PresentationPDF Available

User Guide for the SuSMo evaluation tool: a TU Delft tool to evaluate the impacts of shared mobility in cities

Authors:
1
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Athens, Greece
April 23-26 2012
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012
Beta version, 2021
A TU Delft tool to evaluate the
impacts of shared mobility
User Guide
An output of the SuSMo (Sustainable Urban Shared
Mobility) Project
2
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Input output screen evaluation tool
Methodological approach inside the “black box”: how the CO2
calculation process works?
Diagrammatic representation
Important notes
Outline
3
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
SuSMo Evaluation tool:
What does it look like?
4
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Evaluation tool: Input screen example
5
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Evaluation tool: Output screen example
6
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Methodological
approach:
Inside the “black box”
7
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Methodological approach
Three shared mobility modes are included in the calculations of the impact
on the CO2 emissions:
Car sharing
Bike sharing
E-scooter sharing
Strong preference to use data from studies based on European cities (when
available), although many studies are available for cities in the U.S. and Asia.
But differences in structure, density, scale, function of the cities outside
Europe affect parameters such as the average distance travelled daily for
urban trips and therefore also the average VKT.
We considered tailpipe emissions of CO2, as well as the emissions due to
electricity production related to electric vehicles (cars and scooters).
8
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Methodological approach
Do we always save CO2 when using shared mobility?
When travellers switch from private cars to shared modes, this results in fewer
CO2 emissions; however, especially in car sharing, this might not be the case
when the shared mobility users were previously using public transport for the
same trip, or were performing the trip by walking or cycling.
Important to know the mode used previously for the same trip
After having estimated this, then we can calculate the amount of CO2
emissions that would have been emitted when the shared mode was not an
option and compare it with the CO2 emissions resulting from the use of the
shared mode.
9
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Methodological approach
Same approach for all three modes:
Using information about the current modal split in a city in the three broad
categories of: private car, public transport, active modes.
Main assumption:
The number of trips generated with a shared mode was previously realized
using one of these three options.
E.g. if the modal split in a city is currently 40% private car, 45% public transport
and 15% active modes, we assume that the 40%of the shared trips were
previously being done by private car, the 45%by public transport and the
rest by active modes.
10
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process
Diagrams’ colour coding:
Pink cells: values that are taken from the literature
Purple cells: information that are requested by the cities as input
Orange cells: entail country-specific factors deducted from EU databases or
values that change based on the scale of the city
Blue cells: correspond to the intermediate calculation results
Green cells: the estimated CO2 emissions are presented in green colour.
Time unit: Day, so all the numbers are referring to daily trips.
11
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process:
Car sharing
12
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Car sharing
13
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Car sharing
Important notes:
CO2 emissions from private cars: country-specific indicator of the average
CO2 per km from passenger cars (from Eurostat database), year’s factor
selection based on information each city provides regarding the average
age of the private cars’ fleet.
International Council on Clean Transportation: there is a significant
difference between the CO2 emissions measured in the lab experiments
and the real-world emissions. 40% higher when the New European Driving
Cycle (NEDC) method is used, with the Worldwide Harmonized Light
Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) (started in 2017) approximately 14%
discrepancy between lab and real-world.
40%is added to the CO2 factors to account for this difference as the latest
available values for CO2 emissions per km per country is for 2017. For future
use of this evaluation tool, it is recommended adapting this value if
necessary to the WLTP standards.
14
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Car sharing
Important notes:
CO2 emissions from public transport: For the CO2 emission rate per
passenger km we adopted the classification of the methodological guide
of Medde (French Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development, and
Energy) and ADEME (Environment and Energy Management Agency)
(2012) that suggested using the following factors based on the population
of the city:
Under 100000 inhabitants -> 171 gCO2/passenger km
Between 100000 and 250000 inhabitants -> 154 gCO2/passenger km
Over 250000 inhabitants - > 144 gCO2/passenger km
15
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Impact of the car sharing fleet
16
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Impact of the car sharing fleet
Important notes:
For the typical shared car models for conventional engine cars and for
electric ones we use a representative widely used model for each
category, as follows:
Combustion engine: Volkswagen up! -> 117 gr CO2/km
Electric car: M itsubishi iMiev/Peugeot Ion/Citroen C-zero -> 171 Wh/km
The CO2 emission intensity of electricity generation (gCO2/KWh) per
country was used, available from the database of the European
Environmental Agency (EEA).
The last step after calculating the total emissions from the car fleet itself is to
calculate the difference between the two values, and this number is the
net expected CO2 emissions reduction.
17
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process:
Bike sharing
18
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Bike sharing
19
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Bike sharing
Important notes:
The same process that has been already described for car sharing, with
two differences:
First, we do not need to calculate the net emissions in this case, as we
assume zero transport-related emissions for walking and cycling.
Therefore, the output of the calculation process corresponds directly to
the final estimated CO2 emissions reduced as a result of bike sharing.
Second, to have a more realistic result, for the VKT calculations, we use
the average distance of the active modes trips in the city, because
assuming that a shared bike can replace the full length of an average
private car trip could sometimes be too optimistic and not reflect the
reality of the city; we hence choose to remain on the conservative side
in our assumptions.
20
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process:
E-scooter sharing
21
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: E-scooter sharing
22
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: E-scooter sharing
Important notes:
The calculation process lies in between the ones followed for car sharing
and bike sharing. We did calculate the emissions generated by the e-
scooter fleet based on the electricity generation emission factors per
country, but we used also for the VKT calculation a shorter distance than
the average distance per mode (either the average distance of the active
modes trips can be used or it can be increased by a small percentage to
reflect the usually rather bigger length or radius of the trips made by e-
scooters).
The reduction of CO2 is, as in the case of car sharing, the difference
between the two v alues.
23
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
Calculation process: Impact of the e-scooter fleet
24
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
References
Dornoff, J., Tietge and U. Mock, P. (2020), On the way to “real world” CO2 values: The European passenger car market in its first
year after introducing the WLTP. White Paper, The International Council on Clean Transportation.
EEA (2020), CO2 Intensity of Electricity Generation, Available from: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/co2-
intensity-of-electricity-generation
Eurostat (2020), Average CO2 emissions per km from new passenger cars, Available from:
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-datasets/-/SDG_12_30
Fromm, H., Ewald, L., Frankenhauser, D., Ensslen, A. and Jochem, P. (2019), A Study on Free-floating Carsharing in Europe.
Impacts of car2go and DriveNow on modal shift, vehicle ownership, vehicle kilometers traveled, and CO2 emissions in 11
European cities. Working paper series in production and energy, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology.
Habibi et al. (2017), Comparison of free-floating car sharing services in cities, paper presented in Panel: 4. Mobility, transport,
and smart and sustainable cities of eceee Summer Study 2017.
MEDDE and ADEME (2012), CO2 information for transport services. Application of Article L. 1431 -3 of the French transport code.
Methodological guide.
Roukouni, A. and Correia, G. (2020), Evaluation Methods for the Impacts of Shared Mobility: Classification and Critical Review.
Sustainability, 12, 10504.
25
Transport Research Arena Europe 2012, Athens
For more information or/and to provide
feedback please contact:
Dr. Anastasia Roukouni a.roukouni@tudelft.nl
Dr. Gonçalo Homem de Almeida Correia g.correia@tudelft.nl
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
In recent years, shared mobility services have had a growing presence in cities all over the world. Developing methodologies to measure and evaluate the impacts of shared mobility has therefore become of critical importance for city authorities. This paper conducts a thorough review of the different types of methods that can be used for this evaluation and suggests a classification of them. The pros and cons of each method are also discussed. The added value of the paper is twofold; first, we provide a systematic recording of the state of the art and the state of the practice regarding the evaluation of the impacts of shared mobility, from the perspective of city authorities, reflecting on their role, needs, and expectations. Second, by identifying the existing gaps in the literature, we highlight the specific needs for research and practice in this field that can help society figure out the role of urban shared mobility.
On the way to "real world" CO2 values: The European passenger car market in its first year after introducing the WLTP. W hite Paper
  • J Dornoff
  • U Tietge
  • P Mock
Dornoff, J., Tietge and U. Mock, P. (2020), On the way to "real world" CO2 values: The European passenger car market in its first year after introducing the WLTP. W hite Paper, The International Council on Clean Transportation.
Average CO2 emissions per km from new passenger cars
  • Eurostat
Eurostat (2020), Average CO2 emissions per km from new passenger cars, Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-datasets/-/SDG_12_30
A Study on Free-floating Carsharing in Europe. Impacts of car2go and DriveNow on modal shift, vehicle ownership, vehicle kilometers traveled, and CO2 emissions in 11 European cities. Working paper series in production and energy
  • H Fromm
  • L Ewald
  • D Frankenhauser
  • A Ensslen
  • P Jochem
Fromm, H., Ewald, L., Frankenhauser, D., Ensslen, A. and Jochem, P. (2019), A Study on Free-floating Carsharing in Europe. Impacts of car2go and DriveNow on modal shift, vehicle ownership, vehicle kilometers traveled, and CO2 emissions in 11 European cities. Working paper series in production and energy, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology.
Comparison of free-floating car sharing services in cities, paper presented in Panel: 4. Mobility, transport, and smart and sustainable cities of eceee Summer Study
  • Habibi
Habibi et al. (2017), Comparison of free-floating car sharing services in cities, paper presented in Panel: 4. Mobility, transport, and smart and sustainable cities of eceee Summer Study 2017.
CO2 information for transport services. Application of Article L. 1431 -3 of the French transport code
  • Ademe Medde
MEDDE and ADEME (2012), CO2 information for transport services. Application of Article L. 1431 -3 of the French transport code. Methodological guide.