Abstract
Buses account for almost 60% of the total public transport services in Europe, and most of the vehicles are diesel fuelled. Regional transport administrators, under pressure by governments to introduce zero-emission buses, require analytical tools for identifying optimal solutions. In literature, few models combine location analysis, least cost planning, and emission assessment, taking into account multiple technologies which might achieve emission reduction goals. In this paper, an existing optimal location model for electric urban transport is adapted to match the needs of regional transport. The model, which aims to evaluate well-to-wheel carbon emissions as well as airborne emissions of NOx and PM10, is applied to a real case study of a regional bus transport service in North Eastern Italy. The optimization has identified electric buses with relatively small (60 kWh) batteries as the best compromise for reducing carbon equivalent emissions; however, under current economic conditions in Italy, the life cycle cost of such vehicles is still much higher than those of Euro VI diesel buses. In this context, our model helps in identifying ways to minimize infrastructure costs and to efficiently allocate expensive resources such as electric buses to the routes where the maximum environmental benefit can be achieved.
Highlights
In European urban areas, public transport accounts for 21% of the total number of motorised trips and is responsible for roughly 10% of transport related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (UITP 2018)
An international survey on local bus operators (Corazza et al 2016) shows that more than 40% of the respondents would opt for increasing the use of electric vehicles, 28% would opt for change in favour of more compressed natural gas (CNG), and 13% towards greater use of vehicles fuelled by bio-methane
In line with Harris et al (2020) and Ercan and Tatari (2015), we argue that recharging issues must be considered in cost-benefits analyses and handled at a fleet level, for battery electric buses, costs which were not examined in Durango-Cohen and McKenzie (2018)
Summary
In European urban areas, public transport accounts for 21% of the total number of motorised trips and is responsible for roughly 10% of transport related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (UITP 2018). An international survey on local bus operators (Corazza et al 2016) shows that more than 40% of the respondents would opt for increasing the use of electric vehicles, 28% would opt for change in favour of more compressed natural gas (CNG), and 13% towards greater use of vehicles fuelled by bio-methane Each of these choices has different economic and environmental implications, and some of them are not explicitly evaluated by local governments or by administrators, whose perceptions may fail to take into account all aspects of the real situation on the grounds (Corazza et al 2016). To enable informed decision making for the future development of public transport systems, decision support tools may be of help, when multiple technology options need to be given consideration, and when the transition to ZEB requires the development of appropriate but capital-cost-intensive charging infrastructure
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
