Image source: Los Angeles Metro.
American Planning Association April 15, 2012
Mikhail Chester, Assistant Professor Civil, Environmental, & Sustainability Engineering Affiliate Faculty, School of Sustainability Arizona State University
A project between UCLA, ASU, and UC Berkeley
Transportation decision making often occurs with indicators determined from a subset of system processes: “tailpipe” emissions are the majority of emissions
the majority of impacts result from “tailpipe” emissions.
More and more we are recognizing the shortfalls of this limited view
Life-cycle assessment affords us an opportunity to evaluate the larger footprint
Vehicle
Infrastructure
Energy Production
Background image source: American Institute of Architects, 1997 Environmental Resource Guides
Extraction of Raw Materials
Manufacturing
Operation / Maintenance End-of-life
Raw Fuel Extraction Transport Processing / Refining
Distribution Electricity Generation
Extraction of Raw Materials Construction
Operation / Maintenance Decommissioning
Meta
Onroad Rail Air
Average US modes Sedan, pickup, SUV
Peak and off-peak buses
Light rail, metro rail, commuter rail
Short-haul, mid-haul, and international aircraft
Cities San Francisco, Chicago,
New York City Infrastructure
Parking Regions
California Corridor & High-speed Rail
Encino Station Canoga Park Station
OR
AN
GE
G
OL
D
SE
DA
N
Pa
sad
en
a
San Fernando Valley
Life Cycle Grouping Sedan Orange Line Gold Line
Vehicle
Manufacturing Sedan Transport to Point of Sale
Bus Transport to Point of Sale
Train Transport to Point of Sale
Operation Propulsion Idling
Propulsion Idling
Propulsion Idling
Maintenance Typical Sedan Maintenance Tire Replacement Battery Replacement
Typical Bus Maintenance Tire Replacement Battery Replacement
Typical Train Maintenance Train Cleaning Flooring Replacement
Insurance Sedan Liability Bus Liability Operator Fringe Benefits
Train Liability Operator Fringe Benefits
Infrastructure
Construction Roadway Construction Roadway Construction Station Construction
Track Construction Station Construction
Operation Roadway Lighting Herbicide Use
Road and Station Lighting Herbicide Use Control and Signaling
Track, Station, and Parking Lighting
Herbicide Use Train Control Miscellaneous (Escalators,
Equipment)
Maintenance Roadway maintenance is the result of heavy duty vehicles and thus not charged to the sedan.
Road and Station Maintenance
Track and Station Maintenance
Parking Curbside Parking Dedicated Parking Dedicated Parking
Insurance Road Workers Fringe Benefits Non-vehicle Workers Fringe Benefits
Infrastructure Liability
Non-vehicle Workers Fringe Benefits
Infrastructure Liability
Energy Production
Extraction, Processing, & Distribution
Gasoline Extraction, Processing, & Distribution
Natural Gas Extraction, Processing, Distribution, & Compression
Raw Fuel Extraction and Processing, Electricity Generation, Transmission & Distribution
Energy
Air Emissions SOX Respiratory irritant, acid deposition CO Asphyxiant NOX Respiratory irritant, smog VOC Photochemical smog, cancerous PM Respiratory and cardiovascular damage
Greenhouse Gases
CO2, CH4, N2O
Others Water, labor, costs, toxics, hazardous, etc.
Human Health and Environmental Impact Potentials Respiratory: SOx, NOx, and PM2.5
Acidification: SOx and NOx Photochemical Smog Formation: CH4, CO, VOC, and NOx
Energy Inputs
Process
Emission Outputs
Impact Potentials
Orange line
57 seats
38 pax
Time of Day
Time of Day
Pass
enge
rs
Pass
enge
rs
Gold line
152 seats
43 pax
Greenhouse Gas Emissions in g CO2e per Passenger Mile Traveled
- 50 100 150 200 250 300
Sedan
Orange BRT
Gold LRT
Vehicle Operation Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle Maintenance
Vehicle Insurance Infrastructure Construction Infrastructure Operation
Infrastructure Maintenance Infrastructure Parking Infrastructure Insurance
Fuel Cycle
- 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Sedan
Orange BRT
Gold LRT
Vehicle Operation Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle MaintenanceVehicle Insurance Infrastructure Construction Infrastructure OperationInfrastructure Maintenance Infrastructure Parking Infrastructure InsuranceFuel Cycle
Human Health Respiratory Effects Potential in mg PM2.5e per Passenger Mile Traveled
Life-cycle Respiratory Effects Hotspots PM2.5: Steel and alum. production furnace emissions for vehicle manuf. PM2.5: Supply chain diesel truck use. NOx: Orange line tailpipe @ 19 grams/VMT (Range: 8.2 to 73 grams/VMT). NOx: Supply chain diesel truck emissions. SOx: Direct and supply chain electricity consumption.
NOx SOx PM2.5
- 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Sedan
Orange BRT
Gold LRT
Thousands
Vehicle Operation Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle MaintenanceVehicle Insurance Infrastructure Construction Infrastructure OperationInfrastructure Maintenance Infrastructure Parking Infrastructure InsuranceFuel Cycle
Acidification Potential in g H+ moles Equivalent per Passenger Mile Traveled
Life-cycle Acidification Hotspots NOx: Orange line tailpipe. NOx: Supply chain diesel truck emissions. SOx: Direct and supply chain electricity consumption. SOx: Gold line LADWP coal.
NOx SOx
- 5 10 15 20 25
Sedan
Orange BRT
Gold LRT
Thousands
Vehicle Operation Vehicle Manufacturing Vehicle MaintenanceVehicle Insurance Infrastructure Construction Infrastructure OperationInfrastructure Maintenance Infrastructure Parking Infrastructure InsuranceFuel Cycle
Photochemical Smog Formation Potential in Mg O3e per Passenger Mile Traveled
Life-cycle Smog Hotspots NOx: Orange line tailpipe. NOx: Supply chain diesel truck emissions. VOC: Vehicle fluids (steering, brake, transmission, coolants, etc.). VOC: Vehicle manufacturing and truck transport. VOC: Volatile organic diluents in asphalt.
NOx SOx CH4 CO
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
5% 11%
17%
23%
29%
35%
41%
47% 53
%
59%
65% 71
%
77%
83%
89
%
95%
101%
107%
113%
119
%
125%
Sedan Orange BRT Gold LRT
Car with 1 passenger produces 420 g CO2e per PMT
Car with 5 passengers produces 84 g CO2e per PMT 13
63
21
103
GH
G E
mis
sio
ns
in g
CO
2e p
er
PM
T
Retrospective (Footprinting)
Prospective (System Changes)
Avoided Bus Avoided Auto Orange
Ad
de
d
Avo
ide
d
Ene
rgy
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n o
r Em
issi
on
s
TIME
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10
Gold Propulsion Gold Life-cycle Avoided Automobile
Decadal (D) Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Gg CO2e
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
NEVER
(100+ yrs) SLOW
(1-10 yrs) FAST
Pa
yb
ack
Sp
ee
d
CO
Energy GHG
SO2
PM2.5
VOC PM10
Percentage of Orange Line Trip Takers Shifted from Automobiles
NOx never pays back
Photo source: Mikhail Chester, Paris, December 2009.
www.sustainable-transportation.com
Creating Transit’s Value
APA’s 2012 National Planning Conference
Los Angeles, CA
Cris B. Liban, D.Env., P.E. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
April 15, 2012
2
Outline
• A Different View of Transit
• What We do at Metro
• The Cost and Value of Doing What’s Right?
• Questions/Discussion
Private vehicles are the largest contributor to
a household’s carbon footprint
3
Source: “Public Transportation’s Contribution to U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reduction,”
Science Applications International Corporation, September 2007.
Value of Public Transportation as a Climate
Change Strategy
• Potential for immediate
action
• Supports efficient land use
patterns & general reduction
in travel demand by
individual cars
• Reduces congestion and
improves fuel economy
• Preserves mobility in an
environment of rising fuel
prices
4
Transit Paradox
Transit’s Effects on Regional Carbon Footprint
To reduce emissions from mobile sources, we need higher
levels of public transit and more compact patterns of land
use that transit supports
APTA, 2010
Quantifying Net GHG Emissions from Transit
Sustainable Transportation Systems
Metro is at the forefront of developing a fully integrated
sustainable transportation system:
Safe and easy to use
Accessible and affordable
Efficiently operated
Interconnected with diversified choice of
transportation modes (bicycle, car-sharing, public
transit)
Our objective is to optimize transportation services to
increase throughput, safety and security while reducing
energy and emissions
LA Transit/Transportation System
103 stations
121.2 miles
Future Expansion over 30 Years
Total: 197- 205 stations
236.2+ miles
• Congestion Reduction Strategies
• Highway Programs
• Employer-Employee Incentives
• Funding and Programming
• Bikes and Bike Paths
9
Sustainable Transit Infrastructure
• Alternative Fuels
• Sustainable Infrastructure
– Implementation of “LEED-like” sustainability principles
– Energy Efficiency, Low Impact Development, Sustainable
Practices
• Technology Innovations
• State of Good Repair
Transit-Oriented Districts
• Joint Developments
• TOD Planning Grants
• Union Station Master Plan
11
Electric Vehicle (EV) Charger Deployment
• California Energy Commission Grant
• Reliability of Chargers
• Economic Model and Implementability
• Effect on Transit Patterns
• Five Park and Ride Stations, 20 Chargers
• Partnership with other stakeholders
EV Charger Deployment Locations
EV Charger Deployed by City of LA
12
Green Buildings and Renewables
• LEED-EBOM and LEED-NC Buildings
• Renewable Energy Technology
and Energy Efficiency
213KW
Chatsworth Sun Valley Carson Downtown LA
213KW 1000KW 417KW + + +
Metro Gateway HQ
Division 9 Building
Wayside Energy Storage System
13
Creating Value
• Metro’s Environmental
and Sustainability
Policies
• Design Criteria and
Specification
• Commodities
• Operational Changes
• Metrics and Externalities
14
Business Case for Sustainability
• Water Action Plan
• Energy Conservation and Management Plan
• Annual Sustainability Reports
• Environmental Management System
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
• LEED-EBOM Assessments
• Carbon Trading Credits
Cost-Effectiveness and Other Measures
• Cost-Effectiveness Of Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Strategies Study
• Policy and Cost-Implications Study
• Renewable Energy Study
• Green Rail Study
• Land-Use/Transit Co-Benefits Study
• APTA Working Groups
• Sustainability Metrics
• Eco-Procurement
• Life-Cycle Costing in Metro Projects
Metro’s Role in a Sustainable Region
• Metro’s programs organically create a nexus
among various sustainable elements
• Forging partnerships and finding common-
ground solutions
• Ensure that our operations consider
environment, economy, and society
17
Questions/Discussions
For additional information:
www.metro.net/sustainability
213/922-1100
Dr. Cris B. Liban, P.E.
p: 213/922-2471
e/m: [email protected]
Image source: Los Angeles Metro.
American Planning Association National Conference April 15, 2012
Juan Matute Mikhail Chester Paul Bunje Bill Eisenstein Stephanie Pincetl
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Stephanie Pincetl, Ph.D. Director of the California Center for Sustainable Communities Research Institute of the Environment & Sustainability University of California, Los Angeles
Mikhail Chester, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Civil, Environmental, and Sustainability Engineering Affiliate Faculty, School of Sustainability Arizona State University
William Eisenstein, Ph.D. Executive Director of the
Center for Resource Efficient Communities College of Environmental Design University of California, Berkeley
Zoe Elizabeth Program Manager of the
California Center for Sustainable Communities Research
Institute of the Environment & Sustainability University of California, Los Angeles
Paul Bunje, Ph.D. Executive Director of the
Center for Climate Change Solutions Institute of the Environment & Sustainability University of California, Los Angeles
Juan Matute Program Director of the UCLA Program on
Local Government Climate Action Policies Luskin School of Public Affairs University of California, Los Angeles
The impacts of the transportation system extend beyond the tailpipe, to include: Manufacturing Roads, parking and other infrastructure Maintenance Fuel production
To meet the State’s aggressive environmental goals we must
understand and transform all phases of the life cycle Could changing fuel standards have unintended consequences? Could manufacturing new buses increase net emissions? How does reducing GHGs effect air quality?
4
What are the life cycle effects of 3 different transportation options in Los Angeles?
How could LCA be integrated into transportation decision-making across the state? An analysis of policy options A survey of transportation professionals Creation of a user-friendly LCA tool for transit agencies
Tailpipe emissions create 40% of statewide GHGs. Including the LCA effects of the transportation systems shows the real impact is much higher.
5
BRINGING LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT INTO
TRANSPORTATION POLICY
American Planning Association Conference APR 15 2012
Dr. William Eisenstein
Executive Director
Basic issues
1. Fragmentation of
transportation policy
2. Spatial and temporal
scope of LCA
3. Mismatch of incentives
4. GHGs vs. criteria air
pollutants
Features of good policy
1. Affect wide swath of policy process
2. Allow comparison across modes
3. Spatial scale similar to scale of impacts
4. Realistic analytical burden
5. Realistic for agency/political capacity
6. Avoids unnecessary social costs
Possible policy structure #1
1. Legislation requiring lowest-life-cycle-
impact projects
Pros: explicit requirement; wide coverage of major
projects; even playing field across jurisdictions
Cons: analytical burden; impact on other selection
criteria
Possible policy structure #2
2. Preferential funding program (a la CMAQ)
Pros: financial incentives; opt-in structure
Cons: may not affect enough projects; difficult to
obtain sufficient funding
Possible policy structure #3
3. Planning standard for Regional
Transportation Plans
Pros: allows comparison across modes
Cons: not fully comprehensive; RTPs still rely on
local general plans for land use
Possible policy structure #4
4. California Environmental Quality Act
criterion
Pros: natural home for analytical work; EIRs not
geographically constrained; mitigation potential
Cons: project-by-project analysis; limited
opportunities to modify projects significantly
Possible policy structure #5
5. Transportation Control Measure selection
under Clean Air Act
Pros: natural fit for analyzing criteria pollutants;
strong regulatory incentive for qualifying projects
Cons: does not affect projects not identified as
TCMs
Possible policy structure #6
6. LCA “cap-and-trade” for regional and local
transportation agencies
Pros: allows comprehensive analysis of whole
region; allows planning flexibility; could allow for
trading
Cons: potential administrative complexity
Questions?
William Eisenstein, Ph.D
510-219-3083
http://crec.berkeley.edu
