Leading Edge State DOTs at TRB

One more posting from me on TRB – this time some brief notes on what some leading edge state DOTs are doing to move forward into the 21^st century – advancing performance management, aligning with a broader vision of transportation, and advancing targeted programs linked to more financial resources.

(For new readers, TRB is shorthand for the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, a transportationpalooza held every January when 13,000 transportation professionals from academia, government, and the consulting world congregate in Washington, DC to share the latest research findings and best practices in the field. There are more than 3,000 sessions and presentations, and more than 2,750 papers, so any reporting has to be based on a very limited sample.)

In alphabetical order:

California – Steve Cliff described Caltrans’ commitment to incorporating sustainability principles into the organization’s work.  They have adopted a formal sustainability policy, promoting the “3 Ps” of people, planet, and prosperity and using a Sustainability Maturity model as the intellectual framework.  It isn’t just a matter of drafting policy papers, however.  They are building sustainability principles into their performance management system (targets, measures, and actions) and into their project ranking system.

Colorado – Shailen Bhatt is taking CDOT down an aggressive high-tech path as a way of confronting the “intractable” problems of growing congestion within severe financial, environmental, and geographical constraints.  They are developing everything from smart guide rail to smart ramp meters to support for connected vehicles as part of the branded “RoadX” initiative: “Colorado’s bold commitment to our customers to be a national leader in using innovative technology to improve our transportation system.”

Connecticut – Jim Redeker is leading a comprehensive strategy for upgrading the state’s transportation system, led by a new plan – “Let’s Go Connecticut” – and fueled by new revenue.  ConnDOT is using the current tranche of funding to implement a five-year “ramp-up” plan, which will hopefully be followed by a long-term sustainably funded program at a significantly higher level.  Areas of focus include rebuilding the transit system and promoting transit-oriented development.

Massachusetts – Stephanie Pollack is challenging transportation professionals at MassDOT and elsewhere to rethink their business, with less focus on mobility and more on accessibility.  Rather than think of mode share, we should think of market share – a more customer-oriented approach.  An example of using a market analysis: in one low-income neighborhood taxicabs are a main source of transportation to supermarkets, while “someone else’s borrowed car” is a frequently used mode.  One of her rules: never show an image of transportation without people in it! 

Pennsylvania – Jim Ritzman described PennDOT’s commitment to a “decade of investment,” combining a vigorous modernization effort (“PennDOT 2020”) with new revenues to rebuild the state’s aging infrastructure.  First up: a full-scale attack on the huge backlog of structurally deficient bridges, where Pennsylvania has the unhappy distinction of leading the nation.

Virginia – VDOT is in the final stages of implementing what is probably the most technically sophisticated project prioritization system that I have seen.  According to Robert Cary, the agency is aiming to create a process that is transparent, repeatable, and data driven, that will implement the long-range plan while engendering increased confidence from stakeholders.

Washington – WSDOT continues to be the gold standard for state DOT performance management and reporting, with the “Grey Notebook” and spinoff reports now more than a decade old.  Daniela Bremmer reported that the agency continues to pursue improvement, with standards of credibility, candor, and transparency.  In 2015, WSDOT’s credibility helped secure an 11.9 cent gas tax increase.

Beth Osborne of T4America, which has worked with many state DOTs, presented some findings and practical suggestions for state DOTs pursuing change:

·      Although Congress anticipated that following enactment of MAP-21 the states would lead development of performance management systems, some states have not thought it through at all.

·      The public may support transportation but may not support the transportation agency.

·      A successful project prioritization system will be transparent, consistent, and predictable.

·      Be careful with the use of buzzwords and technical terms.  Even “congestion” means different things to different people.

·      No matter how good your project selection process is, it is seen as a political process until the public understands it.

·      Even agencies that do a good job of planning often do a poor job of oversight and before-and-after reviews.

Resilience at TRB

More from me on TRB, this time on the hot topic of resilience.  (A topic that is even hotter – not to mention colder – with the Blizzard of 2016.  First thoughts here.)

(TRB is shorthand for the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, a transportationpalooza held every January when 13,000 transportation professionals from academia, government, and the consulting world congregate in Washington, DC to share the latest research findings and best practices in the field. There are more than 3,000 sessions and presentations, and more than 2,750 papers, so any reporting has to be based on a very limited sample.)

The best session I attended on the topic was actually a summary of last September’s TRB conference (my posting here).  Six panelists gave very concise “key findings” and “short-term actions” presentations as rapporteurs on the six big thematic tracks of the conference.

Hopefully the entire summary will be generally available, but in the mean time I will give one (hopefully thought-provoking) key finding and short-term action for each.

Project-level adaption

Key finding: Acceptance of some flooding has become the norm.

Short-term action: “No regret” decisions can be made now.

Operations and maintenance

Key finding: Extreme weather events can have lasting impacts.

Short-term action: Include Maintenance personnel in asset management planning.

Institutional and cross-cutting initiatives

Key finding: Countries and regions are creating networks across disciplines and borders.

Short-term action: Promote collaboration.

Climate science and data

Key finding: Decision-making proceeds in the absence of perfect information.

Short-term action: Assemble multi-disciplinary teams early in the process.

Planning for climate change

Key finding: Remarkable progress has been made since 2008.

Short-term action: Need to make the business case for adaption decisions before disasters.

Resilience tools and technologies

Key finding: Most data sources developed for another purpose.

Short-term action: Incorporate key analytical steps into the decision-making process.

Digging Out: Transportation Resilience and the Blizzard of 2016

The concept of “resilience” is an important topic in transportation circles these days, and we’ve just had a big-time, real-world test of how we are doing in that department.  Resilience is a broad term for how well you plan, design, build, and operate your transportation system to withstand the rigors of climate change and extreme weather events. 

At this writing it’s only been about 36 hours since the snow stopped falling in the Blizzard of 2016 and the recovery has just begun, but it’s not too early to make a few observations on what seems to have worked well and what not so well so far.

In general, state and local transportation agencies – and all their sister agencies – appear to have done a very good job and to have significantly improved their planning and crisis management skills.  It looks to me like all the post-Sandy organizational work has made a real difference, and the affected cities, states, and independent agencies seem to be on top of the situation.

Perhaps the most dramatic event of the Blizzard has been the flooding at the Jersey Shore.  Communities which have still not fully recovered from Sandy were once again subject to flooded streets and homes, despite significant and even vigorous preparation.  This episode underscores the challenge that sea level rise and periodic flooding poses for the Eastern Seaboard, especially on the barrier islands.

Transit agencies are still trying to figure out the best way to respond to events like the Blizzard of 2016.  Buses, trollies, and commuter railroads are largely hostage to the elements and can’t get back in service until the snow is cleared.  But what about underground transit?  The Washington Metro elected to shut down for all of Saturday and Sunday, largely to shelter rolling stock in the tunnels.  On Monday they are resuming service on underground routes only.  In Philadelphia, SEPTA kept service going on the Broad Street and Market/Frankford lines, which are in tunnel or elevated, throughout the storm.  Which is the better solution?  I’m sure all the affected agencies had a lively recollection of the events in Boston last winter, in which the T shuddered to a halt in a bad storm, stranding commuter rail passengers in the snow.  Hopefully we will see some “after action” analysis from the agencies after they are fully back in business.

Props to Amtrak for keeping the Northeast Corridor running (although with reduced schedules) throughout the event.

The absolute worst performance of the Blizzard was the stranding of more than 500 vehicles for more than 24 hours on the Pennsylvania Turnpike in the western portion of the state.  Similar incidents happened on I-77 in West Virginia and I-75 in Kentucky (good summary story here).  Folks, this is simply unacceptable.  These were major system failures that were nearly catastrophic.  State DOT commissioners would be well advised to do some serious analysis and planning to ensure that this never happens (or never happens again in the case of those three states) on their watch.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles at TRB

Following on my previous posting on electric vehicles at TRB, I thought it would be worthwhile to talk about hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which also attracted a lot of attention.

(TRB is shorthand for the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, a transportationpalooza held every January when 13,000 transportation professionals from academia, government, and the consulting world congregate in Washington, DC to share the latest research findings and best practices in the field. There are more than 3,000 sessions and presentations, and more than 2,750 papers, so any reporting has to be based on a very limited sample.)

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have been called “the other electric vehicle” and “the vehicle of tomorrow.”  But now it appears they may actually start to appear on our streets and highways.

Some highlights from TRB sessions:

Toyota appears to be leading the way for vehicle manufacturers.  They are transitioning from a development phase to commercialization.  The Toyota Mirai (list price $57,500) has zero emissions, a 300-mile range, can be refueled in 3 – 5 minutes, and has a high-torque electric drive.  They have infrastructure partnerships with fueling station providers in California and the Northeast.  Toyota has also provided royalty-free patents to other manufacturers as a way of stimulating the market.

Air Liquide – a major hydrogen manufacturer – has partnered with Toyota to build 12 stations in the Northeast US and has many more on the way.  They are developing alternative pathways for manufacturing and distributing hydrogen, both to create an efficient system and to improve overall life-cycle emissions of greenhouse gases.  (How you manufacture and distribute hydrogen matters as much in calculating GHG emissions as what comes out of the vehicle.)

California continues to be the leader among states in promoting HFC technology.  They are concentrating on building hydrogen fueling stations and plan to have 50 of them open by the end of 2016.  They estimate that about 100 stations throughout the state will be needed for a sustainable system.  The hydrogen stations will typically be built as auxiliary operations at existing gasoline stations.

The US Department of Energy supports HFC technology as part of its “all of the above” energy strategy.  USDOE’s priority now is encouraging construction of more fueling stations.  There are now about 50 open in the US.

Honda may be next with a commercial HFC offering, the Clarity.

EVs at TRB

For those needing decoding, I mean discussions about Electric Vehicles at the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, a transportationpalooza held every January when 13,000 transportation professionals from academia, government, and the consulting world congregate in Washington, DC to share the latest research findings and best practices in the field.  (There are more than 3,000 sessions and presentations, and more than 2,750 papers, so any reporting has to be based on a very limited sample.)

Electric vehicles continue to be a hot topic in the field, I think in large measure because they are seen as the best chance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector, which accounts for about 30% of total emission in the US.

My (selective) highlights:

·      Despite the ongoing collapse of oil prices, cumulative sales and diversification of EV models continues to grow and will be spurred on by cheaper and more efficient batteries, highlighted by Tesla’s 10-million-square-foot “Gigafactory” for battery production,

·      The US Department of Energy continues to promote the proliferation of EVs through its “EV Everywhere” program, including a concentration on encouraging workplace charging,

·      Although the US has pledged its share in reducing GHG emissions at the COP-21 conference in Paris, it is unclear what that commitment will mean for the transport sector in general and for EVs in particular,

·      One specific EV product at COP-21 was the “Paris Declaration on Electro-Mobility” (available here), in which various public and private sector groups set a goal of “at least 20 percent of all road transport vehicles globally to be electrically driven by 2030” and pledged to “advance our work individually as well as collectively wherever possible to increase electro-mobility to levels compatible with a less-than 2-degree pathway,”

·      A very large study of EV use in Copenhagen confirmed what most people would expect: most EV trips are short (half of them less than 5 km) and energy consumption goes up when the weather is very hot or very cold and when the driver operates the vehicle at very fast or very slow speeds,

·      A smaller scale study of EVs in Stockholm suggests that EV owners’ perception of lower marginal cost and environmental friendliness of their vehicles may lead them to drive more – a “rebound” effect – that could actually increase Vehicle Miles Traveled in some places,

·      A policy study of climate change planning in California, Washington, and Oregon (including EVs as a core measure) concluded that (1) sustained executive leadership is necessary to turn plans into actions, (2) finding adequate funding for greenhouse gas reduction programs is a challenge, and (3) environmental groups have played an important role both in pushing for legislation and in sustaining emphasis on implementation, and

·      To catch a glimpse of the future, think about “SAEVs” – shared, autonomous, electric vehicles – a combination of technologies that could lead to robotic, high-tech, super-Ubers called up on your handheld device!