Clean Vehicles, Fuels, and Practices for Airport Private Ground Transportation Providers (2018)

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.

1 The implementation of alternative fuel (AF) technologies, use of low- and zero-emission vehicles, and increase in energy-efficient vehicles provide opportunities for airports to reduce petroleum use, lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and enhance energy security. In addition to using alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) and emission reduction strategies in their own vehicles, airports can use formal or informal policies and programs to encourage private ground transportation (GT) providers to employ clean vehicle technologies while operating at the airport. The current study summarizes the experiences of public-use airports with developing and implementing clean vehicle policies involving private GT operators serving the airports. The main objective of this synthesis is to identify effective approaches and review best practices employed by the airports to encourage different types of private GT providers to run more environmentally friendly operations. Eleven commercial service airports and 13 private GT operators were interviewed regard- ing their experiences with airport clean vehicle programs and other sustainability practices. The study targeted seven types of airport GT fleets (taxicabs, limousines, shared van rides, hotel/parking shuttles, rental car shuttles, scheduled airport service, and transportation network companies) to provide data diversity and examine the differences between how clean vehicle policies applied to different types of service providers. The key findings obtained from the airports and airport GT providers include the following. Airports • All surveyed airports encourage one or more sustainability practices, including the use of AFVs (encouraged by nine of the 11 surveyed airports), restrictions for vehicle idling (five surveyed airports), use of fuel-efficient and low-emission vehicles (three surveyed airports), and strategies to reduce “empty rides” (three surveyed airports). • Compressed natural gas (CNG), propane, and electric vehicles (EVs) appear to be the surveyed airports’ preferred AF technologies. • Six of the 11 airports have a formal clean vehicle policy that applies to private GT providers. Additionally, two airports reported having informal clean vehicle policies. • Common types of clean vehicle policies include explicit requirement for AFV use (used by three surveyed airports), fuel emission standards (one airport), minimum vehicle fuel economy requirement (one airport), incentive for using AFVs in the form of lower airport fees (one airport), penalty for not using AFVs in the form of higher airport S u m m a r y Clean Vehicles, Fuels, and Practices for Airport Private Ground Transportation Providers

2 Clean Vehicles, Fuels, and Practices for airport Private Ground Transportation Providers fees (two airports), and requirements for GT operators to reduce empty rides (three surveyed airports). • Airports often use more than one type of policy and/or apply different types of policies to different types of GT operators. Taxicabs and shared van rides are more likely to be subject to clean vehicle requirements, whereas limousines and transportation network companies (TNCs) are less likely to be managed by the airports. • Common incentives offered by airports to GT operators for complying with clean vehicle requirements include lower airport fees for AFVs (three surveyed airports), premium parking for AFVs (two airports), priority pickup of passengers for AFVs (one airport), and higher airport fees for non-AFVs (two airports). • Airports make use of the following grants to fund AFV projects: Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants, Voluntary Airport Low Emission Program (VALE), Diesel Emis- sions Reduction Act (DERA) grants, state grants funded by state-imposed taxes, and other grants. Some of these grants are not available to private GT operators to convert fleets to clean vehicles. Private Ground Transportation Fleets • GT operators commonly provide the following recommendations to airports for designing effective clean vehicle policies: – Ensure fleets’ access to fuel by providing fueling infrastructure at the airport; – Involve GT providers in the development of clean vehicle policies; – Treat all operators equally/fairly; – Offer longer and/or exclusive contracts with operators that implement use of AFVs to allow adequate time for them to recoup the investment; and – Model clean vehicle policy after an existing airport program to ensure clarity and structure. • Practically all surveyed operators were directly or indirectly affected by TNC operations at the airports. • Surveyed GT operators typically suggest that airports should treat all operators equally (impose same requirements/fees and provide same access to the airport) and that airports should not impose any more requirements on a taxicab industry that is already struggling because of competition with TNCs. Because the analysis was based on a small data sample, the observations and conclusions presented in the current report do not have statistical significance but are anecdotal in nature, capturing the essence of the industry. Because of these limitations and caveats, the results of the analysis should be interpreted with caution.