse Gas
• Modelling the Best Way to Reduce Global Carbon Emissions
• Are there Limits to the Burning of Carbon Fuels?

What is the Impact of Air Pollution on the World- Present and Future?

The Economic Consequences of Outdoor Air Pollution (20 page pdf, OECD, Jun. 9. 2016) 

Also discussed here: Air pollution to cause 6-9 million premature deaths and cost 1% GDP by 2060 (OECD Press Release, Jun. 9. 2016) 

Today we review a report from the OECD which estimates the impact of air pollution in terms of economic costs and on health costs and premature lives lost. Global costs are expected to rise from $21B in 2015 to $176B in 2060 (in constant 2010 dollars). The number of lost sick days which affects productivity is expected to rise from 1.2 B to 3.7 B in 2060. The number of premature deaths due to outdoor air pollution is expected to rise from 3 million in 2015 to 6-9 million in 2060. Policies to address this include incentives aimed at technology to reduce vehicle emissions, the implementation of improved air quality standards and introduction of emission/congestion/road pricing. The highest per capita costs are found in China, followed by Korea, Eastern Europe and the Caspian region and this is also where premature deaths per capita are highest

Key Quote

The most recent Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study estimates that air pollution – indoor and outdoor combined – was the cause of 5.5 million premature deaths globally in 2013

 The number of lives cut short by air pollution is already terrible and the potential rise in the next few decades is terrifying. If this is not motivation enough to act, this report shows there will also be a heavy economic cost to not taking action

The projected increase in concentrations of PM2.5 and ozone will in turn lead to substantial effects on the economy. According to the calculations in this report, global air pollution-related healthcare costs are projected to increase from USD 21 billion (using constant 2010 USD and PPP exchange rates) in 2015 to USD 176 billion 2005 in 2060. By 2060, the annual number of lost working days, which affect labour productivity, are projected to reach 3.7 billion (currently around 1.2 billion) at the global level. 

This report projects an increase in the number of premature deaths due to outdoor air pollution from approximately 3 million people in 2010, in line with the latest Global Burden of Disease estimates, to 6‑9 million annually in 2060

the implementation of policies, such as incentivising the adoption of end-of-pipe technologies, implementing air quality standards and emission pricing, will certainly help avoid the worst impacts of outdoor air pollution

“Premature death rates are forecast to be up to three times higher in 2060 than in 2010 in China and up to four times higher in India. Death rates are seen stabilising in the United States and falling in much of Western Europe thanks in part to efforts to move to cleaner energy and transport

 The regions with the highest per capita costs are China, followed by Korea, Eastern Europe and the Caspian region. These are regions in which the number of cases of illness per capita is highest

Related articles

• Cancer passes heart disease as top killer in 12 European countries
• The 9 worst cities to live in the world
• Karachi among 9 worst cities to live in
• Project Syndicate: Air pollution will kill more than 200 million people in the next 45 years
• Air pollution's true costs
• Coal Burning Causes the Most Air Pollution Deaths in China, Study Finds
• Reduce Carbon Gas Emissions using Diesel Vehicles or Eliminate Particulates - a choice between Mitigating Climate Change or Health Impacts
• How Many Deaths World-Wide are Caused by Transportation-Related Air Pollution?
• What is the Cost of Inaction on Climate Change?
• Reduce Carbon Gas Emissions using Diesel Vehicles or Eliminate Particulates - a choice between Mitigating Climate Change or Health Impacts

How Does the Cost of Urban Sprawl Compare Internationally?

Sprawl Tax: How the US stacks up internationally ( Joe Cortright, City Commentary, Jun.7, 2016)

Also discussed here: Transportation Costs and the Spatial Organization of Economic Activity (Abstract, Stephen J. Redding, Matthew A. Turner, National Bureau of Economic Research, Jun. 2014)

Today we review a comparison of the costs of sprawl in terms of extra transportation costs for commuting and added time in traffic. Results show that the average daily commute time in the US and Canada is well above (50-62 minutes) that of 17 countries in Europe. As a percent of household income transportation costs are highest for the US at 18% (or $1,500/household )followed by Austria, Canada and Portugal at 15-16% and an average of 12.8% overall (where the higher fuel prices in Europe are countered by the longer commute trips in the US and Canada).  

Key Quotes:

“the average American household spent approximately 18 percent of its budget on transportation. Among the other 16 countries, none spent more than 16 percent, and the average spending level was just 12.8 percent. That means a typical US household spent about five percentage points more of its income on transportation than the residents of other developed countries—which translates to about $1,500 every year.”

“The average American worker spent about 51 minutes commuting between home and work and back again—more than all but one other country in the sample. That exception was Canada, where the typical worker spent 63 minutes on their commute—but the rest were lower, all the way down to Portugal, where roundtrip commutes took up just 29 minutes per worker per day. For the other 15 nations examined the average commute time was 39 minutes—about 12 minutes less per day than in the US.”

 “Compared to other high income nations, we spend about $1,500 per household on transportation costs and about $770 per worker more on commute time costs.”

Related articles

• What are the Characteristics of Traffic Congestion?
• Are Traffic Congestion Costs Exaggerated?