1 Methodology for Estimating Green House Gas Emissions and Assessing Mitigation Options for Project Level Applications for O-Road Mobile Sources Graciela Lubertino, Ph.D. H-GAC Joe Zietsman, TTI Tara Ramani, TTI

Trends in Texas GHG Emissions Texas (if it were a country) would rank seventh in the world for its GHG emissions Transportation is 30% of total CO 2 VMT increased 10% per year from 1990 to 2000 VMT increased 10% from 2002 to 2007 for the Houston region Population growth at about double the rate of the country 2

Policy Issues The 2009 EPA endangerment finding – is the most powerful federal policy to date State level programs in Texas:  TERP  LIRAP  HB 1795 – requires TCEQ to develop an inventory of voluntary actions to reduce CO2 emissions 3

Policy Issues Texas municipal-level actions:  City of Houston and City of Austin working on a comprehensive climate action plan  But most municipalities still waiting for state and federal policy makers. 4

Methodology for Project Level Analysis An analytical tool in the form of a spreadsheet-based calculator Combines the emission estimations of each project with the emission reductions from mitigation strategies Based on user input data 5

Methodology for Project Level Analysis Calculate on-road mobile source GHG emissions for baseline year – Build vs. No-Build at completion year for the project. Calculate on-road mobile source GHG emissions for future years. List of GHGs control strategies. Quantifications of CO 2 emission reductions associated with the selected mitigation options. Calculations will involve the use of EPA’s MOVES model for CO 2 emissions factors and activity data from the travel demand model. 6

Projects to Analyze from the Regional Plan Roadway Traffic Flow Improvements Transit Pedestrian/Bicycle 7

Selection Criteria for Control Strategies Cost effectiveness Potential emission reductions Applicability 8

Control Strategies HOV lanes  TTI and Caltrans studies showed lowest levels of gasoline consumption against the no-build and build- general purpose. Transit  Ex: expansion transit infrastructure, ridership increased – 10,181 MMtCO 2 (by 2012 Miami-FL) 9

Control Strategies Mixed Land Use Development or “Livable Centers”  Encourage jobs/housing/commercial proximity and developments along transit corridors – 18 MMtCO 2 by 2020, California Electrification of Vehicle Fleet  PZEV emit half the amount of CO 2 10

Control Strategies Carbon Sequestration  Trees are a good sink of CO 2  Upto 6 MtCO2e reduction per tree for a 40 year life span  Need to be taken into account how to manage them 11

Control Strategies Eco-Driving and Anti-Idling Policies  Outreach program endorsed by 20 states – info about vehicle maintenance and driving habits – 2.2 MMtCO 2 by 2025, Michigan  Reduce idling time for heavy duty diesel trucks – 1.4 MMtCO 2 e by 2020,California 12

Questions??? 13