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.
T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP SYNTHESIS 130 Subject AreAS Energyâ â¢â PublicâTransportationâ â¢â VehiclesâandâEquipment Battery Electric Busesâ State of the Practice A Synthesis of Transit Practice conSultAntS JasonâHanlin DarbyâReddaway and JuliaâLane CenterâforâTransportationâandâtheâEnvironment Atlanta,âGA ResearchâSponsoredâbyâtheâFederalâTransitâAdministrationâinâCooperationâwithâ theâTransitâDevelopmentâCorporation 2018
TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nationâs growth and the need to meet mobility, environmen- tal, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating problems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213âResearch for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administrationânow the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit service providers. The scope of TCRP includes various transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Pro- posed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was autho- rized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organizations: FTA; the National Academies of Sci- ences, Engineering, and Medicine, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization estab- lished by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the respon- sibility of the TOPS Committee to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Committee defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for propos- als), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired effect if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on dissemi- nating TCRP results to the intended users of the research: transit agencies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other support- ing material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. TCRP SYNTHESIS 130 Project J-7, Topic SA-41 ISSN 1073-4880 ISBN 978-0-309-39017-0 Â© 2018 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessari- ly those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special thanks are extended to all of the participating transit agencies that shared their experiences for this synthesis report. Thanks are also extended to all of the pioneering agencies and sponsoring organiza- tions that took the risk to pave the way for future generations of battery electric bus fleets. C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR TCRP SYNTHESIS 130 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Gwen Chisholm Smith, Manager, Transit Cooperative Research Program Mariela Garcia-Colberg, Senior Program Officer Demisha Williams, Program Associate Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Linda A. Dziobek, Senior Editor TCRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT J-7 CHAIR Brad J. Miller, Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, St. Petersburg, FL MEMBERS Donna DeMartino, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Stockton, CA Michael Ford, The Regional Transit Authority of Southeast Michigan, Detroit, MI Bobby J. Griffin, Griffin and Associates, Flower Mound, TX Ronald Kilcoyne, North County Transit District, Oceanside, CA Jeanne Krieg, Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority, Antioch, CA Paul J. Larrousse, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick David A. Lee, Connecticut Transit, Hartford Elizabeth Presutti, Des Moines Area Regional Transit AuthorityâDART, IA Robert H. Prince, Jr., AECOM Consulting Transportation Group, Inc., Boston, MA Jarrett W. Stoltzfus, Foothill Transit, West Covina, CA Faith Hall, FTA Liaison TOPIC PANEL SA-41 Sandip Chakrabarti, University of New Orleans, LA Roland Cordero, Foothill Transit, West Covina, CA Donna DeMartino, San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Stockton, CA Ed Halbig, City of Seneca, SC Danny Ilioiu, New York City Transit, NY Marc Manning, Chicago Transit Authority, IL Peter C. Martin, CDM Smith, Boston, MA Tina Wu, Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County, NV Sean Ricketson, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC Jeff Hiott, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC Stephen J. Andrle, Transportation Research Board Liaison
FOREWORD The synthesis prepared by Jason Hanlin and his team documents current practices of tran- sit systems in the planning, procurement, infrastructure installation, operation, and mainte- nance of battery electric buses (BEBs). The study strives to provide unbiased information from the perspective of the transit systems on the deployment of BEBs. The synthesis is intended for transit agencies that are interested in understanding the potential benefits and challenges associated with the introduction and operation of battery electric buses. The synthesis will also be valuable to manufacturers trying to better meet the needs of their customers and to federal, state, and local funding agencies and policy makers. A literature review and detailed survey responses from 18 transit agencies that submitted information are provided. Detailed case examples of five different systems are also included in the report and provide additional insights into the state of the practice, including lessons learned, challenges, and gaps in information. Transit administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat- ing the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the transit industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire transit community, the Transit Cooperative Research Program Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, TCRP Project J-7, âSynthesis of Information Related to Transit Problems,â searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute a TCRP report series, Synthesis of Transit Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. PREFACE By Mariela Garcia-Colberg Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Introduction 4 Project Background and Objectives 12 Technical Approach 13 Content Organization 14 Chapter 2 Literature Review 15 International Activity 15 Trolley Buses 16 Planning Considerations 29 Service, Maintenance, and Operations Considerations 32 Costs and Benefits 37 Summary 40 Chapter 3 Survey Results and Agency Characteristics 40 Full Fleet Characteristics 40 BEB Fleet Characteristics 43 Charging Characteristics 46 Chapter 4 Survey Results and Planning 46 Procurement and Deployment 54 Chapter 5 Survey Results and Post-Deployment Experience 54 Training 54 Operations 55 Availability and Reliability 56 Service and Maintenance 57 Costs 58 Social, Environmental, and Health Benefits 59 Resiliency and Emergencies 60 Stakeholder Involvement 60 Overall Satisfaction with BEBs 61 Chapter 6 Case Examples 61 Antelope Valley Transit Authority 64 King County Metro 68 City of Seneca 72 Foothill Transit 77 IndyGo 80 Case Example Summary C O N T E N T S
81 Chapter 7 Conclusions 85 Chapter 8 Future Needs 86 Bibliography 89 Appendix A Survey Questionnaire 125 Appendix B Survey Results