Gallivan F.,ICF International |
Sall E.,San Francisco County Transportation Authority |
Hesse E.,Tri County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon TriMet |
Salon D.,University of California at Davis |
Ganson C.,Governors Office of Planning and Research
Transportation Research Record | Year: 2012
Methods to attribute greenhouse gas emissions from transit vehicles across cities in a multijurisdictional region are explored. Four methods and one submethod are proposed, tested, and evaluated with real-world data from the Bay Area Rapid Transit District, serving the San Francisco Bay Area, California, and the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, serving the Portland area. Each methodology is evaluated on the basis of the likely availability of necessary data, ease of calculation, policy implications, and accuracy. Method 1 allocates emissions on the basis of each jurisdiction's total population and employment as a share of population and employment from all of the region's jurisdictions that have transit access. Method 2 allocates emissions on the basis of each jurisdiction's share of vehicle revenue miles traveled within the jurisdiction. Method 3 allocates emissions on the basis of each jurisdiction's share of linked transit trip origins and destinations weighted by trip distances. Method 4 allocates emissions on the basis of each jurisdiction's share of boardings and alightings. The methods have clear differences in the amount and type of data and the complexity of calculations required. These differences can be readily compared with the data and analytical resources available to a region to provide a partial ranking of methods. Questions of fairness, accuracy, and policy incentives are complicated by theoretical challenges in assigning responsibility for transit service as well as by the unique urban and transportation contexts of each region. Each region will need to select the method that is most appropriate for its unique circumstances in order to achieve intraregional consistency.
Van Schelven R.M.,KWINK Group Consultants Rvan |
Van Deventer P.,Governors Office of Planning and Research |
Van Twist M.,Erasmus University Rotterdam |
Kotter R.,Northumbria University
28th International Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition 2015, EVS 2015 | Year: 2015
This paper presents data from a comparative study of EV-policies in 8 different North-European countries, that maps out all of the policies of these countries (and a range of regions and cities) that target passenger vehicles (PHEV and BEV), chargers (home, private, public; level 1-3), and policies that target the emobility eco-system or supporting network, in time-period 2012-2014. The main findings are that 1) there is wide variance of policies put out by the different countries, 2) these policies are hardly part of a coherent policy-strategy, and 3) mainly address the introduction of e-mobility as an issue of "piling up" enough incentives to overcome early market problems (e.g. high costs, reticent customers, slow adaptation of regulation). Most countries we studied were able to meet short-term policy-ambitions, and some have even surpassed those ambitions; Netherlands and Norway for instance are ahead of their targets, both in numbers of vehicles and chargers. However, if we compare the currently applied policies to the medium- And longer term ambitions, these policies are hardly viable. Therefore, argue for alternative policy strategies that do not "pile up" incentives, but look at "mixes" of policies that instigate a self-reinforcing loop in the adoption to EV's.
Bedsworth L.W.,Governors Office of Planning and Research |
Hanak E.,Public Policy Institute of California
Global Environmental Change | Year: 2013
Local governments in the United States have been hotbeds of climate change activity. Recently, states have sought to incorporate these primarily voluntary actions into broader climate change mitigation programs. Using the example of California, a national leader in U.S. climate policy, this article examines the scope for effectiveness of local climate action and assesses factors related to adoption of local climate policies. The analysis draws on two original surveys of city and county governments, designed to learn about adoption of comprehensive policy tools (emission inventories and climate action plans) and programs in specific areas (energy, water, land use, transportation). Adoption rates are fairly high and growing; by mid 2010 roughly 70% of all jurisdictions were already engaged or planning to engage in comprehensive climate actions, up from roughly 50% in 2008. The adoption of specific programs varies with the degree of local government authority in different sectors, and is generally higher for programs targeting municipal facilities and operations than those targeting residents and businesses. Population size, household income, and strong support from local leaders and the public are all associated with higher rates of adoption, particularly for comprehensive actions. Partisan attitudes are more important for comprehensive actions than for programs in specific areas such as energy efficiency and renewable energy, mirroring the findings of state and national public opinion surveys, which find broader support for actions like clean energy than for explicit climate change-oriented actions. Qualitative analysis reveals additional keys to success, including partnering with other local governments and private organizations and leveraging cost savings and other potential co-benefits of action. As states move to incorporate local actions into broader plans, mandates will also play an increasing role in setting a floor for local efforts. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
Bedsworth L.,Governors Office of Planning and Research
Climatic Change | Year: 2012
California is home to some of the worst air quality in the nation and ninety percent of the state's population lives in areas that are out of attainment with at least one of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Increasing temperatures associated with climate change will make meeting air quality standards more difficult. Under a changing climate, additional emission reductions will be needed to achieve clean air standards. These additional emission reductions and associated costs are called the "climate penalty." Air quality planning is the process of assessing the emission reductions needed to meet air quality standards and outlining the programs and policies that will be implemented to achieve these emission reductions. This paper reviews the challenges that a changing climate will pose for air quality planning in California and identifies opportunities for adaptation. While state air quality regulators in California are taking enormous strides to address global warming, less work is happening at the regional, air district level. Air districts are the agencies responsible for developing air quality improvement plans. An important first step for regional air quality regulators will be to quantify the climate penalty and understand their region's vulnerability to climate change. Limitations in regulatory authority could impede measures to improve preparedness. Regional agencies will likely need to look to state and federal agencies for additional emission reductions. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Chiladakis L.,California Air Resources Board |
Crowfoot W.,Governors Office of Planning and Research |
Winston R.,CA Capital
2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition, EVS 2014 | Year: 2014
Accelerating the market for zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) is a cornerstone of California's long-term transportation strategy to reduce localized pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, save consumers money, and enable continued economic growth. In addition to promoting these vehicle technologies, the state supports the development and use of low carbon fuels, as well as planning more environmentally sustainable communities that reduce unnecessary vehicle travel and congestion. In March 2012 Governor Brown signed an Executive Order calling for 1.5 million ZEVs by 2025. To identify specific actions that the State can take to reach this goal, the Governor's Office with the input from a Governor's Office Interagency Working Group developed the 2013 ZEV Action Plan. © 2013 IEEE.
Bedsworth L.,Public Policy Institute of California |
Bedsworth L.,Governors Office of Planning and Research
Climatic Change | Year: 2012
A changing climate will exacerbate many of the problems currently faced by California's public health institutions. The public health impacts of climate change include: an increase in extreme heat events and associated increases in heat-related morbidity and mortality, increases in the frequency and severity of air pollution episodes, shifts in the range and incidence of vector-borne diseases, increases in the severity of wildfire, increased risks of drought and flooding, and other extreme events. This article assesses the readiness of California's public health institutions to cope with the changes that will accompany a changing climate and how they relate to strategies laid out in the state's Climate Adaptation Strategy. County-level health offices are the front line actors to preserve public health in the face of numerous threats, including climate change. Survey results show that local health officers in California believe that climate change is a serious threat to public health, but feel that they lack the funding and resources to reduce this risk. Local health agencies also have a number of tools in place that will be helpful for preparing for a changing climate. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.