DOE Workshop: Shaping the Transportation Revolution

Vehicle ownership models:Engaging with new technologies and

business models

Regina R. Clewlow, Ph.D.Engineering Research Scholar

Stanford Universitywww.reginaclewlow.com

October 21, 2015

D E PA R T M E N T O F E N E R G Y W O R K S H O P :S H A P I N G T H E T R A N S P O R T AT I O N R E V O L U T I O N

Regina R. Clewlow, 2015

Motivation: Significant projected growth in transportation energy use and greenhouse gas emissions

Source: IIASA Global Energy Assessment, 2012

Transportation energy and GHG emissions are projected to approximately double from 2010 to 2050

Light duty vehicles continue to be the dominant source of energy use and emissions


Historically, the vehicle fleet has turned over slowly

Source: IIASA Global Energy Assessment, 2012

Survival Rates of Light-Duty Vehicles (LDVs)

There are many changes afoot that could alter historical assumptions about vehicle utilization and turnover


Major shifts in the transportation sector

Mobility as a service (not a product)

On-demand

Operational efficiency

Increasedaccessibility

Vehicle-grid integration

Increased multitasking

Multimodal

Incentivize timeand mode shift

Increasing urbanization

and EV adoption


The evolution of shared-use mobility servicesCarsharing: Private Station-Based

Ridesharing Services: TNCs

Carsharing: Peer-to-Peer

Carsharing: Private A-to-B


The evolution of shared-use mobility servicesCarsharing: Private Station-Based

Ridesharing Services: TNCs

Carsharing: Peer-to-Peer

Carsharing: Private A-to-B

Paradigm shift from vehiclesas a productto vehicles

as a mobility service


Carsharing 1.0 was a niche market

Estimated Consumers

Source: Shaheen & Cohen, 2013

- 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000

Carshare Members (N.A.) Carshare Members (Global)Uber Users (Global)

- 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000

100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000

Carshare Vehicles (N.A.) Carshare Vehicles (Global)Uber Drivers (Global)

Estimated Vehicles/ Drivers

• “Traditional”, station-based carsharing primarily worked in major, metropolitan areas

• Members tended to be young, highly educated, and medium to high income (and lived in cities)

• They were also likely to be pro-environment and pro-new technology• Less than 1% of the general population in the U.S. were members


Ride-hailing (carsharing 2.0) is on a different trajectory

• Over the past ~15 years, services like Zipcar attracted about 1 million users in North America, and 1.7 users globally

• Within ~5 years, Uber has attracted at least 8 million globally

• Value proposition is fairly obvious – it is much more convenient (and in some cases cheaper) to book a ride than to use a station-based shared vehicle

Estimated Consumers

Source: Smith, 2015

- 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000

Carshare Members (N.A.) Carshare Members (Global)Uber Users (Global)

- 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000

100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000

Carshare Vehicles (N.A.) Carshare Vehicles (Global)Uber Drivers (Global)

Estimated Vehicles/ Drivers


What do we know about the impact of carsharing on vehicle ownership?

One study suggests that

1 station-based carsharing vehicle can replace between 9 to 13 vehicles (Martin & Shaheen, 2010)



The largest claim suggests that

1 carsharing vehicle can replace up to 32 vehicles (AlixPartners, 2014)



A more recent study based on a statistical sample of the general population finds that

1 station-based carsharing vehicle likely has no impact on vehicle ownership – in the suburbs.

However, carsharing members do own 0.2 to 0.4 fewer vehicles in dense, urban neighborhoods (Clewlow, 2015)


Challenges of estimating the “impact” of shared mobility on vehicle ownershipThere are two factors that have a strong influence on vehicle ownership (and VMT)

that we need to account for:

1. Built environment• People own fewer cars in dense, urban environments. Why? Various reasons,

including availability of transit and walkability.Also, it is a lot more painful (and often expensive) to park a car in a city

• What is the “impact” of shared mobility on behavior vs. the “impact” of urban living on vehicle ownership or VMT?

• We need better modeling efforts to inform public policy

2. Self-selection• With earlier shared vehicle models, I suspect that adopters were likely pro-

environment, and more likely to want to give up a vehicle• Are late-stage adopters also eager to give up their vehicles? Or adopters of

ride-hailing services? • Currently, we don’t know


Alternative fuel vehicle ownership is higher among carsharing households

Vehicles of Adopter HouseholdsVehicles of Non-Adopter Households

92%

6%

0%0%

2%0%

Gas Hybrid PHEV EV Diesel CNG

84%

11%

1% 1%

3%

0%


Source: Clewlow, 2015 (based on analysis of CHTS data)


Alternative fuel vehicle ownership is higher among carsharing households

Vehicles of Adopter HouseholdsVehicles of Non-Adopter Households

92%

6%

0%0%

2%0%


84%

11%

1% 1%

3%

0%


Source: Clewlow, 2015 (based on analysis of CHTS data)

Carshare adopters are more likely to own an alternative vehicle. Why? Likely reasons:• Pro-environmental• Early adopters of new tech

However, perhaps exposure to alternative vehicles through carsharing has some incremental impact on vehicle choice


Auto manufacturers are placing electric vehicles in shared fleets (for various reasons)

Ford go!drive Daimler car2go

BMW DriveNow Scoot Networks w/ Renault-Nissan Twizy


In conclusion, we need more rigorous research on the behavioral impacts of shared mobility• Evidence of vehicle reduction as a result of station-based carsharing is still

fairly murky• Important to distinguish between the effect of living in a dense, transit-rich

environment vs. the effect of shared mobility (while also accounting for self-selection issues)

• We know less about the impacts of one-way or free-floating carsharing services• Do they reduce vehicle ownership?• Do they reduce VMT?• Does exposure to electric vehicles promote purchase?

• We know even less about on-demand ride-hailing services (Uber, Lyft)• We need more and better data, as well as more rigorous research methods to

examine impacts on vehicle ownership and travel behavior• Surveys and data from shared mobility providers are useful (if examined by

an impartial researcher); however• Statistical, representative samples of the general population are also critical


Despite many uncertainties, there are changes afoot that seem likely to lead toward

• Further change in vehicle ownership models• Higher utilization of vehicles• Faster turnover of vehicles

There are potentially more opportunities toaccelerate the adoption of zero emission vehicles…

At least in cities.


Thank you

Regina R. Clewlow, Ph.D.Engineering Research Scholar

Stanford Universityhttp://www.reginaclewlow.com

[email protected]: ReginaClewlow

http://www.reginaclewlow.com/

http://www.reginaclewlow.com/

mailto:[email protected]

Technology

DOE Workshop: Shaping the Transportation Revolution