Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2013

Measure for Measure: Energy Utility Model for Standardized Evaluation of Transportation Efficiency Measures

Abstract

As the environmental and financial costs of conventional gasoline become more apparent, interest in the concept of transportation efficiency is growing. Broadly, this concept involves using less energy to meet current travel demand and often uses a systems-level approach. The transportation sector has much to learn from the electric and thermal energy sectors, whose demand management strategies have used established screening tools to assess the environmental and financial benefits of efficiency measures for years. The adoption of such screening tools may be ideal for the transportation sector as electric vehicles (EVs) bring these two sectors together. An example discusses how the Vermont state screening tool can be used to evaluate a transportation measure: switching from a conventional vehicle to an EV. Screening tool results demonstrate that the estimated cost benefits of an EV vary from –$15,911 to $24,645, depending on the EV model, miles driven annually, and externalities considered, among other factors. The cost-effectiveness of EVs was improved by including avoided health costs because of reduced tailpipe emissions. More broadly, results showed that cost-effectiveness screening tools used in the electric and thermal energy sectors provided a meaningful way to assess potential gains in transportation efficiency and could be used to evaluate other transportation efficiency measures (e.g., bicycle and walking infrastructure, transit). The use of such screening tools will increase communication and collaboration between the energy and transportation sectors while facilitating a systems-based approach to transportation planning and demand management.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. April 2012 Monthly Energy Review. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Statistics, U.S. Department of Energy, 2012.
2. Guide to Sustainable Transportation Performance Measures. Report 231-K-10-004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 2011.
3. Litman T. A. Sustainable Transportation Indicators: A Recommended Research Program for Developing Sustainable Transportation Indicators and Data. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
4. Jacobs E. Topic Paper #28: Transportation Efficiency. In National Petroleum Council Global Oil and Gas Study, No. 195. National Petroleum Council, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 5409–5416.
5. Jeon C. M., and Amekudzi A. Addressing Sustainability in Transportation Systems: Definitions, Indicators, and Metrics. In Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2005, pp. 31–50.
6. Meyer M. Measuring That Which Cannot Be Measured—At Least According to Conventional Wisdom. In Conference Proceedings 26: Performance Measures to Improve Transportation Systems and Agency Operations. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 105–125.
7. Guidebook to Energy Efficiency. Energy Center of Wisconsin, Madison, 2009.
8. Technical Reference Manual. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Harrisburg, 2012.
9. Technical Reference User Manual. Efficiency Vermont, Burlington, Vt., 2009.
10. Pepco C&I Energy Savings Program: Full Retro Commissioning (RCx) Technical Reference Manual. Pepco, Washington, D.C., 2012.
11. State of Ohio Energy Efficiency Technical Reference Manual. Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio, 2010.
12. Crist P. Electric Vehicles Revisited: Costs, Subsidies and Prospects. Discussion paper 2012-03. International Transport Forum, Paris, 2012.
13. Jansen K. H., Brown T. M., and Samuelsen G. S. Emissions Impacts of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Deployment on the U.S. Western Grid. In Journal of Power Sources, Vol. 195, No. 16, 2010, pp. 5409–5416.
14. Lipman T. E., and Delucchi M. A. A Retail and Lifecycle Cost Analysis of Hybrid Electric Vehicles. In Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2006, pp. 115–132.
15. Lave L., and MacLean H. L. An Environmental–Economic Evaluation of Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Toyota's Prius vs. Its Conventional Internal Combustion Engine Corolla. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2002, pp. 155–162.
16. Parks K., Denholm P., and Markel T. Costs and Emissions Associated with Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Charging in the Xcel Energy Colorado Service Territory. NREL/TP-640-41410. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colo., 2007.
17. Environmental Assessment of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Volume 1: Nationwide Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif., 2007.
18. Delucchi M. A., and Lipman T. E. An Analysis of the Retail and Life-cycle Cost of Battery-Powered Electric Vehicles. In Transportation Research Part D. No. 6, 2001, pp. 371–404.
19. Paul B. M., Kockelman K. M., and Musti S. Evolution of the Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet: Anticipating Adoption of Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Across the U.S. Fleet. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2252, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011, pp. 107–117.
20. Quadrennial Technology Review. U.S. Department of Energy, 2012.
21. Hornby R., Chernick P., Swanson C., White D., Gifford J., Chang M., Hughes N., Wittenstein M., Wilson R., and Biewald B. Avoided Energy Supply Costs in New England: 2011 Report. Synapse, Cambridge, Mass., 2011.
22. McCubbin D., and DeLucchi M. A. Social Cost of the Health Effects of Motor Vehicle Air Pollution. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, 1996.
23. Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study Final Report. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2000.
24. Litman T. Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II: Air Pollution Costs. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 2011.
25. Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 2010.
26. Long Range Transmission Plan. Vermont Electric and Power Company, Rutland, Vt., 2009.
27. Energy Sources in New England 2012. ISO New England, Inc., Holyoke, Mass., 2013. http://www.iso-ne.com/nwsiss/grid_mkts/enrgy_srcs/index.html.
28. Vehicle Cost Calculator. Alternative Fuel and Advanced Vehicle Data Center, U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/calc. Accessed June 2012.
29. Santos A., McGuckin N., Nakamoto H. Y., Gray D., and Liss S. Summary of Travel Trends: 2009 National Household Travel Survey. FHWA-PL-II-022. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2011.
30. Your Driving Costs. American Automobile Association, Heathrow, Fla., 2012.
31. Vermont State Screening Tool. Efficiency Vermont, Burlington, Vt., 2012.
32. Electric Vehicles: Compare Side-by-Side. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evsbs.shtml. Accessed July 2012.
33. Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) Model. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 2012.
34. Witt M., Bomberg M., Lipman T., and Williams B. Plug-In Electric Vehicles in California: Review of Current Policies, Related Emissions Reductions for 2020, and Policy Outlook. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2287, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 155–162.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published online: January 1, 2013
Issue published: January 2013

Rights and permissions

© 2013 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Justine Sears
Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, 128 Lakeside Avenue, Burlington, VT 05401.
Karen Glitman
Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, 128 Lakeside Avenue, Burlington, VT 05401.
Greg Fanslow
Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, 128 Lakeside Avenue, Burlington, VT 05401.

Notes

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 18

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 2

  1. Study on Commissioning Techniques for Oil Transportation Pipeline with...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Assessment of Level 1 and Level 2 Electric Vehicle Charging Efficiency
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub