17.07.2015 Views

Acknowledgments US Department of Transportation - BTS

Acknowledgments US Department of Transportation - BTS

Acknowledgments US Department of Transportation - BTS

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

multiplied by the average peak period system speed and divided by the average fuel economy to produce the amount<strong>of</strong> incident fuel wasted.Structure, Assumptions, and ParametersUrban roadway congestion levels are estimated using a formula measuring traffic density. Average daily travelvolume per lane on freeways and principal arterial streets are estimated using area wide estimates <strong>of</strong> vehicle-miles <strong>of</strong>travel and lane miles <strong>of</strong> roadway. The resulting ratios are combined using the amount <strong>of</strong> travel on each portion <strong>of</strong> thesystem (freeway and principal arterials) so that the combined index measures conditions overall. This variableweighting factor allows comparisons between areas such as Phoenix-where principal arterial streets carry 50 percent<strong>of</strong> the amount <strong>of</strong> travel <strong>of</strong> freeways-and cities such as Phoenix where the ratio is reversed. Values greater than oneare indicative <strong>of</strong> undesirable congestion levels. Readers seeking the algorithm for the congestion index shouldexamine http://mobility.tamu.edu/.In previous reports, TTI assumed that 45 percent <strong>of</strong> all traffic, regardless <strong>of</strong> the urban location, occurred in congestedconditions. TTI indicated that this presumption overestimated travel in congested periods. Its 2002 estimates nowvary by urban area anywhere from 18 to 50 percent <strong>of</strong> travel that occurs in congestion. TTI's model structure appliesto two types <strong>of</strong> roads: freeways and principal arterial streets. The model derives estimates <strong>of</strong> vehicle traffic per laneand traffic speed for an entire urban area. Based on variation in these amounts, travel is then classified under 5categories: uncongested, moderately congested, heavily congested, severely congested, and extremely congested (anew category in 1999). The threshold between uncongested and congested was changed in 1999. Previous editionsclassified congested travel when area wide traffic levels reached 14,000 vehicles per lane per day on highways and5,500 vehicles per lane per day on principal arterial streets. For the current edition these values are 15,500 and 5,500vehicles per lane per day respectively. Previous years values have been re-estimated based on these newassumptions. Readers should refer to the TTI website for more detailed information on its estimation procedureshttp://mobility.tamu.edu/.TTI reviews and adjusts the data used in its model, including statewide average fuel cost estimates (published by theAmerican Automobile Association) and the number <strong>of</strong> eligible drivers for each urban area (taken from the StatisticalAbstract <strong>of</strong> the United States, published by the U.S. <strong>Department</strong> <strong>of</strong> Commerce, Bureau <strong>of</strong> the Census).The modelhas some limitations because it does not include local variations (such as bottlenecks, local travel patterns, ortransportation improvements) that affect travel times. TTI documentation does not provide information on peerreview,sensitivity analysis, or estimation errors for their model. Information about sensitivity analysis or externalreviews <strong>of</strong> the model could not be obtained and users should interpret the data cautiously.ENVIRONMENTTABLE 4-43. Estimated National Average Vehicle Emissions Rates by Vehicle Type and FuelTABLE 4-44. National Average Vehicle Emissions Rates by Vehicle Type Using Reformulated GasolineThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency uses its Mobile Source Emissions Factor Model (MOBILE) to generateaverage emissions factors for each vehicle and fuel type. The methods used in the model are theoretically sound, theassumptions are reasonable, but the data vary in quality, and no formal analysis <strong>of</strong> the accuracy <strong>of</strong> these estimateshas been performed. Emissions rate estimates for light-duty vehicles are considered more reliable than those forheavy-duty vehicles because in-use emissions tests are performed on a sample <strong>of</strong> vehicles each year. Deteriorationfor heavy-duty vehicles in the national fleet are based only on manufacturer's engine deterioration tests. In addition,because reformulated fuels (table 4-39) are newer than other gasoline fuels (table 4-38), in use emissions test datafor reformulated fuels are not as extensive.The estimates in the tables represent average emissions rates taking into account the characteristics <strong>of</strong> the nation'sfleet, including vehicle type and age, and fuel used. The model also assumes Federal Test Procedure conditions. Themodel does not take into account actual travel distributions across different highway types with their associatedaverage speeds and operating mode fractions, nor do they consider ambient local temperatures. However, fleetcomposition and deterioration because <strong>of</strong> age are considered. Thus, these rates illustrate only trends due to vehicleemissions control improvements and their increasing use in the national fleet and should not be used for otherpurposes.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!