Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Environmental Benefits and Opportunity of Shared Mobility
Sharon FeigonExecutive Director
November 17, 2014
2
Mission:
Scale the Benefits of Shared
Mobility for Everyone
Founders:TSRC (UC, Berkeley)
CNT
TransitCenter
ATC
SUMC: Our Mission and Founders
Living In U.S. Cities
More people choosing to live in cities: Millenials and
Boomers Changing LifestylesTrends
“Many of us are happy with biking or walking and see public transit as away to meet people, connect…”
…and have extra time to do work whilecommuting…”
“ In D.C., your smartphone canindicate when the next bus is coming, howmany bikes are available... and whether aZipcar or Car2GO is waiting around thecorner. It can summon a taxi or an Uber inan instant.”
Connected, Social, Sharing, Active mobility
Millennials
21000.
22500.
24000.
25500.
27000.
90000.
100000.
110000.
120000.
130000.
140000.1
98
8
198
9
199
0
199
1
199
2
199
3
199
4
199
5
199
6
199
7
199
8
199
9
200
0
200
1
200
2
200
3
200
4
200
5
200
6
200
7
200
8
200
9
201
0
201
1
201
2
201
3
GDP/HH ($)
TVMT/HH
GDP/Household ($) Miles/Household
Households from Census HH-1 December 2013TVMT from FHWA Traffic Volume Trends Nov. 2013
GDP from BEA 3rd Quarter 2013, in Chained Real Dollars
Economy Grows, Vehicle Miles Traveled Drops
We Are Driving Less…
10000.
15000.
20000.
25000.
30000.
Chicago Kane Lake Total McHenry Sub Cook DuPage Will
2005 2011
-10.8%
-9.6%
-2.6%
Calculated from Illinois Dept. of TransportationIllinois Travel Statistics, Annual, Table FC-4 andCensus, ACS, Annual 1-Year Household Estimates
-6.6%-6.0%
-4.0%
-8.4%
-13.5%
…Taking Transit More…
-78750
-52500
-26250
0
26250
52500
Drove alone Carpooled Bike,Motorcycle,Taxi, Other
Change inWorkforce
Walked Worked athome
Took publictransportation
95,981
Fewer
Workers
Commute
d by Car
108,251 More Workers
Commuted by Transit, Walking,
Working at Home or Other Non-Auto Means
Calculated using ACS 1-Year EstimatesMeans of Transportation to WorkTable DP03, 2005-2011
But Still Many Gaps
• Transit in suburbs and lower density areas more limited
• Mismatch jobs and housing
• Infrequent weekend and nighttime service
• Expensive to serve small clusters and lower density
• Most used transit lines are over crowded
• Expansion Funding lacking
• Connections between providers (stations and timing) limited
Shared Mobility
Evolving, many models, data and tech drivenMany Modes
Public Transit Taxis & Limos
Ridesharing
Carsharing
Jitneys
Shuttle services
Bike sharing
Transportation Network Companies
Newest Shared MobilityPrivately Owned Buses and Shuttles
•Operating on new routes– using data analysis to find gaps and passengers
•Uber Pool and Lyft Lines
•Autonomous Vehicles
•Taxi Apps
Industry Growing Fast
Uber Valued at $18.2 Billion
11Shifting of transportation normsTransportation
Approach
I own and use my own transportation
I own my transportation and/or access
shared mobility options
I access a menu of mobility options to
meet my needs
Traditional Trending Future
SuburbanRural
Urban Core Urban Core SuburbanRural
Shared Use Value greater Integrating Modes
One system select route, choose mode, book it and go!
Integration Vision
Environmental Impact: North American Carsharing Report
13
• Between 9 to 13 vehicles removed, including postponed purchase
• 4 to 6 vehicles/carsharing vehicle sold due to carsharing
• Most shift due to 1 car households becoming carless
• Second largest shift, 2 car households become 1 car households, 25% sell a vehicle; 25% postpone purchase
• Net CO2 reduction of 27% observed and
43% full impact
Martin, Shaheen, Lidicker, 2010
Environmental Impact: Bikesharing
North American Bike Sharing Study, Shaheen etal, 2014
As much as 50% drop in driving
15
Environmental Impact: Bikesharing
Environmental Impact: Ridesourcing/Transportation Networking Companies
16
Ridesourcing still new, with potential to impact VMT/ VKT and vehicle ownership
Not enough research yetPreliminary study showed:- 90% of vehicle owners did not change ownership level - 40% drove less since using ridesourcing
Business Models: Hard to scale, public private partnerships, sponsorships, public companies
Infrastructure: Use of public space, bus stops, parking, street allocation, bike lanes growth, multiple providers
Governance: Regulations lag , insurance, safety, sharing data, balancing multiple city objectives, what is fair?, which agency?
Different Platforms: Hard to connect without common standards
Key Challenges
Positive change that’s good for everyoneOpportunity
Quality of Life: increased options, public health, better usability for the customer, makes travel fun
Sustainable mobility: Green, quiet, low carbon, energy savings,
System efficiency: Reduced congestion, waste, optimized routing and vehicle type
Economic Benefits: Less Expensive than car ownership, more savings that can fuel local economy
20
San Francisco
Integrated land-use transportation innovation
Shared Mobility
Gap Access» Tool for Cities to Understand
Opportunity of Shared
Mobility
» Scale the Benefits for diverse
neighborhoods and populations
» Measure the environmental
and cost saving benefits
» Utilize the data to create
integrated platforms, real time
information, and common fare
media for all neighborhoods