National Academies Press: OpenBook

Performance Measures for Freight Transportation (2011)

Chapter: Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice

« Previous: Appendix E - Modal Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Performance Measures for Freight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14520.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Performance Measures for Freight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14520.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Performance Measures for Freight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14520.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Performance Measures for Freight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14520.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Appendix F - Environmental Freight Performance Measures: State of Practice." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Performance Measures for Freight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14520.
×
Page 135

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

133 a p p e n D i X F Environmental Freight Performance Measures: state of Practice

134 Introduction The environmental impacts of freight performance can be captured in several ways. Air-quality emissions can be esti- mated for trucking, rail, air, and waterborne freight through several extrapolations and interpolations conducted by EPA. Hazardous material releases attributed to trucking and rail accidents or spills are tracked through FMCSA and FRA. The energy use by sector is captured by several agencies. From federal energy use data a “carbon footprint” can be calculated. Localized impacts, such as petrochemical runoff from depots or contaminated ballast releases from ships, are not subject to standardized national reporting and will not as easily lend themselves to calculating national performance measures until new reporting mechanisms are established. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measures Presently there are no national performance measures for freight-related greenhouse gas emissions (GHE). However, there are estimates that could be monitored as general mea- sures of the trends related to GHE generated by the freight sector. EPA generates these estimates by multiplying fuel-use data by the emission factors generated from several sources.1 These factors are developed by EPA and then used by the states and metropolitan planning organizations when they conduct “conformity” analyses. A conformity analysis is a modeled estimate of whether the emission burden gener- ated by transportation sources is within, or “conforms” to, the total allowable transportation emissions allowed for that region. The conformity models used by states and metropol- itan planning organizations (MPOs) were not developed to produce estimates of GHE emissions but were developed for estimating ozone-related emissions of volatile organic com- pounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NO x ). Because there are still no national standards for GHE, the models do not produce a conformity estimate for those emissions. How- ever, EPA has used components of the models to produce estimates of greenhouse emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). It uses dif- ferent methodology to estimate hydrofluorcarbons (HFC), which escape from air-conditioning and refrigeration units. Using slightly different methodology, it has produced com- parable estimates for rail, aviation, and water freight modes. These other modal estimates are produced by multiplying total fuel use attributable to that mode by estimated emis- sion factors. These estimates are available from EPA at an aggregated national level. It relies on FHWA and the U.S. Energy Infor- mation Administration (USEIA) for the fuel estimates. Those fuel estimates come from the refineries, not from the local retailers. This process greatly simplifies the estimates of fuel production for federal taxation purposes. However, it requires an estimation of how much fuel is attributable to each state for purposes of allocating federal fuel tax receipts. EPA does not produce local or regional GHE emissions data for freight transport. However, because fuel use is estimated by state, the same methodology EPA uses nationally could be estimated on a state basis. Also, because each metropolitan planning organization must produce conformity forecasts, it probably would be possible to estimate from their existing models some regional GHE forecast similar to that produced nationally by EPA. The models would not cover rural “attain- ment” areas, which are not required to conduct conformity analyses. As shown in Table F.1,2 the EPA report notes that the 77 percent increase in truck-related GHE resulted from a dou- bling of diesel fuel consumption by trucking during the time period. It reported diesel consumption by medium- to heavy- duty trucks increased from 18.5 billion gallons to 36.0 billion between 1990 and 2008. Gasoline usage for passenger pur- poses rose 21 percent during the same period. 3 2 emissions data for freight transport. However, because fuel use is estimated by state, the same methodology EPA uses nationally could be estimated on a state basis. Also, because each etropolitan planning organization must produce conformity forecasts, it probably would be possible to estimate from their existing models some regional GHE forecast similar to that produced nationally by EPA. The models would not cover rural “attainment” areas, which are not required to conduct conformity analyses. Source: Table-101 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Domestic Freight Transportation, pg. A-31 Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH4, N2O, and Indirect Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Combustion and Methodology for and Supplemental Information on Transportation- Related GHG Emissions Table F.1. Greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Domestic Freight Transportation (CO2 Megatons) Mode 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 % Change 1990–2006 Truck 228.6 272.5 344.3 343.6 357.9 354.4 367.4 395.2 404.6 77% Rail Freight 34.1 39.6 44.9 45.5 45.6 47.0 49.8 50.4 51.5 51% Ships, Boats 32.8 40.1 50.6 29.8 47.8 20.7 29.5 33.2 30.2 -8% As shown in Table F.1, the EPA report notes that the 77 percent increase in truck-related GHE resulted from a doubling of diesel fuel consumption by trucking during the time period. It reported diesel consumption by medium- to heavy-duty trucks increased from 18.5 billion gallons to 36 billion between 1990 and 2008. Gasoline usage for passenger purposes rose 21 percent during the same period. Transportation generates about 33 percent of all U.S. GHE.3 About 66 percent of the transport-related GHE comes from passenger travel, about 25.3 percent from freight, and remaining from off-road sources such as agriculture or mining.4 USEIA predicts a gradual continued rise in transportation-section energy use and a gradual rise in transport-related GHE.5 It predicts that annual tons of CO2 related to transportation will rise from 1,948 million tons in 2005 to 2,145 million tons in 2030, or an approximate 10 percent increase. The increase is about .4 percent a year compared to an expected energy-use increase of .7 percent. The lower rate of emission is attributed to improved emission-reduction technology. Again, these data can be used to produce GHE performance measures for the freight system at a gross, national level. Additional calculations could break out these estimates for state and regions. Other Transport Emissions Since approximately 1970, various amendments to the Clear Air Act have promulgated a series of emission-reduction strategies for the national vehicle fleet and its fuel. These strategies have been focused Comment [JP1]: Author: Please review this whole sequence of text, source, table. You’ll need to make an endnote out of the Source bit. It isn’t clear what that table appeared in or who published it, or how many docs are being cited. (2 kinds of Methodology, etc.). The note should indicate that all the foregoing text is based on this material. Also, in Table F.1, delete the callout . You need an n.2 but not inside the table. Does the whole Source para. go here? Source: EPA. table F.1. Greenhouse gas emissions.

135 Figure F.1. Emission trends. Source: EPA. table F.1. Greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation generates about 33 percent of all U.S. GHE.4 About 66 percent of the transport-related GHE comes from passenger travel, about 25.3 percent from freight, and the remaining from off-road sources such as agriculture or mining.5 USEIA predicts a gradual continued rise in transportation- section energy use and a gradual rise in transport-related GHE.6 It predicts that annual tons of CO 2 related to transpor- tation will rise from 1,948 million tons in 2005 to 2,145 mil- lion tons in 2030, or an approximate 10 percent increase. The increase is about .4 percent a year compared to an expected energy-use increase of .7 percent. The lower rate of emission is attributed to improved emission-reduction technology. Again, these data can be used to produce GHE perfor- mance measures for the freight system at a gross, national level. Additional calculations could break out these estimates for state and regions. Other Transport Emissions Since approximately 1970, various amendments to the Clear Air Act have promulgated a series of emission- reduction strategies for the national vehicle fleet and its fuel. These strategies have been focused upon six primary emissions, VOC, NO x , CO, lead, SO 2 , and particulates (PM). Lead was removed from fuel in the 1970s both because it was a public health hazard and because it interfered with the vehicular catalytic converters that were an important emission-control strategy. NO x and VOCs are the precursors of ground-level ozone, or smog, which has been the focus of significant emission-reduction efforts. Sulfur dioxide also is a pollutant that contributes to “acid rain” and to the for- mation of particulates. Particulates are controlled because of their ability to penetrate deep into the lungs and create nega- tive health effects. Carbon monoxide is a toxin particularly in high-congestion locations. The effects of the control strate- gies have been significant, with reductions of up to 80 percent in some of these transport-produced pollutants as shown in Figure F.1. These data provide a potential air-quality performance measure for these six pollutants. Performance measures using these data can be produced regionally as part of the confor- mity analyses or they can be aggregated nationally. In addi- tion, 20-year forecasts for these emissions are produced for each non-attainment area’s air-quality conformity analyses. Many air-quality measures can be calculated from basic fuel data as shown in Table F.2, below. The EPA Emission Factors web page7 notes that emission levels are generally cal- culated by a formula of : E = A × EF × (1-ER/100) Where: E = Emissions A = Activity Rate EF = Emission factor ER = Overall emission reduction efficiency, % Energy Use in Freight Transportation USEIA produces a forecast of energy use for the transpor- tation sector through 2030.8 This forecast serves, in effect, as a leading indicator of fuel usage that can be used to extrapolate a carbon footprint, emissions, and other related factors. The forecast for transportation addresses petroleum, natural gas, Transport Emissions 1970-2007 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1 9 7 0 1 9 8 0 1 9 9 0 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 8 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 6 P e rc e n t VOC NOX CO

136 and electricity usage for the transportation sector. Again, as with other measures, it does not specifically address freight but does so indirectly. The indirect forecast comes from fore- casts for diesel usage, which can be assumed to be used pri- marily for freight transport. USEIA predicts that transporta- tion sector energy consumption will increase at an average annual rate of 0.7 percent through 2030, which is significantly lower than the 1.4 percent historic average annual rate from 1980 to 2006. It attributes the lower rate of growth to vehicle fuel economy standards, slower economic growth, higher fuel prices, and lower demand. Although light-duty passenger cars and trucks remain the largest consumers of energy, the largest rate of growth is among heavy trucks. Heavy vehicles’ use of energy will grow from 18 percent of all transportation energy today to 20 per- cent of all transport energy in 2030, according to USEIA. Energy Price and Efficiency Measures Energy is a large percentage of freight movement costs and is intuitively a greater cost as prices increase. Fuel prices are particularly important to the trucking and aviation modes, although they are not insignificant to rail or water modes. either. For this reason, the trucking industry’s consumption of fuel is an important element at both the national level and within individual trucking operations. Two examples of such measures are the calculation of the quantity of diesel and gasoline consumed annually by the industry as a whole and the basic analysis of energy performance (e.g., measures such as miles per gallon [mpg]). In fact, some trucking firms are so cognizant of energy performance that drivers are rewarded with fuel bonuses for attaining specific mpg levels, and driv- ers are trained to shift gears in a more fuel-efficient manner. The ATA publication Trucking Trends offers basic indus- try statistics related to fuel consumption, such as billions of gallons of diesel and gasoline used per annum as well as comparisons of fuel consumption and vehicle miles trav- eled. Fuel efficiency is considered through freight perfor- mance measures on the national level as well.9 Estimates can be made of fuel consumption for several types of U.S. com- mercial truck operations through a national level analysis of factors such as: • The effect of cargo tons per truck on fuel consumption; • The effect of long-haul mileages driven by heavy trucks on fuel consumption. The results of this analysis over a 20-year time period show an improvement in efficiency measured in gallons-per-cargo of ton-miles traveled. Finally, industry-wide performance measures for emis- sions are calculated in Trucking Trends (thousands of short- tons) and address the following emissions types: • Sulfur dioxide • Nitrogen oxide • Volatile organic compounds • Particulate matter (PM-10) EPA produces fuel-use estimates for the major modes that are derived from FHWA, USEIA, and other sources (see Table F.2). Hazardous Materials Releases Local and state governments are required to have systems in place to respond to hazardous material incidents because such events often necessitate specialized equipment and greater expertise than standard highway incidents. Govern- ment regulations also aim to decrease the number and sever- ity of hazmat incidents on highways. Public-sector program goals therefore relate specifically to decreasing incidents and the effectiveness of incident preparedness and response; sev- eral measures of the performance of public-sector entities to meet these goals are listed in the literature. Regarding state-level activities, FMCSA10 identified several outcome-based performance measures through a survey of Source: EPA, Table A-72, in Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH 4 , N 2 O, and Indirect Greenhouse Gases, 2008. table F.2. petroleum use for freight.

137 state agencies that have authority over hazardous materials transport, including: • Measurement of Hazardous Materials Violations and En- forcement Actions; • Measurement of Severe Incident Trends; • Measurement of Hazardous Materials Carrier/Shipper Inspection Trends; • Total Number of Hazardous Materials Incidents; and • Budget/ Resources Record Trends. At the federal level, USDOT’s FY 2004 Performance Plan assesses hazardous materials transportation safety through one key measure: “the number of serious hazardous materials incidents in transportation.” 11 Additional measures are also employed by the fed- eral government for program assessment purposes; USDOT’s Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety— Emergency Preparedness Grants program, which aids local hazmat responders,12 is evaluated using the fol- lowing measures (in addition to the number of serious hazmat incidents): • Number of Hazmat Responders Trained; • Number of Emergency Plans Completed; • Number of Local Emergency Planning Committees Sup- ported; and • Number of Training Exercises Conducted. Finally, in response to federal regulations requiring hazmat security, FMCSA13 produced guidelines for the develop- ment of comprehensive security plans for hazmat trucking operations. Within these guidelines, it is suggested that per- formance measures are put in place to assess hazmat car- rier vulnerability levels as security plans are established and improved. Examples of such measures that are offered in the guidelines include changes in theft and property dam- age rates. Likewise, trucking companies that haul hazardous materials have internal performance measures that rate the outcomes of safety-related plans and procedures. Source: EPA, Table A-72, in Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH 4 , N 2 O, and Indirect Greenhouse Gases, 2008. table F.2. petroleum use for freight. Endnotes 1 EPA. Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH 4 , N 2 O, and Indirect Green- house Gases from Mobile Combustion and Methodology for and Supplemental Information on Transportation-Related GHG Emissions, 2008. 2 EPA. Methodology for Estimating Emissions and Methodology for and Supple- mental Information on Transportation-Related GHG Emissions, 2008. 3 EPA, Table-101 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Domestic Freight Trans- portation, Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH 4 , N 2 O, and Indirect Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Combustion and Methodology for and Supple- mental Information on Transportation-Related GHG Emissions, p. A-31. 4 AASHTO. A Primer on Transportation and Climate Change, 2008, p. 4. 5 EPA. Table A-72 in Methodology for Estimating Emissions of CH 4 , N 2 O, and Indirect Greenhouse Gases, 2008. 6 USEIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2008 with Projections to 2030: Growth in Transportation Energy Use Is Expected to Slow, 2008. 7 EPA, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html (accessed May 25, 2010). 8 USEIA. Growth in Transportation Energy Use Is Expected to Slow, 2008. 9 Bertram, Kenneth M., D. Santini, J. Anderson, and A. Vyas. Trends in the Size Distribution, Highway Use, and Consumption of Gasoline and Diesel Fuels of the U.S. Commercial Truck Fleet, 1977–2002, presented at the Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., 2008. 10 FMCSA. Guide to Developing an Effective Security Plan for the Highway Transportation of Security Materials, prepared by Battelle and TotalSecurity. US, Washington, D.C., 2003. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/ hazmat/security-plan-guide.htm (accessed Feb. 18, 2011). 11 USDOT. Hazardous Materials Safety, 2003. http://www.dot.gov/ PerfPlan2004/ safety_hazmat.html (accessed Feb. 18, 2011). 12 Office of Management and Budget. Detailed Information on the Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety—Emergency Preparedness Grants Assessment, 2008. http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/PHMSA/DownloadableFiles/ Files/HMEP_final_report_10_11_05.pdf (accessed Feb. 18, 2011). 13 FMCSA, Hazardous Materials Division. Hazardous Material Compliance Effectiveness Study, prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute in collabora- tion with the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, Washington, D.C., 2003. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/hazmat/hazmat-es-finaldoc.htm (accessed Feb. 18, 2011).

Next: Appendix G - Stakeholder Perspectives »
Performance Measures for Freight Transportation Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Report 10: Performance Measures for Freight Transportation explores a set of measures to gauge the performance of the freight transportation system.

The measures are presented in the form of a freight system report card, which reports information in three formats, each increasingly detailed, to serve the needs of a wide variety of users from decision makers at all levels to anyone interested in assessing the performance of the nation’s freight transportation system.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!