28
1 1 Webinar Participants 2
1
1
Webinar Participants 2
2
Mechanics of the seminar
The webinar is being recorded, the URL will be sent out to participants and posted at www.coe-sufs.org
Participants from the US and Canada can:Use Adobe Connect to receive the audio (PRIMARY method)Dial 1-888-446-7584, access code 1120583
International participants can: Use Adobe Connect to receive the audio (PRIMARY method)Use Skype or similar to dial 1-888-446-7584, code 1120583 Dial 212-372-3742 (caller paid call)
Submit questions using the Chat feature
3
Now offering Professional Development Hours
Professional Development Hours (PDH) for Professional Engineers (PE) now available1.0 PHD for this webinar
Credits issued through the NYS Department of Education. Please confer with the state or country in which you register as a PE to determine whether or not the credit will transfer.
For more information on obtaining PDH please email [email protected]
4
3
CoE-SUFS
Funded by the Volvo Research and Educational Foundations (VREF)
Main Goal: To jumpstart an integrative process, involving cities, private sector, and researchers to develop new freight systems paradigms that: Are sustainable Increase quality of life Foster economic competitiveness and efficiency Enhance environmental justice
5
6New York City, Albany, USA
Santo Domingo, DominicanRepublic
Barranquilla, Bogotá,
Medellín, Colombia
Osaka, Japan
Chennai, India
Mumbai, India
Dalian, China
Nanjing, China
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Melbourne, Australia
London, UK
Singapore, Singapore
Santander, Spain
Sao Paulo and Belo Horizonte,
Brazil
Pretoria, South Africa
Toronto, CA
Gothenburg, Sweden
Bologna, Italy
Delhi, India
4
Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Exchange to share global best practices and real world examples of sustainable urban freight systems
Next P2P (January, 2016):Updates on Off-hour Delivery Initiatives Around the World
Workshops to bring together public/private sectors and academia, to jointly work to address urban freight issues Already held at: India, Brazil, Colombia, Canada, Mexico,
Chile, and AustraliaUpcoming: Improving Freight Systems in Metropolitan Areas:
From New York City to Across the Globe – Sept. 16th, 2015
CoE-SUFS Dissemination Programs 7
Franklin Jones, [email protected](503) 858-7142
Franklin Jones, Founder / CEO - B-line Sustainable Urban DeliveryCargo Cycles For Urban Delivery: The North American Experience
5
Urban Delivery Industry Landscape
CongestionPollution – air, noise, and
waterScarcity of parking in urban
areasFails to meet environmental
mandatesRapid increase in convenience
deliveryGrowing problems (growing
market)
9
B-line Overview
We are a B2B local logistics company with enhanced marketing and branding services
Our Mission is to make our communities more livable
10
Founded 2009Portland, OR
6
B-line Style 11
=
12
7
13
14
8
15
Align Brands 16
9
Since 2009: 2 trikes - 8 trikes 2 people - 16 people 50,000 deliveries avoided an estimated 90,000 delivery miles over 100 metric tons of CO2 emissions 37.8% growth rate in annual revenue
B-line trikes: cover over 20,000 trike miles annually 2014 alone: delivered 947,000 metric tons of product
As a company: Various sustainability awards Earned media Greater brand recognition Ready to scale model
Achievements 17
Beyond B-line: Operators
Diversified across business models
Logistics / Delivery Courier / Messengers Pedicabs Point of Sale - i.e.. coffee bikes
or ice cream trikes Independent contractors utilizing
cargo cycles in trades
18
10
Beyond B-line: Locations
Concentrated on coasts and in metropolitan areas:Pacific Northwest (including Canada) - at least 16 in
Portland, ORNorth East - Boston, NYC, PittsburgMid-Atlantic - Washington D.C., Mid-west - Chicago, Minneapolis, MN
19
Direct to Consumer Example: SoupCycle Founded in 2008 - a weekly meal service subscription featuring, soups,
salads, breads, and juices - all made from scratch, with organic ingredients. Operate in Portland, Corvallis - expanding to Bend and Eugene in September
(all in Oregon) 15 employees Over 160,000 lifetime deliveries Purchased over 15 tons of organic produce between June 2014-May 2015
20
11
B2C Example: Portland Pedal PowerPortland Pedal Power is capturing direct to consumer market needs: Sees a major gap in last mile rapid delivery
service providers that can handle the surge indemand due to the technology boom.
Online ordering is exploding and the promiseis immediate delivery of product. Amazon Now Grub Hub Walmart
The apps depend on individual restaurants orthird party contractors in the 'shared economy'to complete the movement of product.
Last mile bike delivery is faster and moreefficient in urban core.
Last mile bike delivery reduces congestioncreated by these third party contractors (cars)in the urban core, filling this gap in the marketmore sustainably.
21
Beyond B-line: Builders / Manufacturers
Focus on individual / family transport Increasingly e-assisted Handful of US builders focusing on freight:
Stites Design Metrofiets ELF Coaster Pedicabs Ti-cyclesWorksman Trikes
22
12
Challenges to the Market
E- assist cycles access falls under States DMV and laws vary by state: http://ebike.research.pdx.edu/
Infrastructure ranges dramatically city by cityNon-recreational Cycling culture slow to matureLarger companies active in Europe are not as
aggressive at testing models in North America“uberization” of freight = mixed impactFood safety trending towards isolating product
categoriesMarket is still quite small on all fronts
23
People Make the Difference 24
13
People Make the Difference 25
People Make the Difference 26
14
Cargo Cycles for Urban Freight:The North American ExperienceCargo Cycles for Urban Freight:The North American Experience
Alison ConwayCity College of New York
New York, NY
Project Goals
Measure freight tricycle traffic performancein NYC conditions
Comprehensive state-of-the-practice reviewCommodities and sectorsBenefits, challenges, and
barriers to operation
28
15
Operational Performance in New York City
Case Study Operators
City Bakery
Local green bakery chain 7 locations - Midtown/
Downtown Manhattan 2 trikes / 5 total drivers Typical day: 7 AM – 7 PM Morning tour + on-demand
deliveries
City Harvest
Local food rescue non-profit 120+ potential Manhattan
locations (by all vehicle types) 19 trucks - Long Island City 3 trikes - Midtown and Upper
East Side / 1 driver per trike Typical Day: 12 PM – 12 AM Donation pickups < 50 lbs
30
16
Data Collection
QSTARZ BT-Q1000XT travel recorderChallengesUrban canyonsDrift pointsLimited battery life and storage capacity
Data CollectedCity Bakery Trikes: 53 unique days of data City Harvest Trikes: 40 unique days of data City Harvest Trucks: 29 unique days of data
31
Performance Measures
Corridor Moving SpeedsInfrastructure typeTime-of-dayNeighborhood
Travel Time/Stopped Time DelayCB: TT and STD for repeated tripsCH: STD:TT Ratio for by neighborhood trip ends
Stop Durations:CB: Producer and Receiver LocationsCH: Pick-ups (trike only) and deliveries
32
17
Externalities
Emissions (avoided)Particulate MatterCO2
Space Consumption Vehicle in motion f(footprint, speed, delay) Parking f(footprint, duration)
33
Variable Values
Vehicle TypePassenger Car, Passenger Truck (Cargo Van), Light
Commercial Truck (Step Van), Small Box Truck
Fuel Type Gasoline (Pass. Car), Diesel (All other)
Age 1 year, 5 year, 10 year
Speed 3 mph, 5 mph, 10 mph, 15 mph
Temperature 29 (Winter), 70 (Summer)
Humidity 62 (Winter), 65 (Summer)
Estimated Road Space Consumption Rates 34
Vehicle Type
Dimensions Max. Vehicle Capacity
Relative Capacity vs. Cycles Maximus
Relative Space Hours Consumed
vs. Cycles MaximusVolume
RatioPayload RatioLength Width Volume Payload CH CB
(ft) (ft) (ft3) (lbs) (unitless) (unitless)Cycles Maximus 8.53 3.93 35.3 551 1 1 1 1Lovelo CargoCycle 7.71 3.22 53 396 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.7Passenger Car 17.67 6.44 20.6 a 1500 b 0.6 2.7 1.6 3.5Cargo Van 18.68 6.6 240 2016 c 6.8 3.7 1.7 3.814 ft Box Truck/ Step Van 23.2 7 762/784 d 6000/7100 21.6/22.2 10.9/12.9 2.2 5
18 ft Box Truck 27.1 8 1296 8200 36.7 14.9 3 6.624 ft Box Truck 32.6 8.04 1536 e 16500 43.5 29.9 3.6 8a From manufacturer specifications; trunk onlyb Payload provided in manufacturer's specifications as towing weightc Varies by configuration; best estimate based on online sales postings and manufacturer's specificationsd Payload estimates provided by City Harveste Estimate provided by vehicle rental agency - http://www.budget.ca/truck/en/fleet/
18
Corridor Moving Speeds
Median Moving Speed (mph)CB Trike CH Trike CH Trucks
7.22 3.90 8.28
CB vs. CH TrikesShorter toursLighter loadsMore driversOn-demand deliveries
Minimal impacts on trike performance by infrastructure type
35
City Bakery Travel Time and Stopped-Time
Low variability in travel timeLow stopped time : travel time ratios
36
0102030405060708090
100
A B C D E F G H I
Share of Observations
Trip End Pair
Stopped Time : Travel Time Ratio
<=.2 .2-.4 .4-.6 .6-.8 >.8
Observed Travel Times
19
CH Stopped-Time Delay to Travel Time Ratio 37
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Midtown Upper East Midtown/UE
Share of Observations
Neighborhood Pair
Tricycle Stopped Time : Travel Time Ratio
<=.2 .2‐.4 .4‐.6 .6‐.8 >.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Midtown Upper East/West Midtown/UEW
Shar
e of
Obs
erva
tions
Neighborhood Pair
Truck Stopped Time : Travel Time Ratio
<=.2 .2‐.4 .4‐.6 .6‐.8 >.8
Truck Speed vs. Trike Speeds
Less than 3.9 mph, 33.6%
3.9 to 7.3 mph,
13.1%
7.3 to 11.5 mph, 13.0%
11.5 to 18.4 mph,
18.6%
Greater than 18.4
mph, 21.7%
Estimated 1-Mile Travel Time (min)CB Trike CH Trike CH Trucks
9.4 20.9 9.7
38
20
Stop Durations
Truck parking durations vary with parking restrictionsMidtown: meters off = longer durations Deliveries faster where double parking legal
Stops generally shorter for trike than truck VolumeParking flexibility
39
Very long trike parking times observed for CH difficult/expensive if regulated as for trucks
City Bakery Case Study Externalities
Trikes replaced cargo vansScenario A: Direct replacementScenario B: Combined routes for initial morning deliveries Median observed speed
40
Current Scenario A Scenario B
Daily Distance Traveled (mi) 20.7 23.8 22.1
"Producer" Stops 13 13 12
"Receiver" Stops 5 5 4
Daily Space Consumed (ft2*hrs) Total Total % of Current Total % of Current
Road 109.2 473.9 434 422.2 387
Parking 136.7 502.1 367 463.5 339
Total 245.9 976 397 885.6 360
Annual Emissions (g) Total
PM 10 (lbs) 0 2.5 2.2
CO2 (tons) 0 13 11.5
21
Summary of Observations (1)
High travel time reliability/low stopped-time delayShort stops little influenced by regulationsTrike trip distance often < motor vehicle trip distanceStreet directionalityDedicated networkParks/green space
Speeds are influenced by:PayloadTrip distanceTrip urgency
41
Use of electric assist could reduce impact of human limitations
Summary of Observations (2)
Emissions and space savings will be highly variableVehicle replacedReorganization of logistics
For CB case study:Shorter total distance traveled70 – 72% savings in road space consumedMore than 2 lbs PM10 and 11 tons CO2 avoided annually
42
22
State-of-the-Practice: Europe vs. North America
North American Survey
Bikes at Work Inc. B-Line Urban Delivery Metro Pedal Power Pedal Express Revolution Rickshaws Shift Urban Cargo
Delivery Stick Dog Pedicabs The Hammer Active
Alternative Transportation
44
Created using www.zeemaps.com
23
Varying MotivationsProfit”Green” CredibilityIdeology
Commodities/Sectors Served
Different dominant sectorsEurope: Last-mile parcel / courierNorth America: B2B/C food delivery
45
Street & parking access costs?Density of customers?
Competitive vs. niche mode
Common sectorsB2C Retail/Restaurant
deliveriesOffice SuppliesPharmaceuticalsWaste/Recycling
Operator Tradeoffs
Driver costs vs. vehicle maintenance and fuel costsLower economies of scale if large vehicle space being
fully utilizedMarket constrained by human limitations/electric
vehicle autonomy if warehousing required, high cost for space in CBD
Fear of the unknown/resistance to change
46
24
Public Sector Involvement (1)
North AmericaLimited research to dateAmbiguous operating regulations
Vehicle classifications Use of non-motorized infrastructureElectric-assist legality
Expensive insurance regulations (NYC)Few limitations on freight access2 cities: “capital” grants 1 city: contract for recycling pickup1 city: official city recognition
47
Largely perceived as a niche “green” mode
Limited risk mitigation for startup and ongoing operations
Difficult to balance cost tradeoffs
Public Sector Involvement (2)
EuropeFunded pilot studies (EU and
Local)Recognition schemesA few examples of operating
subsidyPolicies limiting motor vehicle
access (e.g. bans, congestion charges, low emissions zones)
Policies permitting flexible use of dedicated infrastructure
48
Reduced startup risk to trike operators and shippers
Higher profile credibility as a competitive mode
Reduced differential in operating costs
25
Additional Public Sector Consideration
Compatibility with residents and non-motorized modesSafety
Low speedsLower risk of fatal heavy-vehicle involved accidents
Vehicle navigationPedestrian-only plazas (where permitted)Dedicated or shared bicycle infrastructure (where
permitted)Narrow travel lanes and turning radii
Noise
49
Final Thoughts (1)
Cargo cycles offer competitive speeds and improved reliability and parking flexibility for many short distance local movements
Cargo cycles consume less space, produce fewer emissions, generate less noise, and pose a lower risk for fatal accidents with non-motorized travelers vs. traditional vans and trucks
However higher labor and trans-loading costs and lost economies of scale must be outweighed by other benefits to incentivize a shipper mode switch
50
26
Final Thoughts (2)
Depending on specific market and cultural conditions, government can incentivize use by:Formally recognizing “green” carriers and shippersSupporting Research
Policy studies reduce shipper uncertaintyPilot studies reduce startup/mode switch cost risk
Providing clear vehicle classificationsPermitting flexible use of infrastructureDisincentivizing traditional truck and van useDirectly subsidizing cargo cycle operations
51
Thanks!Questions?
Alison ConwayCity College of New [email protected]
Franklin JonesB-Line Sustainable Urban Delivery
27
Additional Resources
B-Line Sustainable Urban Deliveryhttp://b-linepdx.com/
Freight Tricycle Operations in New York Cityhttp://www.utrc2.org/sites/default/files/pubs/Final-Freight-
Tricycles-NYC.pdf
An Analysis of the Competitiveness of Freight Tricycle Delivery Services in Urban Areas (Tipagornwong and Figliozzi, Portland State University)http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~maf/Journals/2014_An_Analysis_
of_the_Competitiveness_of_Freight_Tricycle_Delivery_Services_in_Urban_Areas.pdf
53
Acknowledgements (1)
Funding AgenciesNY State Energy Research Development Authority –
Joe Tario, Project ManagerNY State Department of Transportation –
Bob Ancar, Project Manager
Supporting PartnersRevolution Rickshaws: Greg Zuman, Helen Zuman, Julian
IsazaCity Bakery: Allison Dees, Zachary McCullough, Maury RubinCity Harvest: Kyle Clifford, Alberto OyolaNYC DOT: Stacey Hodge, Hayes Lord
54
28
Acknowledgements (2)
CCNY ResearchersDr. Camille Kamga, Co-PIJialei Cheng, Graduate Research AssistantPenny Eickemeyer, Project ManagerAbhishek Singhal, Graduate Research AssistantQuanquan Chen, Graduate Research AssistantEmmanuelle Lezais, Visiting Student Intern, ENTPERianna Yuen, Undergraduate Research Assistant
55
