and Cycling Could Cut Car Use, Reduce CO2, Save Consumers US$100 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

February 2015 CODATU Conference Istanbul, Turkey Global High Shift: How More Public Transport, Walking, and Cycling Could Cut Car Use, Reduce CO2, Save Consumers US$100 Trillion, and Boost Equitable Mobility Lew Fulton Michael Replogle University of California, Davis ITDP

Investment and policy choices shape vehicle ownership, travel activity, and resulting cost, benefits, impacts

Vehicle use is function H 2 not just of income, but policy and investment NextSTEPS Sustainable Transportation Energy Pathways www.steps.ucdavis.edu Source: Rand Corporation 2014. The Future of Driving in Developing Countries

Portland, Oregon: An American Turn Around Story 1970s 1990s

Portland, Oregon made the land use-transport policy and investment connection

Portland residents now bike more

Portland residents now use public transport more

Portland, Oregon area residents drive less because of changes in transport investment and land use policy Portlan d

Thus Portland residents emit less CO 2

As the world urbanizes cities everywhere face choices: to lock in a low or a high carbon future?

High Shift Study: Inspired by Rio+20 Voluntary Commitments What would be effect if the 17 Rio+20 transport commitments were taken to scale worldwide including: 8 MDBs: US$175 billion for more sustainable transport 2012-2021 • UITP: double public transport mode share by 2025 • ITDP: promote BRT and TOD Standards, national transport policy best • practice 2

Global High Shift Scenario Study • Analysis led by UC Davis, in cooperation with International Energy Agency (IEA) supported by ITDP, International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) • Global travel projected using urban model adapted from the IEA Mobility Model (MoMo): 33 countries or regions • More detailed break out of urban travel modes, 2 wheelers, non-motorized transport, equity impacts • Modal shift based on potential to boost capacity of transit/NMT systems to allow fewer cars 3

Comparison of Two Scenarios • “ High Shift ” Scenario: • UN Projections of cities by size through 2050 • Increase rapid transit km per million residents (RTR) • Encourage walking and cycling for short trips • E-bikes expand in lieu of motor cycles and some cars • Preserve total projected growth in personal mobility in low and middle income (non-OECD) countries to 2050 • Cut car travel in cities by half by 2050 from Base Case • “ Base Case ” aligns with the IEA 4 degree scenario (4DS) • Some fuel economy improvement • No shift away from car growth • Other modes static or slow growt h 6

Rapid Transit per Resident (RTR) to 2050 : combined length of transit systems per capita to 2050 4DS High Shift 2010 2030 2050 2030 2050 OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD Metro 7.1 1.8 6.8 1.5 6.9 1.4 8.8 4.8 10.7 6.4 BRT 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.1 4.6 9.0 8.1 13.5 Tram/LRT 11.5 3.0 10.9 2.5 11.1 2.3 13.2 4.0 15.2 4.6 Commuter rail 32.5 1.9 31.0 1.6 31.5 1.4 42.3 10.2 52.6 14.8

Combined length of transit systems to 2050 4DS High Shift 2010 2030 2050 2030 2050 OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD Metro 6,336 4,883 6,970 6,103 7,604 7,324 9,078 18,922 11,820 32,962 BRT 574 1,910 862 3,820 1,149 5,729 4,740 35,781 8,905 69,652 Tram/LRT 10,221 7,983 11,243 9,979 12,266 11,975 13,516 15,896 16,810 23,809 Commuter rail 28,915 4,967 31,806 6,209 34,698 7,450 43,478 40,488 58,040 76,009

The Base and High Shift Scenario Doubling of public transport and NMT urban travel and about a halving of LDV travel in 2050 v. Baseline 45 walk 40 cycle 35 annual PKm (trillions) e-bike/scooter 30 Commuter rail 25 Tram/LRT 20 Metro 15 Minibus 10 BRT 5 BRT Feeder bus Urban bus 0 2010 2050 2050 2010 2050 2050 ICE 2Ws Base HS Base HS LDV OECD non-OECD 8

High Shift Scenario – travel per capita Total travel in non-OECD preserved, travel reduced some in OECD 12.0 walk cycle 10.0 Thousand PKm per capita e-bike/scooter 8.0 Commuter rail Tram/LRT 6.0 Metro 4.0 Minibus BRT 2.0 BRT Feeder bus Urban bus 0.0 2010 2050 2050 2010 2050 2050 ICE 2Ws Base HS Base HS LDV OECD non-OECD 9

High Shift Scenario – Spotlight on Asia Rapid growth in urban bus travel, big drop in ICE 2W travel 12 10 walk cycle 8 e-bike 6 Trillion PKm Commuter rail 4 Tram/LRT 2 Metro Minibus 0 2010 2050 Baseline 2050 HS 2010 2050 Baseline 2050 HS 2010 2050 Baseline 2050 HS 2010 2050 Baseline 2050 HS 2010 2050 Baseline 2050 HS BRT Urban bus Motor 2W LDV United States Europe China India Other Developing Asia 9

High Shift Scenario: Bus, Rail, Bike, E-Bike, Walk Travel Total Passenger Kilometers Travel (PKT) for bus, rail, walk, bike, and e-bike by year and scenario 8

Non-motorized Km Travel Per Capita By Mode, Region, Scenario 800 700 capita 600 per� 500 PKT� 400 300 Annual� 2010 200 2050� Baseline 100 2050� High� shift 0 Non-OECD Non-OECD Netherlands Non-OECD OECD States OECD OECD China United� Walking Cycling e-bikes � �

Direct Cost of Scenarios Vehicle purchase costs (all modes) • System infrastructure costs (road, rail) • Vehicle and system operating costs • Fuel costs (liquid fuel, electricity) • 2

27% Fewer Cars Needed in Cities Under High Shift vs. Baseline Total Urban Cars in 2050 in High Shift nearly doubles from 2010 to 1.1 billion (vs. 1.8 billion in 2050 Baseline) 2 Urban Car Stock by Scenario, Year, Region

Vehicle purchase costs across all modes – costs in specific year Car purchase costs dominate, drop substantially in High Shift 7

Vehicle purchase costs across all modes – zoom-in without cars 2 wheeler and urban bus costs dominate though BRT/Rail car costs rise in HS case toward 2050 7

Infrastructure investment costs across all modes Road/parking costs dominate, followed by metros and • side walks (foot paths) Annual Costs 10

Cumulative Public and Private Direct Costs High Shift Scenario lowers total costs in all categories Vehicle purchase costs (all modes) • System infrastructure costs (road, rail) • Cumulative Savings of Vehicle and system operating costs • >$100 trillion 2010-2050 Fuel costs (liquid fuel, electricity) • $350 Infrastructure Rail Infrastructure BRT $300 Infrastructure Roadway $250 O&M Cycle/e-bike Trillion US Dollars O&M Rail $200 O&M Bus $150 O&M Private vehicle O&M Road-related $100 Fuel Electricity Fuel LDV-2W liquid fuel $50 Purchase Cycle/e-bike $0 Purchase Rail OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD OECD non-OECD Purchase Bus 2010-2030 2010-2050 2010-2030 2010-2050 Purchase Private vehicle Base High Shift 3

Distribution of Car Ownership by Income Car ownership is lower for all income groups under High Shift, but becomes slightly more equitably distributed than under BAU 3

Impacts on Global Equity of Access to Mobility Under High Shift Scenario vs. Business-As-Usual: • Public transport mobility of poorest 20% triples • Public transport mobility of 2 nd poorest 20% doubles 3

Impacts on Global Equity of Access to Mobility Under High Shift Scenario vs. Business-As-Usual: • Public transport mobility of poorest 20% triples • Public transport mobility of 2 nd poorest 20% doubles In rich countries` 3

Impacts on Global Equity of Access to Mobility Under High Shift Scenario vs. Business-As-Usual: • Public transport mobility of poorest 20% triples • Public transport mobility of 2 nd poorest 20% doubles And less wealthy countries` 3

Impact on urban passenger transport CO2 emissions Compared to baseline scenario for 2050, High Shift scenario would also cut global warming pollution Cut annual CO2 emissions 1.7 GT (40%) • Cut cumulative 2015-2040 CO2 emissions 25 GT (25%) • 3

Impact on urban passenger transport CO2 emissions per capita CO2 per capita from urban passenger transport converges to 0.8-0.2 tons in 2050 High Shift

Global High Shift Needs to Include Adoption of Euro VI Standards to Protect Public Health Source: ICCT

In Summary More investment in public transport, walking, and cycling now to 2050 could: Cut cumulative public and private urban • transportation costs by >$100 trillion, Triple public transport mobility of • poorest 20% Cut annual CO2 emissions from urban • passenger transport by 1.7 GT (40%) in 2050 (combined with GFEI a 55% cut) 3

Need full set of building blocks to attain shift towards public transport, walking and cycling with less car use Reduce traffic speed Reform urban Prioritize & Prioritize and design and Expand Public expand public street codes Transport transport Regulate and price parking, vehicles & road use Prioritize & Encourage & Improve Improve Walking Cycling Dense, Clean Compact, technology & Connected fuel Growth standards Supportive national policies