Road Pricing Anthony M. Rufolo Systems Science Seminar May 7,2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Use of FuelTrac Card for Purchases of Gas for University Vehicles FuelTrac can ONLY be used in State owned Vehicles or those leased through the State Enterprise.
Advertisements

The National Household Travel Survey Heather Contrino US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Office of Highway Policy Information.
International Symposium on Road Pricing 2003 Evaluation of Singapore’s Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) System ( present) A P G Menon MSI Global.
1 This document and its contents are the property of The University of Iowa’s Public Policy Center National Evaluation of a Mileage- Based Road User Charge.
Employer-Paid Parking: A Matching Grant Employers pay for parking at work if the employee is willing to pay for driving to work Commuters who don’t drive.
Oregon’s Road User Fee Pilot Program Presented to International Fuel Tax Agreement Managers’ Workshop September 2006 PowerPoint Presentation provided by:
Oregon Mileage Fee Concept and Road User Fee Pilot Program Presented to WASHTO Construction and Materials Committee Portland, Oregon April 8, 2008 James.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials U.S. Department of Transportation Federal.
San Juan County Solid Waste: Funding. Solid Waste Funding Current Solid Waste Revenue Current Solid Waste Revenue Rate Structure used to collect revenue.
Iowa State Association of Counties 2013 Fall School of Instruction November 14, 2013 Stu Anderson Iowa Department of Transportation.
I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned I-15 Managed Lanes: Building on Success And Lessons Learned.
GE541 Economic Geography of Transport October 30th.
CONGESTION PRICING Traffic Solution or Tax Scheme?
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved Chapter 10 Externalities from Autos.
SR520 Urban Partnership Project 2008 ITS Washington Annual Meeting November 12th, 2008 – Seattle Jennifer Charlebois, P.E. Tolling and Systems Project.
TRB Lianyu Chu *, K S Nesamani +, Hamed Benouar* Priority Based High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes Operation * California Center for Innovative Transportation.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION KATY (I-10) HOT LANE 13 mile (20.9 km), one-lane reversible facility in the median of Katy (I-10) Freeway. HOT operations (QuickRide)
Toll Technology ITS Washington Annual Meeting Bart Cima, IBI Group - Seattle November 12, 2008.
Exploratory Study: Vehicle Mileage Fees in Texas Ginger Goodin Richard T. Baker Texas Transportation Institute Research sponsored by the Texas Department.
Measuing Preferences, Establishing Values, The Empirical Basis for Understanding Behavior David Levinson.
Toll Collection. One of the early widespread adopters of ITS Some of the most obvious benefits from ITS adoption.
Steve Heminger Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission Transportation Research Board Executive Committee June 17, 2005 TOLL: The Four.
A Very Big Experiment Congestion Charging in London Peter Jones Transport Studies Group University of Westminster.
The London Congestion Charge. Facts Traffic speed in central London had fallen more that 20% since the 1960s (14.2 mph to 10mph) I n 1998 drivers in inner.
Less Stop More Go EXPRESS LANES Travel Choices and Strategies to Relieve Congestion Presentation to FDOT’s Annual ITS Working Group Meeting March 2008.
Presentation to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit and the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Peggy Catlin, Deputy Executive Director.
New Revenue Subcommittee Recommendations. Criteria Elasticity Elasticity Ability to phase in Ability to phase in User-based User-based Yield Yield Ease.
Oregon’s Road Usage Charge Program - SB810 Implementation 2015 AASHTO Audit Conference July 21, 2015.
K.O.R.E. Enterprises Workshop Urban Transportation Systems 10/15/08.
Tolling and Congestion Pricing Patrick DeCorla-Souza Office of Innovative Program Delivery Federal Highway Administration Presentation to Transportation.
THE CONDITION OF OUR SURFACE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE How Do We Adequately Finance Our System?
Oregon’s Road User Fee Pilot Program Presented to NEACT LaGrande, Oregon August 4, 2005 James Whitty, Manager Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative.
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Incorporating Pricing Strategies US Department of Transportation Incorporating.
Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) ISYM 540 Current Topics in Information System Management Anas Hardan.
Funding Your Journey Florida Transportation Economics 101 Presenter’s Name Organization.
Congestion Pricing I. Introduction II. Need and purpose of multimodal system Traffic gridlock reflects an imbalance between road supply and road demand.
Quantifying Transportation Needs and Assessing Revenue Options: The Texas Experience presented to The Arkansas Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance.
Transportation Services Budget February 4, 2010 Josh Davis, Director 1.
The Oregon Road User Fee Concept and Pilot Program Presented to National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission Washington DC September.
Methodology for the Use of Regional Planning Models to Assess Impact of Various Congestion Pricing Strategies Sub-network Extraction A sub-network focusing.
PRICING STRATEGIES PRESENTED BY JEFFREY D. ENSOR TO THE MALAYSIA TRANSPORT RESEARCH GROUP NOVEMBER 25, 2003.
Center on Tolling Research Technology for Managed Lanes Christopher Poe, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Agency Director Director, Center on Tolling Research Texas.
I-394 MnPASS Technical Evaluation Preliminary Findings March 23, 2006 Doug Sallman – Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
What will we see 20 years from? If we slept for 20 years what would we recognize when we awoke? The future starts….
B2. Vehicle-Based Surveys ISCTSC 2008 – Annecy, France.
Mileage based user fees and sustainable transportation funding Dr. Adrian Moore Vice President Reason Foundation.
Convergence of Transportation Policy and RFID Enabler of Future Transportation Policy Chris Body Mark IV Vice President, Business Development.
Managed Lanes CE 550: Advanced Highway Design Damion Pregitzer.
David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Civil and Environmental Engineering 1 Norway’s toll rings: Full scale implementations of urban pricing Dr. Terje Tretvik - SINTEF, Norway IMPRINT-EUROPE.
More on supply and demand relationships. Characteristics of congestion  Unlike the production of other goods, in transportation consumers provide their.
Liberating road users: Options for progress. Liberating road users at ADC 2 September 24, 2010 How are road users constrained? Governments determine 
Section 3: New and Experimental Technologies
I-680 Value Pricing: A HOT Lane Demonstration Project of “Smart Carpool Lanes” Sponsor: Alameda County Congestion Management Agency 2003 Sponsor: Alameda.
Road Impact Fee Update Discussion Item June 21, 2011 Transportation Impact Fee Update Discussion Item June 21, 2011.
Term Paper Presentation Course: CVEN 632 Presented by: Shailendra Matoria Evaluating Electronic Toll Collection System against Conventional Toll Plaza.
2/2/2016US DOT/Volpe Center1 Distributional Impacts of Congestion Pricing Douglass B. Lee, Jr. International Symposium on Road Pricing Key Biscayne, FL.
System Control and Regulation CEE 587 Prof. Anne Goodchild May 18, 2011.
Darrin Roth American Trucking Associations, Inc. INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROAD PRICING.
Company LOGO Georgia Truck Lane Needs Identification Study Talking Freight Seminar March 19, 2008 Matthew Fowler, P.T.P Assistant State Planning Administrator.
B A Y A R E A T O L L A U T H O R I T Y 1 Toll Increase Options for the State-owned Bay Area Bridges BATA Oversight Committee Public Hearing on Proposed.
FEBRUARY 22, 2016 FY 2017 County Administrator’s Recommended Budget.
13 March 2014 By a California Country Mile The Business Case for Road Usage Charging Matthew J. Dorfman and Travis P. Dunn D’Artagnan Consulting, LLP.
Transportation Revenue Sources Presentation to the Discovery Institute October 6, 2004 Amy Arnis Deputy Director Strategic Planning and Programming Washington.
I-77 High-Occupancy Toll Lanes
21st Century Transportation Committee Finance Subcommittee
Introduction: The Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) is a technology that permits vehicles to pay highway tolls electronically. E-Z Pass is the nation’s.
International Symposium on Road Pricing 2003 Evaluation of Singapore’s Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) System ( present) A P G Menon MSI Global.
How to Put Together the Pieces of Road Usage Charge Legislation
Presentation transcript:

Road Pricing Anthony M. Rufolo Systems Science Seminar May 7,2010

Perceived Need To Replace Fuel Taxes  Concern About Alternative Fuel Vehicles  Current Revenue Not Adequate  Resistance To Fuel Tax Increases  Pricing Could Help Manage Demand  But Imposing Prices Is Costly

HTF Receipts By Category

Mileage Fee Experiment  Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Tested a System to Replace State Gas Tax With Mileage Fees  When Fueling at a Participating Station, System Subtracts Gas Tax And Adds Mileage Fee  Other Vehicles Still Pay Gas Tax

Basic System  GPS Used To Allow On Board Unit To Determine Time And Location Of Travel  Up To 30 Time And Location Zones  All Miles Driven Allocated To A Zone  Could Be Different Fee For Each Zone  All Data Stored In Vehicle

Data Transfer  When Fueling, Vehicle Communicates With Pump Via Radio Signal  In Baseline, Mileage Data By Zone Uploaded  In Experiment, State Gas Tax Deducted And Mileage Fee Added At The Pump

Baseline  Two Service Stations Equipped With Technology  Volunteers Recruited Who Lived Or Worked Near The Stations  Vehicles Equipped With Devices  Approximately 4.5 Months Of Baseline Data Collected On Driving By Zone  Participants Instructed To Regularly Use Participating Stations

Experiment  At Midpoint, Participants Assigned To One Of The Three Groups  Data Collected For About Another 4.5 Months  For Experiment Groups, Gas Tax Deducted And Mileage Fee Added At Participating Stations  Participants Were Reimbursed For State Gas Tax Paid At Other Stations

Objectives  Test Functioning Of Equipment In Vehicles And At Pumps  Identify Problems With Using The System For Users Or Stations  Evaluate Behavioral Responses To Flat VMT Fee  Evaluate Behavioral Responses To Congestion Pricing

Not Random  The Sample Was Not Random  All Volunteers –Must Be Able To Fuel At Participating Stations At Least Twice Per Month –All Vehicles In Household Must Participate And Be 1996 Or Newer –$300 Or More Per Vehicle In Incentive Payments –No Motorcycles Or Diesel Vehicles In Household

Location of Study Participants and Service Stations

Volunteers Recruited  Installation Of On Vehicle Devices Occurred Between June 14,2006 and July 11, 2006  Initial Sample Was 201 Households  But Useable Data From 168 Households With 207 Vehicles

Experiment Begins  In November 2006, Households Were Assigned To One Of The Three Experiment Groups: Control, Mileage Fee (VMT), Or Congestion Pricing (RH)  Given An Endowment Account Based On Baseline Driving And Price System  Mileage Fees Deducted From Endowment And Any Remainder Paid At End

VMT Fee  The Basic System Tested Was A Simple Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Fee  Charge of 1.22 Cents Per Mile Traveled In Oregon (On Average Equal To State Gas Tax) And Refund Of Gas Tax  No Charge For Miles Outside Of Oregon  No Refund Of Other State Gas Taxes

Congestion Charge  Value Pricing Program Provided Funding And Congestion Charges Added As Part Of Test  10 Cents Per Mile For Travel In Congestion Zone During Weekday Rush Hours (7-9 a.m., 4-6 p.m.)  0.43 Cents Per Mile For Other Travel In Oregon

Rush Hour Zone

Control Group  No Change From Baseline-Continue To Fuel At Stations But Pay Price Including State Gas Tax  Intended To Control For Seasonal Effects, Changes In Price Of Gasoline, And So On

Data Collection Design  Mileage By Zone Collected Whenever Vehicle Was Fueled At A Participating Station  Data Collected At Independent Reader Station To Mark Beginning, Midpoint, And End Of Study

Data Collection Reality  Reported Reads Varied Between 66% And 88% Of Detected Vehicles By Station By Month During Baseline  Could Be Problems With Data Transmission, Drive By, Or Stop For Other Purchases  Problems With Independent Reader Either Due To Failure To Try Or Failure To Transmit Data

Problems Created  Less Than Half Of Control Group Provided Useable Data  Vehicles Spent Varying Amounts Of Time In Baseline And Experiment  New Change In Daylight Savings Time Was Not Programmed Into The Units, So Rush Hour Changed On March 11, 2007

Responses To Problems  Data Calculated As Miles Per Day And RH Miles Per Weekday To Account For Varying Times Of Participation  Data Analyzed For Experiment Ending On March 11, 2007 And For Experiment Ending On April 1, 2007  Data Analyzed By Vehicle And By Household

Group Size  Control Group Was Intended To Be 27 Vehicles (About 10%), But Only 10 Provided Useable Data  VMT Group Ended With 95 Vehicles Providing Useable Data  RH Group Ended With 102 Vehicles Providing Useable Data  Control Group Results Not Statistically Significant

Average Mileage Per Vehicle ControlVMTRH Base RH/WKDY BaseOR/Day ExpRH/WKDY ExpOR/Day

Change In RH Miles Per Wkdy MeanT-Ratio % Change Control VMT RH

Change In OR Miles Per Day MeanT-Ratio % Change Control VMT RH

Results  VMT Reduced Mileage Relative To Control But Increased Rush Hour Mileage  Not Statistically Significant, But Survey And Focus Groups Found Participants Stating That They Reduced Mileage

Congestion Pricing Results  Paired Means Shows About 13% Reduction In Peak Miles  Further Reduction In Off-Peak Miles Rather Than A Shift To Off-Peak  Reflects A Pure Price Effect Since There Was No Change In Congestion For This Group

Effect Of Price On Mode Choice  12 Of 84 Households In RH Reported Someone In Household Changing Mode To Save Money  10 Of 79 Households In VMT Reported This As Well Although On Average The VMT Fee Was Equal To The Gas Tax

Effect Of Congestion Charge On Travel  26 Of 84 RH Households Reported Changes In Either Time Or Distance Traveled  23 By Avoiding Driving During Rush Hour  4 Reported Consolidating Trips And One Joined A Carpool

Response To Fee System  145 of 163 Households (91%) Would Be Willing To Stay With System If All Service Stations Participated  Response Drops To 105 (64%) Who Think Other People Would Be Willing To Use The System

Caveats  Self-Selected Sample  Effects Of Being In An Experiment  Limited Duration  Congestion Price Is Per Mile But Does Not Reflect Direction Of Travel Or Other Differences In Actual Congestion

Accuracy  OSU determined that readings from system deviated as much as 20% from odometer readings  Some problems with zone boundaries  Many missed reads at the pump

Cost  Retrofit would be expensive, so phase in with new vehicles  Change station accounting software  Equip pumps  Accounting and billing system

Potential Use of Road Pricing  Two Congressional Commissions Have Recommended Replacing Fuel Taxes With Pricing  But The Cost of Pricing is Much Higher Than the Cost to Collect Fuel Taxes

Many Types Of Pricing  Targeted Tolling and Pricing –Turnpikes –Bridges, Tunnels, And Related Links  Cordon Pricing  Comprehensive Pricing –Flat Charge –Variable Based On Congestion, Emissions, Road Damage

Cost Issues  Few Taxpayers Pay The Fuel Tax, But There Could Be Millions Of Accounts With Pricing  Technology May Be Costly  Cost To Manage Accounts And Enforce The System  Research Needed To Better Understand Cost Trends And Possibilities To Use Technology Available For Other Purposes

Tolls With Closed System  Tolls paid at designated areas with barriers to entry/exit  Detection by toll gates, attendants, police, and cameras  Advantage is low violation rates  Disadvantages are cost, bottlenecks, and safety issues

Tolls With Open System  Vehicles equipped with transponders and tolls are paid as the vehicle passes through  Detection is mostly cameras  Advantage is higher throughput and revenue generation  Disadvantages are higher violation rates and costs for transaction recognition, violation processing, and courts

Automatic Vehicle Identification Identify vehicles at fixed points Wireless data/financial transaction via transponder/tag Toll roads, tunnels, bridges, cordons Video recognition of license plates for enforcement London using high speed license plate matching only (no tags) for cordon pricing Identify vehicles at fixed points Wireless data/financial transaction via transponder/tag Toll roads, tunnels, bridges, cordons Video recognition of license plates for enforcement London using high speed license plate matching only (no tags) for cordon pricing

Tolling in U.S.  277 toll roads, bridges, or tunnels  $9.3 billion in toll revenue in 2006  Operating costs tend to be a high percentage of revenue

Flat Versus Variable Pricing  Tolls That Do Not Vary Raise Revenue But Do Not Manage The Road System  Prices Based On The Level Of Congestion Manage The Road System, But May Not Raise Desired Revenue

Types Of Congestion Charges  Congestion Charge Varied By Time, Location, And Distance Traveled Is Most Efficient  Dutch Have Proposed Such A System, But None Currently Exist  Facility And Area Systems Have Been Implemented

Variable Toll Facilities  Growing Experience With High Occupancy Vehicle/Toll (HOT) Lanes  Generally Used For New Lanes Or Underutilized HOV Lanes  Static And Dynamic Congestion Pricing Is Used  Some Use Of Variable Pricing On Previously Flat Toll Facilities

Cordon or Area Pricing  In use in other countries –Singapore –London –Stockholm  Proposed for New York, but not implemented

Cordon Pricing: Singapore  Demand management  Initially, paper based system with 31 checkpoints in morning peak hours  Expanded to 66 gantries, 7:30 am to 4:30 pm  ERP system implemented –Vehicle transponders –Smart cards –Electronic gantries –OCR license plate recognition  Variable dynamic pricing –85 th percentile speed, 45 to 65 km/h

 £5/vehicle; increased to £8/vehicle  Area expanded in 2007  No barriers/tollbooths  Residents: 90% discount  £1/vehicle discount for fleets with 10+ vehicles  Weekly, monthly, and annual passes.  £120 fine; reduced to £60 if paid in 2 weeks  Free passage route Cordon Pricing: London Western Extension Original

Comprehensive Pricing  History  Oregon experiment  Puget Sound experiment  Others

Most Proposals Rely On GPS  Must Locate Where Vehicle Is Operated And Mileage  Odometer Based Subject to Fraud and Costly  Cell Towers is Another Possibility

Telematics Information Button GPS + Primary Cellular, Combination Antenna Protected Backup Antenna Telematics Control Unit Emergency Call Button Roadside Assistance Button

Other Experiments  Puget Sound  Minnesota pay as you drive  Iowa studies

Different Pricing Considerations For Light And Heavy Vehicles  The Primary Issue For Efficient Pricing For Light Vehicles Is Peak Congestion  The Primary Issue For Efficient Pricing For Heavy Vehicles Is Road Damage

German System  Charge per kilometer on major roads  GPS system with cellular communication for most  Allows for other users to pay per trip  Operating cost has been about 25% of revenue

Dutch Proposal  All Vehicles Pay Per Kilometer Based On Weight, Congestion, and Environmental Effect  Convert Fixed Cost Of Driving To Reflect Actual Usage Of The System And Cost Imposed  Manage Congestion, Road Damage, And Environmental Concerns

Cost Estimates From Four Sources  Large Reputable Companies Contracted To Estimate Cost For Comprehensive Pricing System  Cost Categories-Initial and Annual –On Board Unit –Administrative –Collection –Enforcement –Miscellaneous

Cost Estimates Cost Item VMT Fees Average Cost over providers Per Unit of Total Operating Cost $ per lane mile $ per lane mile $4,042 $4,042 $ per centerline mile $ per centerline mile $8,245 $8,245 $ per 1,000 VMT $ per 1,000 VMT $6.26 $6.26 $ per vehicle $ per vehicle $75.16 $75.16 $ per transaction $ per transaction $6.95 $6.95 % of total revenue % of total revenue6.6%