www.nhvweb.net/NHHS/MediaCenter/Driver Ed Project.doc

4507 users shared this document! click

March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure051 EPA_SW_swtires_031306.doc 1 Control Measure: EPA SmartWay Single-Wide Tires and Aerodynamics, Measure 51
Category: On-road
Author: John Grant, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

This measure would encourage or require the purchase of single-wide tires and aerodynamic
options for new trucks that operate within the HGB area, a Clean Freight Strategies of the EPA
SmartWay Transport Partnership 1,2 .

Implementation Feasibility

The purchase of single-wide tires on a new truck could save $1,000 per truck initially 1 . Difference in operations due to the usage of single-wide tires could make changes in
maintenance necessary, forcing fleets to alter retread methods and monitor tire air pressure more
closely. In addition, shift in wheel bearing load position could stress and prematurely shorten the
life of certain wheel ends, leading to increased maintenance costs. Wide based tires are not
currently stocked widely in repair facilities, so additional waiting time could be incurred during
tire repair.

Aerodynamic options can be included on new trucks at additional costs. It is expected that initial
costs can be partially/fully recovered as a result of decreased fuel consumption. Aerodynamic
options including skirt and gap farings and boat tails were evaluated as part of this measure.
Skirt farings are attached to the trailer, while gap farings are installed between the trailer and
tractor to decrease wind resistance. Boat tails are installed on the back of the trailer to reduce
turbulence.


Public Acceptance

This measure would require changes in heavy-duty truck maintenance. It would not be feasible
to implement this measure on all trucks that travel through the HGB, however, it could be
implemented for trucks based within the HGB.


ANALYSIS

This measure was analyzed by comparing the expected fleet turnover with the exclusive use of
single-wide tires and aerodynamic options on 50% of all new Class 8b heavy-duty trucks within
the HGB.

Though more testing is needed, initial results (EPA, 2005) suggest that NOx reduction could be
achieved through the implementation of single-wide based tires and aerodynamic operations
compared to truck operations without these technologies. Emission reductions for a truck 1 http://www.epa.gov/smartway/documents/supersingles.pdf 2 http://www.epa.gov/smartway/documents/aerodynamics.pdf March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure051 EPA_SW_swtires_031306.doc 2 outfitted with single-wide based tires and aerodynamic options for a suburban test cycle and 65
mph highway test cycle indicated a NOx emission reduction of 45% and about 25%,
respectively. It was suggested that these are preliminary results and that the NOx emission
reduction may have been artifact as a result of the engines used in the testing of this technology.

The measure was assumed to apply to Class 8b heavy-duty trucks that are locally based. Locally
based trucks were assumed to account for 50% of all new Class 8 heavy-duty trucks in the HGB.


Emissions Affected

The emissions affected include, Class 8b heavy-duty diesel trucks (53 tpd) (TTI, 2005).


Emissions Benefit

Estimated potential emission reductions from this measure are projected at 0.45 tpd NO x based on Mobile6 analysis of emissions from Class 8b heavy-duty diesel trucks and EPA 2005
projected emission reductions as the result of single-wide tire use. Some of the emissions benefit
is artifact as it is expected that some truck fleets already use single-wide tires and/or
aerodynamic options.


Cost and Cost-effectiveness

Skirt and gap farings can be added to a heavy-duty truck at a cost of $2400 3 . Boat tail cost was estimated at $2000 based on engineering judgment for an estimated total initial cost of $4400.

Total cost for single-wide tires is not expected to include any overhead costs as single-wide-
based tires are generally less expensive to include on new trucks compared to regular dual tires 1 . Additionally, significant increases in truck and road maintenance are not expected as a result of
the use of single-wide-based tires.

Based on a annual mileage accumulation of 50,000 miles for Class 8b heavy-duty trucks, and
HGB Class 8b heavy-duty truck VMT, it was found that at a 50% penetration, this measure
would affect 4,351 Class 8 HDTs. Assuming a life of 8 years and a prime rate of 3% for
aerodynamic options, the annualized capital cost was estimated at $627 per vehicle. Based on
cost and emission reduction estimates, the cost effectiveness of this measure is estimated at
$17,000 per ton.

3 http://www.epa.gov/smartway/calculator/loancalc.htm March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure051 EPA_SW_swtires_031306.doc 3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure # Name Description Affected
Sources Affected Emissions (tpd) % tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 51 EPA SmartWay Single-Wide Tires and Aerodynamics Add single- wide based tires and aerodynamics to 50% of Class 8b HDT On-road Class 8b Heavy- Duty Diesel 53.2 0.1% 0.4 $17,000

REFERENCES

EPA (2005), Effect of Single-Wide Tires and Trailer Aerodynamics on Fuel Economy and NOx
Emissions of Class 8 Line-Haul Tractors-Trailers, United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 2005.

EPA (2004), "A Glance at Clean Freight Strategies: Wide-based Tires, EPA 420-F-04-004,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, February 2004.
TTI (2005), 2002, 2009, and 2012 Emissions Inventories for the Houston/Galveston Eight-Hour
Nonattainment Counties, Texas Transportation Institute, August 2005. April 24, 2006 DRAFT


H:\HGAC SIP\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure054 59 Clean Vehicle Procurement 03_10_06 revised 04_24_06.doc 1 Control Measure: Retrofit/Replacement of On-road Heavy-duty Vehicles, Measures 54 and 59
Category: On-road
Author: Chris Lindhjem, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

This measure seeks to reduce on-road vehicle emissions by rapid turnover to newer lower
emitting engines, retrofit of existing engines with approved devices, or new lower emission
technologies. These programs have been mandated or voluntarily implemented with incentive
funding from State (e.g. TERP) or Federal (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality, CMAQ).


Implementation Feasibility

Programs of this type have been successfully established in Houston, Los Angeles, and
Sacramento. The program implementation relies on a partnership between the transportation
planning organization, H-GAC, and TxDOT and FHWA to properly distribute CMAQ dollars.
H-GAC has dedicated staff time to administer the program addressing funding, prepare contracts,
conduct verification, reporting, and other functions with this program.


Public Acceptance

The program has been successful in Houston and has gained participation with each funding
cycle. The similar TERP program has also demonstrated high participation and has lowered the
cost per emission reduction during the 2005 fiscal year from previous years.


ANALYSIS

The analysis of the cost and effectiveness of these programs relies primarily on the TERP and
Houston area programs. Other programs such as the California Carl Moyer program demonstrate
similar costs and effectiveness, but rely on evaluations specific to California. The Houston area
H-GAC Clean Cities/Clean Vehicles program conducted a review of cost and effectiveness of
their CMAQ program and determined that the most cost effective use of these funds for emission
reductions would be to target heavy-duty vehicles. Other competing uses of CMAQ dollars, such
as vanpool and other commute reduction programs were not excluded, but more emphasis was
directed toward heavy-duty vehicles for this reason.

Through 2005, the H-GAC Clean Cities/Clean Vehicles program had committed funding to
nearly 100 projects, most of which involved many vehicles in a fleet under a single project. The
projects include alternative fueled vehicles, hybrid-electric drive trains, and clean diesel engines.
These projects produced NOx, PM, and some VOC emission reductions. Projects funded in the
Houston area through 2005 represent approximately 900 tons per year NOx emission reduction
with total CMAQ funding of $50,000,000 (equivalent to about $56,000/ton). Annual NOx
emission reductions reported for the HGB and DFW areas combined by the TERP program were
reported to be 2,021 tons per year with a total funding level of $60,000,000 (equivalent to April 24, 2006 DRAFT


H:\HGAC SIP\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure054 59 Clean Vehicle Procurement 03_10_06 revised 04_24_06.doc 2 $30,000/ton). Thus, the TERP program has begun to produce emission reductions with lower
cost effectiveness.
Emissions Affected

This measure would affect about 90 tpd 2009 on-road heavy-duty emissions in the eight-county
HGB ozone nonattainment area. This measure includes heavy-duty diesel, heavy-duty gasoline,
and buses.


Emissions Benefit

Benefits from the Clean Cities/Clean Vehicles program primarily impact non-holiday weekday
travel, as there is considerably less heavy-duty vehicle activity on weekends and holidays. An
approximate value of 290 - 295 average weekdays of emissions per year has been used by TCEQ
for modeling purposes. Based on an average cost effectiveness of $30,000 - $56,000 per ton per
year, the cost of a 1 ton per day reduction would be approximately $9,000,000 - $16,000,000.
Based on a $20,000,000 annual program budget over four years (2006 2009), a NOx emissions
reduction benefit in excess of 5 tons per day and up to 9 tons per day would be achieved in
addition to that achieved to date. The lower bound is the progress to date of this program,
though some projects in place will have expired by 2009.

However, TCEQ already credits 3 tpd of emission reductions from this measure in its baseline
emission inventory. Therefore the emissions reductions from this program were reduced by 3 tpd
to account for that current expectation.

Cost and Cost-effectiveness

$20,000,000 a year for 2006-2009 based on discussion above and therefore $80,000,000 would
need to be committed over the next 4 years. Amortizing the 1-year cost effectiveness ($30,000 -
$56,000 initial cost per ton per year) over the life of the project leads to a TERP comparable cost
effectiveness of no more than $10,000 per ton per year.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure # Name Description Affected Sources Affected Emissions (tpd) % Tpd Est. Cost Effective- ness ($/ton) 54, 59 Clean Fleet Vehicle Procurement Policy/Clean Fleet Program Maintain a fleet program that addresses clean vehicle acquisitions of public and private fleets. On-road Heavy- duty Vehicles 90 0 10% 0 9 $5,000 - $10,000 April 24, 2006 DRAFT


H:\HGAC SIP\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure054 59 Clean Vehicle Procurement 03_10_06 revised 04_24_06.doc 3 REFERENCES

H-GAC, Clean Cities and Clean Vehicles, http://www.houston-cleancities.org/

Sacramento COG, SECAT program, http://www.4secat.com/
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure071 ZEVs_030306.doc 1 Control Measure: Electric Vehicles, Measure 71
Category: On-road
Author: John Grant, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

The electric vehicle control measure consists of the voluntary inclusion of a greater percentage of
zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) into the HGB fleet. This measure evaluates the scenario in which
10% of all new LDGVs from 2007-2009 are fuel cell or other ZEVs.


Implementation Feasibility

There are two main ZEV types in development: electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles
(FCVs). Electric vehicles have been developed, but are generally only applicable for limited
range applications. Fuel cell vehicles are currently a developing technology considered to be a
possible alternative to gasoline/diesel vehicles in the future. The U.S. Department of Energy,
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Hydrogen, Fuel Cells & Infrastructure Technologies
Program has specific goals for fuel cell vehicle technology development including validating a
FCV with a range of 250+ miles at a cost of $3.00 / gge (gasoline gallon equivalent) by 2009.
FCVs require a various alternative fuel stock and a fuel delivery system to supply the fuel stock.
Demonstration projects have established the functionality of FCVs, however, high production
costs and lack of infrastructure for fuel delivery have precluded these vehicles from becoming
more widely used.


Public Acceptance

This measure would represent a significant change in the 2007 to 2009 model year LDGV fleet
makeup compared to expected makeup. Technology needed to adopt this measure may not be
cost-effective and could potentially be burdensome to vehicle manufacturers and consumers.
The program could target specific niches to partially or fully achieve the goal and achieve
favorable acceptance. Options include targeting public or private sector fleets, or enacting
within city demonstration programs for the implementation of ZEV technology and the
placement of needed infrastructure.


ANALYSIS

This measure was analyzed by comparing the expected fleet turnover with the same turnover,
assuming 10% of 2007 to 2009 MY LDGVs as fuel cell ZEVs. ZEVs were assumed to produce
no emissions, i.e. emissions associated with fuel (hydrogen) and electricity production were not
included in this analysis.

A standard MOBILE6 run for Harris County shows that, 2007 to 2009 MY LDGVs comprise
4.9% and 3.2% of all LDGV VOC and NOx emissions, respectively. Based on the onroad
emission inventory for 8 counties in the HGB nonattainment area (TTI, 2005) that indicated that
LDGVs were responsible for 48.2 tpd VOC and 42.2 tpd NOx emissions, the estimated March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure071 ZEVs_030306.doc 2 contribution of emissions from 2007 to 2009 MY vehicles is 1.34 tpd NOx and 2.38 tpd VOC.
Assuming that ZEVs comprise 10% of the LDGV fleet for 2007 to 2009 MY vehicles, the
emissions reduction from this measure is estimated at 0.24 tpd VOC and 0.13 tpd NOx.


Emissions Affected

The emissions affected include onroad LDGV emissions (48.2 tpd VOC and 42.2 tpd NOx)
(TTI, 2005).


Emissions Benefit

Estimated emission reductions from this measure are 0.24 VOC and 0.13 tpd NO x .

Cost and Cost-effectiveness

Based on the 2009 onroad HGB emissions inventory, the total number of vehicles that would be
replaced with ZEVs is 69,000 assuming a fleet penetration of 10% and an average annual LDGV
mileage accumulation of 10,482 miles per year. The average added cost of a fuel cell vehicle
was optimistically estimated at $10,000 per vehicle (CEC, 2001) (methanol fuel cell vehicle).
Based on this average added cost, and the total number of vehicles to be replaced, an average
annual cost of $98.0 million was estimated for vehicle costs.

The cost of methanol fueling stations was estimated at $60,000 per station (cost to convert
gasoline station to 100% methanol station) (CEC, 2001). Assuming that 10 stations would be
needed for refueling, an average annual cost of $85,000 was estimated.

Based on the annual cost of fuel cell ZEVs and fuel stations, the total annual cost of $98.1
million is estimated for this measure. The cost effectiveness is estimated at $1.1 million per ton
VOC and $2.0 million per ton NOx.


SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure # Name Description Affected Sources Affected Emissions (tpd) % tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 71 Electric Vehicles 10% of 2007-2009 fleet as ZEV Onroad - LDGV 48.2 VOC, 42.2 NOx 0.4% VOC, 0.3% NOx 0.24 VOC, 0.13 NOx, $1.1 million VOC, $2.0 million NOx
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure071 ZEVs_030306.doc 3 REFERENCES

CEC (2001), Projected Automotive Fuel Cell Use in California, California Energy
Commission.P600-01-022F, October 2001.
TTI (2005), 2002, 2009, and 2012 Emissions Inventories for the Houston/Galveston Eight-Hour
Nonattainment Counties, Texas Transportation Institute, August 2005. March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure115 cleaner_diesel_030906.doc 1 Control Measure: Cleaner Diesel Fuel, Measure # 115
Category: On-road
Author: John Grant, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

The cleaner diesel control measure would consist of a change in diesel fuel from Texas Low
Emission Diesel fuel (TxLED) to either cetane additive enhanced (CAE) or Fischer-Tropsch
(FT) diesel fuel. It is anticipated that, due to the nature of CAE and FT diesel technology, this
program may not be a mandatory change to CAE or FT diesel, but may more likely be for a
localized or demonstration project on specific Class 8b Heavy Duty Truck (HDT) fleets.

TxLED fuel contains less than 10 percent by volume of aromatic hydrocarbons and has a cetane
number of 48 or greater. CAE diesel would consist of diesel to which additives were
supplemented, producing a cetane number increase of 5 points with no changes in other
parameters from TxLED fuel. FT diesel fuel would consist of typical FT fuel with a cetane
number of 74 and an aromatic content of 0.1 percent (Clark et. al., 1999).


Implementation Feasibility

Large-scale production of Fischer-Tropsch fuels are currently being researched by several oil
companies (EPA, 2002), however, production is currently scarce and costly. Cetane additives are available for implementation; however, distribution issues would make it difficult to make the
use of cetane enhancers mandatory over the entire HGB. Therefore, this measure was evaluated
as a targeted measure, consisting of replacing TxLED fuel in 10% of the heavy-duty truck fleet
with either FT or CAE fuel.


Public Acceptance

This measure would require changes in diesel production associated with each technology.
Increased costs associated with this production could potentially be burdensome for diesel
manufactures that would need to change their operations to conform to new standards, as well as
for diesel consumers due to increased diesel costs. It is expected that grant funding could ease
this burden.


ANALYSIS

This measure was analyzed by comparing the emissions associated with current TxLED fuel for
heavy-duty vehicles (including buses) with FT and CAE diesel fuel. Emission reductions of
12% (Clark et. al. 1999) and 1.3% (EPA, 2003) were estimated for FT, and CAE fuel,
respectively. Based on the onroad emission inventory for 8 counties in the HGB nonattainment
area (TTI, 2005) that indicated that heavy-duty diesel vehicle (Class 8b only) emissions were
responsible for 53.2 tpd of NOx emissions, a reduction of 0.64 tpd and 0.07 tpd is estimated for
the implementation of FT and CAE fuel in 10% of the heavy-duty fleet, respectively.
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure115 cleaner_diesel_030906.doc 2 Emissions Affected

The emissions affected could include all diesel engines (87 tpd, prior to adjustments for ambient
conditions and other emission reduction measures) or to the entire or portions (estimated here at
10%) of fleets of larger Class 8b heavy-duty trucks (53.2 tpd) (TTI, 2005).


Emissions Benefit

Estimated emission reductions from this measure are 0.07 - 0.64 tpd NO x for the fleets representing 10% of Class 8b, or 1.1 10 tpd if applied across all diesel operating in the area.


Cost and Cost-effectiveness

Estimates from vendors indicate that cetane increases of 5 points would cost approximately
$0.08 per gallon.

The cost of Fischer-Tropsch fuels ranges from $0.10 (cost to produce) up to $0.25 per gallon (to
deliver under current market conditions) more than California Diesel (CEC, 2003) 1 . The cost of these fuels however has been decreasing due to advance in the technology and economies of
scale if demand increases as it is beginning to in California where it is increasingly sold as a neat
fuel or a blend stock to produce California reformulated diesel fuel.

Based on VMT traveled per day by Class 8b HDT (from onroad emission inventory for 8
counties in the HGB nonattainment area), an estimate of total diesel fuel cost was made,
assuming a diesel cost of $2.13/gallon and a fleet average of 5.35 miles/gallon ($2.1
million/day). This fuel cost was compared to the fuel cost for scenarios in which CAE or FT fuel
was used in 10% of all vehicle miles traveled, which produced added costs of $8,000/day and
$25,000/day respectively. The cost effectiveness was then estimated as the ratio of added fuel
cost to emission reductions, $118,000/ton and $39,000/ton for CAE and FT fuel respectively.


SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure # Name Description Affected Sources Affected Emissions (tpd) % Tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 115 Cleaner Diesel Fuel Cetane Additive Enhanced or Fischer Tropsch Diesel Fuel Onroad Class 8B HDT 5.32
87.4 1.3% - 12% 0.07- 0.64 1.1 10 $39,000 -
$118,000 March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure115 cleaner_diesel_030906.doc 3 REFERENCES

CEC (2003), Reducing Californias Petroleum Dependence, A Joint Report of the California
Energy Commission and California Air Resources Control Board, P600-03-005F, August 2003.

Clark, et. al. (1999), Clark, Nigel, Mridul Gautam, Donald Lydons, Chris Atkinson, Wenwei
Xie, 1999, On-Road Use of Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Blends, SAE Technical Paper Series,
1999-01-2251, Washington D.C., April 1999.

EPA. 2002, Fact sheet: Clean Alternative Fuels: Fischer-Tropsch, EPA420-F-00-036, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/fuels/altfuels/420f00036.pdf
EPA (2003), The Effect of Cetane Number Increase Due to Additives on NOx Emissions from
Heavy-Duty Highway Engines, Final Technical Report, EPA420-R-03-002, February 2003.
TTI (2005), 2002, 2009, and 2012 Emissions Inventories for the Houston/Galveston Eight-Hour
Nonattainment Counties, Texas Transportation Institute, August 2005. March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure144 Divert Trucks 03_08_06.doc 1 Control Measure: Divert or Route Trucks Around Nonattainment Area, Measure 144
Category: On-road
Author: Chris Lindhjem, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

This strategy would attempt to reroute through truck traffic without business around the local
roadways in the HGB area.


Implementation Feasibility

The implementation of this measure could be very difficult. Incentives to use likely longer routes
would need to be identified or other means such as pricing measures.


Public Acceptance

The local traffic situation would improve as a result of less traffic though through trucks
represent a small fraction of the overall vehicular traffic in the area.


ANALYSIS

The analysis of this measure used a gross estimate that 8.99% of trips in the HGB area originate
and end outside of the area. This figure includes both light and heavy-duty vehicles and was
applied equally between the two general types.


Emissions Affected

This measure would affect under 90 tpd 2009 on-road heavy-duty emissions in the eight-county
HGB ozone nonattainment area. This measure includes heavy-duty diesel freight vehicles and
may only affect the larger Class 8 heavy-duty trucks, which are responsible for about 60 tpd of
the <90 tpd heavy-duty vehicle total.


Emissions Benefit The emission benefit was estimated by using a penetration rate (fraction of vehicle rerouted) of
10 50% of the through vehicles. Because the implementation of this strategy is undefined, it
was difficult to determine how and therefore how much of the through traffic would be diverted.
Cost and Cost-effectiveness

The cost for encouraging rerouting is unknown.
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure144 Divert Trucks 03_08_06.doc 2
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure # Name Description Affected Sources Affected Emissions (tpd) % Tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 144 Divert Through Truck Traffic Around non- attainment area On-road Heavy- duty Vehicles 5.5 7.5 10 50% 0.6 4 Unknown

REFERENCES

H-GAC (2006), personal communication
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure150-HOV3-17-06.doc 1 Control Measure: HOV Lanes (Combines aspects of Measures 150,157 and 161)
Category: On-Road
Author: Barbara Joy, Earth Matters Inc.


DESCRIPTION

High occupancy vehicle lanes have been a key strategy for congestion relief and emission
reductions in the Houston region for many years. HOV lanes allow carpools and transit vehicles
to use special lanes during peak traffic periods. The overall effect can be a significant incentive
to utilize higher occupancy vehicles, which reduced travel and associated emissions in an area.

The current HOV system in the Houston region consists of the following facilities:
1. Katy Freeway (IH 10W)
2. North Freeway (IH 45N)
3. Gulf Freeway (IH 45S)
4. Northwest Freeway (US 290)
5. Southwest Freeway (US 59S)
6. Eastex Freeway (US 59N)
Utilization, according to the last report available (September 2005) is 122,596 passenger
trips/day. The lanes operate for long periods; the am period generally runs from 5 am 11 am
and the pm period from 2 pm to 8 pm (12 hours a day). The lanes are for vehicles with 2 or more
passengers most of the time; they are reserved for vehicles with 3 or more passengers about two
hours a day.


Potential of this Measure

The extensive coverage and utilization of HOV lanes throughout the region may limit increases
in the effectiveness of HOV measures. Use is already restricted to 3+ vehicles for portions of the
day and efforts are always ongoing to improve HOV access to transit stations and park and ride
lots. This measure is evaluated in a semi-quantitative manner here. In separate evaluations of
improved Commute Solutions programs, this measure is considered as part of the encouragement
and rationale for additional benefits from Commute Solutions. The benefits cannot be double-
counted; emission benefits from increased ridesharing, vanpooling and transit use are going to be
the same reductions counted as additional use of HOV lanes.


METHODOLOGY AND EMISSIONS ANALYSIS

The 1995 utilization report notes there were 122,596 people per day using the HOV lanes. The
average trip distance in the area is about 15 miles (20 miles for work trips and less for non-
work). The average vehicle occupancy for carpools has not been estimated for the Houston
region but a default used in methodologies such as the California Air Resources Board Methods
to Find the Cost Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects is 2.5. In terms of accounting for
the individuals driving a carpool (who cannot be counted as reductions), this means that about
40% of the people using the HOV lanes cannot be counted as reducing VMT. March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure150-HOV3-17-06.doc 2
As noted above, this measure has been significantly implemented already. Because additional
emission reductions are expected to be limited, the measure is evaluated in a semi-quantitative
manner, with an arbitrary assumption about potential growth. In short, it is assumed that growth
in HOV use between 2005 and 2009 is 20 percent, or roughly 4% per year (this may be too
optimistic and more could create so much utilization that any speed increase in using the lanes
would be offset by too much utilization). Therefore by 2009 there are 147,115 people per day
using the lanes. Adjusting for VMT by the drivers, it is expected that 88,269 people/day will be
reducing their driving to use the HOV lanes, with the remaining 58,846 people doing the driving
for the carpools. At an average vehicle trip of 15 miles this could reduce VMT by up to
1,324,035 miles per day. Since EPA only allows additional benefits to be counted toward
emissions credit, it must be assumed that only 20% of this benefit could be counted as a new
benefit. Based on this, 264,807 miles per day are reduced.

The emissions analysis uses the following key variables:
Total light duty vehicle VMT for average ozone day (episode day used in air quality modeling) is 135,673,516 Average light duty vehicle composite emission factor for NOx for same day is 0.471 grams per mile Average light duty vehicle composite emission factor for VOC for same day is 0.489 grams per mile There is no methodology in the MOSERs guide for this measure; however the following
equation utilizes the basic process suggested by the MOSERs methodology, as follows:

Variables: EF A : Speed-based composite emission implementation, VOC, or CO)
grams/mile EF B : Speed-based running composite emission factor before
implementation (NO x VOC, or CO) (grams/mile) VMT A : Change in VMT as a result of growth in HOV lane use It is assumed that emission factors and trip length before and after implementation are the same.
Emissions changes from vehicle trips and associated start emissions are evaluated through the
use of composite emission factors.

In this analysis VMT A was derived above. March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure150-HOV3-17-06.doc 3 Equation:
Daily Emission Reduction = C = VMT A * EF A =
264,807 * 0.471 gram/mile NOx/453.6 = 275 lb/day, and 0.14 tpd NOx

and
264,807 * 0.489 gram/mile VOC/453.6 = 285 lb/day, and 0.14 tpd VOC.

Cost Effectiveness

The facilities have already been constructed so no additional costs can be calculated. If data
were available on construction costs they could be amortized through 2009 but this is not
possible at this time. Therefore it is estimated that cost effectiveness will be <$4,000/ton.


COMMENTS

This evaluation is based on hypothetical assumptions and data for this program and may be
considered for use in ozone plan after review of key assumptions. Key to this consideration is
the nearly 100 percent overlap between this measure and any other measures that increases
vehicle occupancy. Separate analyses for ridesharing, transit and vanpooling cannot simply be
added to this benefit.

Also key is that the emission factors used in the analysis are emission factors with currently
programmed federal and other control measures such as Tier 2 tailpipe standards. Other
measures are being evaluated for the H-GAC region, such as California LEV (low emission
vehicles), cleaner fleets and wider application of the Inspection and Maintenance program. If
these or other similar programs were implemented, the emission factors used to evaluate
programs affecting the amount of travel (such as this one) would be smaller each mile driven
would be at a lower emission rate and therefore each mile not driven would not reduce emissions
as much as it would have without the additional measures.


SUMMARY OF RESULTS: NO x Expected
Emission Reduction Measure ID Name Description Affected Source Affected Emissions % Tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 150,157, 161 HOV Lanes 20% increase in HOV lane use On-Road 165.8 tpd 0.0 9 0.14 <$4,000
March 23, 2006 DRAFT


Y:\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure150-HOV3-17-06.doc 4 SUMMARY OF RESULTS: VOC
Expected
Emission Reduction Measure ID Name Description Affected Source Affected Emissions % Tpd Est. Cost Effectiveness ($/ton) 150, 157, 161 HOV Lanes 20% increase in HOV lane use On-Road 79.3 tpd 0.18 0.14 <$4,000


April 24, 2006 DRAFT


H:\HGAC SIP\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure172 Light-Duty Scrappage 03_08_06 revised.doc 1 Control Measure: Scrappage/Buy-Back Program, Measure 172
Category: On-road
Author: Chris Lindhjem, ENVIRON


DESCRIPTION

This strategy would build on and expand the Low Income Repair Assistance Program (LIRAP)
to include greater and more emission effective vehicle buy-back and scrap those high emitters.
H-GAC is administering LIRAP on behalf of Brazoria, Harris, Fort Bend, Galveston and
Montgomery counties. For administering the program, H-GAC claims the emission reductions
achieved through the scrapped portion of the LIRAP.


Implementation Feasibility

The LIRAP program was designed originally to improve the compliance with the inspection and
maintenance Texas AirCheck program.


Public Acceptance

The LIRAP program has a social and air quality benefit to the program and so is a generally
acceptable program to most stakeholders.


ANALYSIS

The majority (approximately 96%) of the funding is spent on repairing high emitting vehicles,
and the emission reduction is counted in the low waiver rates (those vehicles that still do not pass
the inspection even after every reasonable repair has been made) assumed in the MOBILE6
emissions modeling. The smaller numbers of vehicles that are scrapped have not been counted in
the emissions modeling and therefore are available to use as a separate air quality strategy.


Emissions Affected

The overall light-duty emissions accounts for 70.5 tpd for a typical weekday, but this measure
would affect the small fraction, 3%, of vehicles that are high emitters that would be waived
through the I/M program. In addition, three counties do not have I/M programs, and so high
emitter vehicles cannot be identified for removal.


Emissions Benefit The emission reduction could be structured either that model years that fail the I/M test is
replaced with the average levels or that high emitters above a certain cutpoint in emissions level
be selected for replacement. In Table 1, an emission reduction potential is shown for the average
emission reduction potential if an older vehicle is replaced with an average emitting vehicle in April 24, 2006 DRAFT


H:\HGAC SIP\HGAC Control Measures\Onroad measures\Measure172 Light-Duty Scrappage 03_08_06 revised.doc 2 2009. This estimate may underestimate the effectiveness of the measure because no additional
selection for high emitters was used.
Table 1. Overall Annual Emission Reduction Estimate (tpy) per Vehicle for Older Model Years. Emission Reduction Potential (tpy) Vehicle Type VOC NOx Model Year LDGV 0.002 0.004 0.007 <2000 LDGT1 0.002 0.003 0.004 <2000 LDGT2 0.002 0.003 0.010 <2000 LDGT3 0.004 0.005 0.012 <2004 LDGT4 0.004 0.005 0.021 <2004 Average 0.003 0.005 0.010

The total emission benefit would depend upon the number of vehicles that could be replaced
under such a program. If 10% of the current LIRAP program cost were dedicated to high emitter
replacement, between 40 and 400 high emitters could be retired per year. The range of the
program effectiveness using 10% or 100% of current program cost would result in 0.2 to 4 tpy
and 2 to 40 tpy NOx emission reduction and 0.1 to 12 tpy VOC reduction for each year the
program existed, so over the 2007 2009 time frame, the benefits would be 3 times that
estimated. However, TCEQ already credits 0.1 tpd of emission reductions from this measure in its baseline
emission inventory. Therefore the emissions reductions from this program were reduced by 0.1
tpd to account for that current expectation.
Cost and Cost-Effectiveness

The current LIRAP program spends, on average $550 - $750 per vehicle, for repair and
replacement, but only 295 vehicles have been replaced in the first 2

Comments