USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Travel time, safety, energy, and air quality impacts of Florida high speed rail


Material Information

Travel time, safety, energy, and air quality impacts of Florida high speed rail
Physical Description:
1 online resource (44, 17 p.) : ill., maps. ;
Lynch, Thomas A ( Thomas Anthony )
Florida -- Dept. of Transportation
Florida State University -- Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Florida Overland eXpress
Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis
Center for Urban Transportation Research
Place of Publication:
Tallahassee, Fla.
Tampa, Fla.
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
High speed trains -- Environmental aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Railroads -- Passenger traffic -- Planning -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Travel time (Traffic engineering) -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Air quality management -- Florida   ( lcsh )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )


Includes bibliographical references (p. 41-44).
Statement of Responsibility:
prepared by Thomas A. Lynch ... et al.
General Note:
Title from cover of e-book (viewed Aug. 8, 2011).
General Note:
"Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation and Florida Overland eXpress."
General Note:
"June 1997."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 025971167
oclc - 745910919
usfldc doi - C01-00195
usfldc handle - c1.195
System ID:

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text


Travel Time, Safety, Energy, and Air Quality Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail June 1997 Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation and FLORIDA OVERLAND EXPRESS Prepared by Thomas A. Lynch, Ph.D. Neil Sipe, Ph.D. Institute of Scien ce & Publ ic Affairs Florida State University 2035 E. Paul D irac Drive Rm. 130 Morgan Bldg. Innovation Par!( TallahaSsee, FL 32310 Steven E. Polzin, Ph.D. Xuehao Chu, Ph.D. Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT 100 Tampa FL 33620-5375


this page IS blank


TABLE OF CONTENTS Section TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND A IR QUAUTY IMPACTS O F FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Page T able of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 The High Speed Rail Al t ernative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The Florida High Speed Rail Project . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I mpacts of Florida High Speed Rail . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . 12 HSR Trave l and Traveler Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Ridership Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Technology Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6 Modal Performance Assumptions . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. . . . 17 T ravel Time Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Safety Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Reduction in Aircraft Flights and Automobile Trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Energy Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Air Qual ity Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 Appendix A Florida Power Plant Emiss i ons, 1995 ......... ..... ...... .......... A Appendix B Flight Schedules, Orlando International Airport 1997 . ... ......... B-1 Page Ill


LIS T OF TABLES TRAVEL TIME SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORID A H IGH SPEED RAIL PAGE Table 1 FOX S c h edu le Speeds and Distances .. . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . 8 Table 2 F LOR IDA OVERLAND EXPRESS Project Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Tabl e 3 FOX Statio n Pair D i stances ...... ..................... ...................... 20 Tabl e 4. L i neHaul Trave l T i mes ....... .... ..... .............. ... ... ....... 21 Table 5. Trave l Time Savi ngs ...................... .. ........ ...................... 22 T able 6 Fatality Inj ury and Acc id e nt Rates for A uto Air, and HSR .................... . 23 Table 7. Fatalities, Serious Injuries and Accidents for U.S Sched uled Air Services ........... 24 Table 8. Passenger Miles for U.S. Scheduled Serv ices .................. ... .... ... ...... 25 Tabl e 9 Estimated Safety Benefit s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Table 10. Re ductions in Aircraft Flights and Automobile Trips .... ... ...................... 27 Tabl e 11. Transportation Mode Energy Efficiencies ....... ........ .. ....... ............. 31 Table 12. E n ergy Savi ngs from Diverti ng Auto and Air Pass en gers to Fox-H SR ....... .... 32 Tabl e 13. Net Red u ction in Air Quality Poll utants (tons) ........... ....... ... .... 33 Tabl e 14. Power Plant Emission Factors ............... ...... ... .... .............. 35 Table 15. A uto mobile Emission Factors . .................. ... ............. 35 Table 16. Sample Aircraft Profile ... ...... ...................... ... ............ .... 37 Tab l e 17. Ai rcraft Fuel Rate and E mission Factors .... ........ ......... .. ... . ..... 39 Ta ble 1 8. Emissions Savings Summary .......... .................... .. .............. 39 Table A-1 Carbon Monoxide (CO) ............................. .............. .. ... A-2 T able A-2. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) .............................. .............. ..... A-4 T able A-3 Particular Matter (PM) ....... ............ ............. .. ...... .... A-6 T able A-4 Particula r Matte r (PM10) ......... ... . ...... ............ ..... ...... A 9 Table A -5. Sulfur D io xi d e (S02) .............................. ... .............. .. A-11 Tab l e A-6 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) ............ . .......... A-13 Tab l e B-1. F l ight Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B 1 Page-tv


List of Figures TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Page Figu r e 1. Popu l alion and Tourism Growth, 1990-2010 ....... ... ... . . ... 4 Figure 2. Travel Demand Growth 1990-2010 .... . . .... ......... ........... 4 Figure 3. FOX Systllm and Project Description ...... ...... ... ...... ... ........... 7 Figure 4 FOX Sta t ions and Faci l ities ......... . . ..... ........ .... ... .............. 8 Figure 5. FOX Implementat ion Time line ........ ... ... . ........... .. .. ...... . 10 Figure 6 Florida H i gh Speed Rail Ridership ....... . . .... . . . . ........ . . ........ 13 F igure 7 Reduction in Aircraft Ffights .................. .... ...... .................. . 28 Figure 8 Reduction i n Automobile Trips .......... ..... .... . ....... : . . . . . 28 F i gu r e 9. Cumulative Distr i bution of Aircraft by Nu mber of Seats Orlando International Airport, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Pagev


INTRODUCTION TRAVEL tiME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL This report, Travel Time, Safety, Energy, and Air Quality Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail is one of three document$ produced report ing on the impacts of Florida high speed rail Two studies, with a shared executive summary, were carried out to analyze the im p acts of Florida high speed rail. This initiative was undertaken during the first half of 1997 by the Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis (CEFA) at Flor ida State University (Tallahassee) and the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida (Tampa). The three document$ consist of two technical reports and an executive summary. The two technical reports each share introductory materials and background in fomnation then present findings in their r espective areas. The technical study and executive summa ry titles are: An Analysi s of the Economic Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail Travel Time, Safety, Energy, and Air Quality Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail Executive Summary : An Analysis of the Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail This research effort is i n response to a request from the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) and the FLORIDA OVERLAND EXPRESS (F()X), the franchisee, to construct and operate Florida high speed rail, to support conti nued project planning. Thus, this effort produced an analy sis that provides additional, specific technical information regarding the impacts of the FOX project based on the high speed rail plan as outlined in the FOX proposal and subsequent franchise agreement between FOX and Florida Department of Transportation. This rep ort addresses specific impacts of interest to planners, the publlc and decision makers This r eport is organ ized to briefly describe the transportation market in Florida and the FOX plan, followed by a more substantial discussion of the methodology and findings of the analysis. Page-1


this page IS blank


BACKGROUND TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORJDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Florida has experienced population and tourism growth over the past few decades virtually unrivaled elsewhere in the United States. Popu la tion has grown from 5 0 million in 196 0 to 12.g million in 1990 and is continuing to grow at a pace roughly twice as fast as the population as the U.S. Considerable progress has been made in expanding Florida's h i ghways, ports, airports and public transportation systems. Flat topography, the absence of freeze-thaw cycles and a relatively young existing infrastructure have helped; however, growing demand has continued to outpace the supply of new transportation capacity As the inventory of facilities grows, the cost of maintenance requires an increasing share of revenues. Urbanization h as dramatically increased costs of right-of-way for facility widening. Congestion has increased the costs of maintaining traffic flow while repair ing or widening facilij ies and utilijy relocation and environmental mitigation have dramatically increased the cost for roadway expansion. The costs and consequences of unlimited expansion of Florida s roadways are more than can be borne by our environment and by the taxpayers A number of Flo rida's urbanized regions are nearing the physical and environmental limits for expanding their highway and airport capacity. Figure 1 shows the growth in total population and tourism in Florida since 1970 and projected to 201 o. Between 1990 and 2010 Florida population is expected to increase by 38 percent. Population growth is expected to continue to favor the coasta l and central Florida areas resulting in larger and more dense urbanized areas. Tourism is expected to grow even more rapid ly with an anticipated increase of 82 percent between 1990 and 2010. The Associated Press reports that Florida had 7.2 million foreign tourists in 1995 The renowned attractions of Florida, a combination of sunshine, beaches and a huge and growing list of attractions and accommodations, will v i rtually assure co nt in ued attractiveness as the baby boom ages and the internationa l population expands in numbers and has growing disposable income. This increase in population and tourists will be facing an increasingly strained transportation system. Not only has population grown but travel per capita has increased And the infrastructure investments have not kept pace. As shown in Figure 2, highway lane miles (LM), is forecasted to only increase 19 percent between 1990 and 2010. In that same time period vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and the number of vehicles are expected to grow dramatically. Vehicle miles of trave l per highway lane mile is expected to increase 52 Page-3


TRAVEL T IME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALJTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL percent. A i r trave l e x pansion has a l so dramatica ll y outpaced popu l a t ion growth and continued pressure for intercity t rave l capac ity i s e x pected t o remain strong in Florida F i gure 1 Popul a t ion and Tour i sm Growth, 1990 2010 4 0 30 .. c 2 20 -::;; 10 0 1970 1980 1990 Year 2000 201 0 l-e-Total T ou rist Population J Source: C EF A a n d CUTR. F i gure 2. Travel Demand Growth, 1990 2010 1 0 0% 80% 60% 4 0% 20 % 0% H i g hway L M Vt:hic:te s p e r I.M F lo ri d a Tour i sts F l o r i d a Rnid c n t$ VMT per LM Source: CEFA and CUTR Page-4


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL The High Speed Rail Alternative The Florida Department of Transportation has aggressively sought aHernatives to meet the travel needs of Florida residents and tourists while still being responsible stewards of the environment and public resources In this search, the prospect of implement ing a high speed rail system for Flo rida originated in 1 982 and is currently mandated by the 1992 Florida High Speed Rail Transportation Act. Florida is not alone in considering high speed rail a number of states and regions are exploring a variety of rail technologies and corridors A common goal is to identify markets where travel volumes and distances are such that rail services can be competitive with highway and air travel options This may provide an opportunity to lessen the pressure on both roadway and air travel as these facilities are heavily congested in several urban areas. As time has passed, the prospect of a high speed rail system has grown more attractive. Modern rail technology has proven itself in an increasing number of travel markets across the globe. Florida's rapid population and tourism growth, flat topography, cluster of l arge urbanized areas, and growing dens i ties have created a travel market that, in part, may best be served by a transportation system that includes high speed rail. Rapid development also motivates moving ahead with a system at this time while the cost and avai l ability of rights-of way are still reasonable. Other motivations for moving ahead include a desire to use the investment to he lp shape future development near stations and to complement the growing interest in publi c transit as an alternative to automobile travel. A traveler choosing to travel by HSR instead of auto may be further reducing roadway travel and its negative impacts as transit aHernatives might be the logical choice for trave l within the urban a r eas visited by HSR travelers. The proposed Florida high speed rail project is not envisioned as a single cure-all for the pressing travel congestion problems facing the state. High speed rail is, however recognized as one of several pivotal transportation investments needed within the integrated infrastructure of the state to resolve these growing concerns. The Florida High Speed Rail Project In 1996, the Florida Department of Transportation entered into a p ublic -priva te partnership with FLORIDA OVERLAND EXPRESS (FOX), a consortium of four of the world's larges1 and inost Page5


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL respected international enginee r ing construction and rail equ i pment companies, to implement a high speed rail system link i ng Tampa-O r lando-Miami. The Florida Department of Transportation and FOX are currently in the process of fi n aliz i ng studies of ridership route a li gnment, construction costs and financing The Florida High Speed Rail System is designed to provide approximately 320 miles of e l ectrified track connecting Flo r ida's largest urban areas. The system is intended to be an integra l part of the state's overall transportation infrastructure by l i nking a i r auto, taxi, shuttle vans, bus, and existing rail and trans i t systems in a way that will meet Mure resident and tourist travel needs. The Florida high speed rail project will serve as an important l i nk in what may be the United States' first muHi-modaltransport system that i ncludes high speed rail. The system proposes connections with five major airports, the highway system and growing regiona l rail and bus transij systems across the state's largest metropolijan areas The counties directly served by this proposed high speed rail system are forecast to contain more than 45% of the state's 15.5 million people by the year 2000 and over 58% of tourist development tax revenues are predicted to be collected i n counties with direct FOX service. FOX will serve a very large share of the state's major tourism attractions inc l uding cruise ships, beaches, urban centers and theme parks. Figure 3 is a graphic provided by FOX that indicates the system characteristics and the candidate alignments under study. The p r oposed system is planned to uti l ize the newest generation of Fr ench TGV rail equ i pment. The system will consist of ten car train sets including two power cars, seven passenger coaches and a lounge car wijh food serv i ce. The coach vehicles will be 61' 4" long and 9' 6" w i de. A train set would have seating capacity for 295 passengers. The system will serve seven stations as shown i n Figure 4. The peak operating speed for the system is 200 miles per hour with an average scheduled trave l speeds shown in Table 1 for each station pair. Page 6


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Figure 3. FOX System and Project Description FOX's High Spood Rai l 320 DediCated Route Miles 7 Stations in cl u d ing 2 Airport lntermoda l Facililios 21 Trai n Sets 295 Passengers Per Trai n Top Operating Speed 200 mph .. Trains Can Operate Every 5 Mjnutes Interconnects With local Transit a t All Stations commences Operation 2004 5.3 Billion ($1995) Total Project COst Source: FOX. Page-7


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL F igure 4. FOX Stations and Facilities Stations 0 Airport C<>nnectlon 0 Maintenance of Way Fa d lity <::! Service and Storage Fadlay 0 Operations Cenler @ Futl Service Maintenance Facility Source: FOX. Table 1. FOX Sche d ule Speeds and D i stances Source: FOX. Page B


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Schedules would provide service at least every hour, getting more frequent over time as demand increased. Service would be provided 365 days per year at least 18 hours per day. Fares are anticipated to be competitive with or lower than airline fares with pricing designed similar to airlines with yield management targeted to severa l different travel markets. Ticketing would be integrated with other ground travel and air providers. The system would be completely grade separated with no at-grade crossings of roadways, other rail lines or pedestrian or other access. Stations would offe r a full service environment with ticketi n g, access and egress mode services, amenities and services designed to meet many traveler needs Smaller in scale than commercial airports rail stations would enable r e l atively quick a r riva l and departure times. The schedule for the implementation of the FOX program is shown in Figure 5 The proposed schedule for Florida's h igh speed rail project has environmental and engineer ing s tudies on-going through 1999 and construction slated to begin i n 2000. The first passengers will be able to travel from Miami to Orlando beginning i n 2004. Service would start on the Orlando to Miami leg in 2004 and in 2006 the full phase one alignment from Tampa to Miami wou l d be in place. The prospect of future system expansion to northeast or southwest Aorida and perhaps other locations has been considered ; however, impacts from those facilities are not included in this analysis Tabl e 2 provides information developed by FOX summarizing the overall project. Page9


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Figure 5. FOX Implementation Time Line YEAR EVEN T Proposal Submis sion to Commencement of Full Train Operations Source: FOX. Page -10


TRAVEL TIM E, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND A IR QIJALITY I M PACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Table 2 FLORIDA OVERLANO EXPRESS P ro j ect Summary ""'\\ Sum OF FlORIDA llioll SPEED RAIL l'O.'tlATIVI Fl..oMlA 0\IEJilA.'v.RY The FbklllSpud U,.,.,... k a clllaCiOnlll TM opetae ONet" 110 route lilAcs. of nckaw--.c KMil -.d-e .,.toy dtlt.auoc:essAI tteh101or1. riHch .._ soo ...... pM .., 0111 Pill I ... upo ...... hropt. aQOI'r'..-, ........ .,.,... Ome:.d I t.o.--lS rrira.lta trotn 1'11cn ..... Mf!O aloqg the fYMm muc::hlb M bipmyhas; with tter roo-. be locMd at HIM'II Airport. West Browri Wur; him Bd\. OrlanOc> Airport. La\eland 3nd Thmpa. Routle: al!a,...,.nc and c:wirorwntocal rcucf lf'd.ld pouible W\'ke tO downtowft Otllndo nd che aro. SPO."'sc. Aottd' h!h peed m project I s :a pi'OOIICICIM lll(tk,g tKin'fl l e p..;blic/privue tr.IM.pot"WWon ,,,n.nhlp by Che Stat e o f Rorid:a. i'IUVATI Tho FOX consortium w b..,1d lhe ptOjta k for a ptriOd, The 111 CIIIT)' ouc grad e twdllt. roucllltemMives e.v:W=io n. public eutfU(I\. tiWironmem:at '1d other asks thtcuz'h 1 998 Som>uu CoMtt\ICCiol'lls sbo:d co bctn II\ l to 4 09frulonl b.-en and 81'9 sch11411td co bt&if' fr'l 20()4, f\11 cpentioas exter.dkl& to ,,. to bept.ln 2.006. Corr Tht cc.c ol chi 19SIS b S5.l blllon. lht.SacaolllorNa. has COittolia:c:d$10 ,..,., .,.. JIC"*'lC. ,.... for ... ftO'l The FOXTqmil h p1wz1t cqMy UJVGf'ds; aJ pr1or to opii"'ISoa cl set'i>ke. "-'* wcdd be.I'III!Mid lh"ouP lbe: iSsurlc:a clear--. boNit and r.denlsuppott. -Tht fOX projeet brins die. followi"l impolurc bontr.IS co the State of Aori& and the, N#tion : Mo6ol for 1-fVl Spocd 1W Dt.,.elopmtm Aotida't Etwii"'M''eM lnltltU.S. Enhancement or intra.St:Me Mobil!()' '-kiii\UI Pubr!Cif'tM.w V$'1 w n!: TIOf Toa.Wier E conomic SYP90'\'S Growdl Pol ities or the. Sate a Pnwkf the 8&d ........ ,.,.,.. O'd ...... tl'ltn=: let. ponJoft ollltM .... pt'Cjoa. &ns.osTo f'totot'...., _.,..ct. $QIIe kl'ftii'Md e.:ltD die czh) owwh lortt'f'llll' TRoST.n assist ca. SQiitol Acwtda-.. Source: FOX. Page-1 1


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QuALJTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Impacts of Florida High Speed Rail As a precursor to estimating the economic im pacts, this study looked at the transportation benefits expected from the project. These benefits are of interest both because they subsequent l y contribute to economic impacts, and independently as safety air quality and energy use are among the important considerations in making transportation investments. Transport at ion benefits accrue to persons choosing to use HSR and for non-users of the system that benefit from the presence of this transportation alternative. These benefits take two forms The first is benefrts to the HSR traveler beyond the cost of the fare including consumer surplus safety, environmental and other savings. Second, there are economic and other savings for non-high speed rail travelers using existing transportation modes in the form of reductions in congestion and air pollution as a result of some air and auto travelers switching to this new high speed rail mode. HSR Travel and Traveler Benefits Florida High Speed Rail is projected to carry approximately 6.13 million one-way trips in the year 2010. This will result in approximately 16,780 daily trips, averaging 182 miles. Forty-six percent of the ridership will be concentrated in the Orlando-M i ami segment with 36 percent and 18 percent in the Tampa-Orlando and Tampa-Miami segments respectively. Fifty seven percent of these trips would be made for business purposes the remainder being tourism and personal travel. Of the total ridership, 31 percent are estimated to shift to high speed rail from air travel, 45 percent would shift from auto, and 24 percent would be new trips induced due to the cost and convenience of high speed rail. Of intercity travel between the Florida cities served, approximately 5 percent of highway traffic will be served by high speed rail, while approximately 80 percent of air traffic will be diverted to high speed rail. HSR ridership represents about 11 percent of the total trave l that starts and ends in the ci1ies served in the Tampa-Orlando-Miami corridor. The average fare is projected to be approximately $64 per trip or $0.35 per passenger mile i n 1997 dollars. Figure 6 shows the trend of HSR ridership over the first few decades of operation. Several studies have developed ridership forecasts fo r high speed rail in Florida over the past several years. The source of ridership estimates for this analysis is the ridersh ip forecast included in the FOX Pre-Certification Post Franchise Agreement and Page 12


/ TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS supporting documents. This forecas t utilized the extensive f o recasting work that was carried out by KPMG Peat Marwick in 1993 and furthe r modeling work carried out by SOFRERAIL, a French firm invo lved in high speed rail planning Based on that forecast HSR will serve approxima tely 1.1 billion passen g er miles of travel in 2010, helping meet needs in a state that currently has over 127 billion vehicle miles of travel on roadways. As portrayed by these statis t ics, HSR would provide a large amount of service and carry a large ridership, yet in the context of the total travel demand of t h e State its role, like that of any single project, is more modest. Figure 6. F lorida H i gh S p eed Rail Ridership 10000 r-8000 c .. ::> r-0 6 000 : -.9-t-0 4000 .. :2 a:: 2000 r-0 2004 2010 2016 IU 2022 Year 2028 203 4 2040 Source: FOX and FOOT Pre-Certification Post Franchise Agreement (PCPFA) and supporting documents. Page-13


this page IS blank


METHODOLOGIES TRAVEL TIME, SAFErY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL In evaluating the overall transportation impacts of the HSR project the research team started with data on the overall travel markets and the forecasts of travel changes as a result of the implementa tion of HSR. This infonnation was used along with other estimates of mode specific performance to determine estimates of overall travel benefits of HSR implementa tion. Accordingly, this analysis is dependent on two distinct set of data, first, that on ridership and, second, that on the mode specific performance characteristics such as accident rates. The analysis was carried out at an aggregate level for the high speed rail system. Depending on the specific type of impact, generally 2010 was used as a reference year. However, in most cases, cumulative impacts over the time frame of the analysis were calculated. Several factors introduce uncertainty into the estimates. These uncertainties could result in the impacts being greater or less significant than forecasted. Several of these considerations are briefly discussed below Ridership Forecasts As in dicated earlier, this analysis is dependent on ridership forecasts carried out independently of this study The impacts of HSR are dependent not only on the total forecasted ridership but also on the assumed prior mode of travelers and on the forecasted geographic travel pattern. In general, differences in impacts are calculated by comparing the forecas ted perfonnance to the conditions that would be expected to exist for the travelers in the absence of the new mode. Thus, for example, the energy savings will be calculated to be the change In energy consumption between HSR and auto for that segment of the market forecasted to switch from auto. Ridership Is forecasted as being from three sources: shifted from auto shifted from air travel and induced {new travelers deciding to travel due to the new The benefits to trave lers are calculated for shifted travelers. Net Impacts may be different; as, for example, the energy savings for a shift of travelers from air to HSR may be partially offset by the energy consumption of the new induced travel. In general, the estimated 24% induced travel share will offset some of the energy, travel time, safety and air qualitY impacts of the shifted travelers. Thus, not only might changes in the total ridership change the forecasts, but Page-15


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL changes i n the prior mode could change the estimation of impacts. Similarly, shifts in the geographic market could result in changes in the. The same number of travelers allocated differently between short and long trips would change the estimate of benefrts. For example, if total ridership were the same but fewer trips were on the Tampa-Orlando segment and more on the Miami-Orlando segment one would expect larger traveler benefits. F inally even subtle assumptions can have an affect on impact estimation. Do the travelers that choose high speed rail come from autos with an average occupancy of 2.2 in 1992, the average today for intercity t r avel in Florida, or is it more likely that they come disproportionately from single occupant vehicles? As auto operating costs are spread over more travelers in vehicles, one might be more inclined to see a greater shift f rom single occupant vehicles. Th is would create larger energy and environmental benefits. Unless otherwise noted, this ana ly s i s uses average conditions As in the above case, these assumptions will impact benefits estimates Technology Assumptions The energy and air quality analyses assume ene rgy consumption and pollutant product ion characteristics expected to be applicab le for a 2010 analysis year For a project with an extremely long life such as the one being analyzed, one might expect sign ificant technology changes to impact the actual performance of various modes over t ime. For example, looking back 25 years one would see significant differences in automobile ene rgy efficiency travel safety, and air pollution characteristics. It is very difficult to predict how rapidly technology changes can be expected in the future and how well they will be accepted by the marketplace. We may have a significant share of the auto fleet being powered by hybrid or electric vehicles within the time period of the franchise agreement. Yet, pure electric vehicles may not be in significant use for intercity travel for some time if ever. A more exhaustive analysis looking at scenarios of the vehicle fleet characteristics in the areas of energy consumption safety and air quality might be able to provide a richer understanding of the traveler benefits, particularly for more distant time periods where there remains a great deal of uncertainty regarding modal performance. Technology changes in the aircraft indus try will also impact the comparative performance of air travel over the next several decades. Energy efficiency, safety and pollutant production have also been changing ra p id ly for the air travel i ndustry Page


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Modal Perfonnance Assumptions This analysis assumes average modal performance characte rist ics for both high speed rail and the atternatives over the time period of analysis. For high speed rail international experience with the technology provides a high degree of confidence that the assumed performance characteristics will b e attained However, for the air and auto modes the actual in -service operating performance is very much subject to market demand and operating conditions. Specifically, while we know today's technologies performance capabilities, the actual in-servi ce performance is very much affected by the l evels of congestion that exist. Dramatic in creases in travel time, cost, safety energy and air quality Impacts can be expected if the travel mari

this page IS blank


TRAVEL TIME IMPACTS Time savings were estimated for those HSR passengers who will be diverted from auto and air. The est i mation assumed that roadway access time was the same across all modes The estimation accounted for the following differences among the modes: the difference in the total amount of t i me for line-haul travel between HSR and the original mode of travel; and the difference in the total amount of tenninal time between a i r and HSR. It was assumed that terminal time for HSR is 18 minutes s h orter per passenger trip than air. This assumpt i on is simila r to that used in earl i er ridership fo r ecasting work. It is expected that the term i nal time would be less on high speed rail due to a number of factors. Airports by virtue of the fact that they serve a multitude of destinations are much larger physically and require greate r walk ing distances. I n addition luggage handling, security and ticke ting all would be expected t o take less time in a high speed rail facility. Actual vehicle boarding would a l so be expected to be faster as it would not be constrained to a single entry point and narrow aisles as i n aircraft boarding. With sing l e train departu r es every ha l f hour to hour the proposed station facilities should be able to efficiently process demand. The 18 minute savings would occur partially at each end of the trip, t hough the grea t est HSR time advantage wou l d be expected at the boarding end of the trip. The distances of line-haul travel for all three modes were assumed to be the same as those for HSR. Table 3 shows the distances betwee n each station pair, based on information prov ided by FOX. As HSR stations are l ocated in close proximity to or at airports, access time to the station/airport for air and rai l trips would be expected to be very s i milar. In some cases auto access tri ps may be f aster as they would be more direct, not necessarily having to access a central station point to begin an intercity trip. This access c i rcui t ry for a i r or HSR would be a relatively modest share of total travel time fo r longer intercity trips but could be more important for shorter trips. The l ine-haul t r avel times (excluding terminal times) used in the est i mation are shown separately in Table 4 for auto, air and HSR. For auto, an average speed of 60 miles per hour was assumed Posted speeds in much of the corridor are 70 MPH and typically Page-19


TRAVEL TIM E, SAFETY, ENERGY A N D A IR QUALITY I M PACTS OF FLORID A HIGH SPEED RAIL average free-flow freeway speeds wou l d be a f e w m il es abo ve the poste d s peed f o r auto t rave l Table 3. FOX Sta t ion -P a i r D i s tance (mi le s) S t a t ions Miam i For West Palm Or l ando O rl ando Lakeland lauderda l e Beac h Airport A tt ract i o n s Tampa 319 2 8 6 227 84 73 32 Lak eland 287 255 196 52 Orla n do 246 214 155 11 Attractions Orla n d o 235 203 1 44 Airport West Pa l m 92 59 Beach Fort 33 L auderda l e Source: FOX. Urban parts of the corr idor would hav e l ower posted sp e e d s and most probably s lower trave l in p eak p e riods Over t he life of t he franchise one migh t e xp ect increasing congestion on at lea s t urba n p a rts of the roadWay sy s tem Curre ntly 1-4 b etween Tampa and Orl ando exper ienc es congesti o n a nd d e l a ys on a regula r basis. A d ditional capacity f o r t his co rr i dor is currently u nder co nstruct i on Ove r the life of the H SR p r oject other sections o f the co rr idors are like l y to get congeste d at times and operate at l o w e r s p eeds. If road way dema nds con t inue to outpace capaci t y expansion, aut o speeds may be l o wer in com ing decades. For air. current schedules for flights b etween the c i t i es in the HSR corridor were used. Shifts t o small jet s as replacement for turboprop a i rcraft m ay sightly speed a i r travel in-flight ti me howeve r gro w ing airport delays ma y offset that c h ange A i rport congest i o n i s p redicted t o change s i gnificantly over the coming ye ars and co u l d r esult in s lowe r o verall air t ravel t i m e s Incre ased air po rt se curity m e asures c o ul d also imp act air t ravel times b y i ncre a s ing temnin a l times. Line-haul trave l times for high speed rail were f rom the FOX Pro p osal. Page2 0


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL These travel time differences are then multiplied by the corridor specific travel forecasts. The results ofthese calculations are shown in Table 5. Table 4. Line-Haul Travel Times (minutes) ., E "' "' (ij c , 0 c 0...<:: e Q) "Ot:: .. t::" wg !ij 8. c 0 .!1! 0 Stations Mode ::;: .. .... Auto 319 286 227 84 73 32 Tampa Air 80 70 60 40 30 FOX 145 132 113 55 37 18 Auto 287 255 196 52 37 /// Lakeland Air 80 70 60 40 /// FOX 125 1 1 2 93 35 1 7 /// Auto 246 214 155 11 /// /// O rl ando Air --/// /// Attractions FOX 10 3 90 71 13 /// /// Auto 235 203 144 /// /// /// O rl ando Airport Air 70 60 50 /// /// /// FOX 85 72 53 /// /// V/// Auto 92 59 "/// /// /// V/// West Palm Beach Air 20 10 /// /// /// "/// FOX 44 23 /// /// /// Au t o 33 /// /// /// /// /// Fort Lauderdale Ai r 20 /// /// /// /// L// FOX 17 V// /// 1/// /// /// Source: FOX, CEFA, and CUTR. Page21


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Table 5. Travel Time Savings Type of Impacts Annual Impacts Cumulative Impacts for 2004-2043 for 2004-2043 Hours Saved for HSR Users from Air (millions) -0.5 20.5 Hours Saved for HSR Use

SAFETY IMPACTS TRAVEL TiME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Reductio n in the number of i njuries, and accidents was estimated for hose HSR passengers who would be diverted from auto and air. This analysis evaluated the safety consequences of the HSR investment. It did not evaluate the relative merits of HSR in i mproving safety compared to other transportation investments. The estimation was based on information on fatality Injury, and accident rates per passenge r mile for each mode and the amount of passenger m iles that are projected to be diverted fro m auto and air. The fatality, i njury and acciden t rates used in this analysis are shown in Table 6. HSR was assumed to be free of any fatalities injuries, or accidents, based on operating experiences in Japan and Europe in the last 1 5 years Table 6. Fatality Injury, and Accident Rates for Auto, Alr, and HSR Aut o Alr HSR Fatalities per Billion Passenger Miles 1 0 0.1958 0 Injuries per B illion Passenger Miles 1 766 0.0545 0 Accidents per Billion Passenger Miles 1,807 0.0783 0 Source: Tables 7 and 8 ; FOX, and Aorida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 1995 Florida Traffic Crash Facts Information o n fatal i ty, injury and accident rates for auto was from Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehic les (FDHSMV)'s Flori da Traffic Crash Facts, 1995. The Department reported that there were 2,847 fatalities, 233,900 "non-fatal injuries, and 228 589 crashes on Florida's highways in 1995 and estimated a fatality rate of 2.2 per 100million veh i cle miles of t ravel. This fatali ty rate and the tota l number of fatali t ies we r e used in this analysis to estimate the total mount of vehicle travel which in turn was used to estimate injury and accident rates per vehicle mile for auto. These rates were then converted into r ates per passenger mile by using an occupancy rate of 2.2 persons per vehicle for intercity t r avel. This auto occupancy rate was based on FOOTs Florida High Speed and Intercity Rail Market and Ridership Study Page-23


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL I nformation on fatality, injury and accident rates for air was derived from the Web site of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the 1996 U S Statistica l Abstract. Since the numbers of fa talities injuries or accidents vary significa nt l y over t ime for air travel, this analysis used average rates over the p eriod 199 0 -1994 Also only scheduled services were cons ide red i n the r ates b ecause informat ion on passenger m iles is not readily avai l able for non-schedule d services Tab le 7 shows the num ber of passenger fata li t i es, se ri ous in juri es, and acciden t s by year and type of services (U.S. Air Carriers versus Commuter Air Ca r riers). Table 8 shows the amount of travel by year and type of services. Table 7 Fatali t ies, Serious Inj uries, and Accidents for U S Scheduled Air Services Passenger Fatalities Serious Injuries Accidents U S. Carrier Commuter U.S Carrier Commu ter U .S. Carrier Commu ter 1990 8 7 23 11 22 1 991 40 99 19 30 25 1 992 26 21 14 5 1 6 1993 0 24 7 2 22 1 994 228 25 16 6 19 Total 302 176 79 54 104 Source NTSB NTSB NTSB US Abstract NTSB NTSB Tabl e 3 Ta b l e 8 Table 3 No .989 Table 6 Tabl e 8 Source : Nationa l Transportation Safety Boa rd, Aviation Accident Statis t ics and the 1996 U.S. Statistical Abstract. Table numbers a r e shown at the bottom row of the table 16 22 23 16 10 87 Page 24


TRAVEL nME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPl:ED Table 8 Passenger Miles for U.S. Scheduled Airline Services (billions) U S Carriers Commuter 1990 457.9 7.61 1991 448.0 7.80 1992 478 6 9.46 1993 489 7 10.61 1994 519. 2 12.02 Tota l 2 393.3 47.50 Sou rce U.S. Abstract No 1039 U .S. Abstract, No. 1048 Source : 1996 U .S. Statistical Abstract Tab l e numbers are shown in t h e bottom row. Table 9 shows the estimated safety benefrts Safety benefits to HSR users shifted from air are minimal be<:ause of the extremely low risk on air travel (See Table 6) On the other hand, safety benefits to HSR users shifted from auto are significant. A total of 5 fatalities 380 injuries, and 389 acci d ents are expected to be avo ided annually due to from shifts from auto to HSR travel. Table 9 Estimated Safety Benefits Type of Impacts Annua l Impacts Cum u lative Impacts for 2004-2043 for 2004-2043 Auto Air Auto Air Reduced Fatalities 5 0 190 4 Reduced Inj u ries 380 0 15,201 1 Reduced Accidents 389 0 15,541 2 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Page-25


this page IS blank


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL REDUCTIONS IN AIRCRAFT FUGHTS AND AUTOMOBILE TRIPS The diversion of travelers from air and highway modes to the FHSR will reduce the number of aircraft flights and automobile trips in the corridor. Table 10 shows the estimated reduction s in aircraft flights and automobile trips. Figures 7 and 8 show the reductions over time for aircraft flights and automobile trips respectively. Table 10. Reductions in Aircraft Flights and Automobile Trips Mode Annual for 2004-2043 Cumulative for 2004-2043 Aircrafls Flights (thousands) 61 2 ,433 Automobile T rips (thousands) 1 473 58,923 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Annual reduction in aircraft flights because of diversion of passengers to the fHSR was computed as follows : where AF P," o p. AF = .-.!!. o.., = annual reduction in the number of ai r craft flown annual air passengers diverted to the FHSR average number of passengers per aircraft (1) For example the FHSR was projected to divert 1.5 million passengers from air in 2010. This d i version translates to a reduction of about 30 aircrafts, assuming an occupancy lev e l of 32 passengers per aircraft. The level of aircraft occupancy of 32 passengers was based on an average load factor of 63 percent and an average seating capacity of 50 for fligl)ts between cities in the FHSR corridor. Page27


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Figure 7. Reduction in Aircraft Flights Source: CEFA and CUTR. Figure 8. Reduction in Automobile Trips. Source: CEFA and CUTR. Page-28


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS ' . OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Annual re duc tion in automobile trips because of travelers diverted to the FHSR was estimated as follows: where AT = annual re duction in the number of automobile trips VMT = annual reduction in vehicle miles of travel due to automobile passengers diverted to the FHSR L..,,. = average length of automobile trips in miles (2) Reduction in vehicle miles of travel was estimated with information on p assenger miles diverted from automobiles and information on vehicle occupancy for intercity travel in Florida. Vehicle occupancy was derived from the 1992 StateWide Survey of Intercity Travel in Florida as shown in Exhibit D-5, Florida High Speed and Intercity Rail Marke t and Ridership Study: Technical Appendices, 1993. The overall occupancy was 2.2 for all purposes. Vehicle occupancy was assumed to be 1 .5 and 2.5, respectively, for business and other purposes, which are consistent with the overall occupancy and the share of intercity trips for business purposes (28 5 percent) as reported in Exhibit D-1. The number of passenger miles was estimated with data on FHSR ridership diverted from highway by station pairs and distances between station pairs. This was done for each year over 20042043 and for bus iness and other purposes separately. The average length of automobile trips for a given year was estimated by dividing the number of FHSR passenger miles diverted from automobile by the number of FHSR riders diverted from highway trayel. Page29


this page lS blank


ENERGY IMPACTS TRAVEL TIME SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL The energy efficiency of the automobile fleet is generally expected to continue to improve as new more efficient vehicles replace existing stock across the U.S. This analysis assumes a general 25% gain in the Florida general automobile fleet stock efficiency over the 2010 to 2035 time period with the retirement and replacement of older models wi1h the new more efficient automobiles. The FOX-TGV HSR e n ergy consumption estimates were derived from the FOX Florida High Speed Rail Application. The Florida airplane energy efficiency is derived from the Florida Miami-Orlando-Tampa air carrier corridor specific Information sources. These and other pertinent transportation modeling informat ion were derived from widely accepted industry standards employing consistent and relative ly conservative assumptions. The respective average energy efficiencies for each mode are identified In Table 11 Table 11. Transportation Mode Energy Efficiencies Transportation Mode Year Energy Consumption Rate (BtusiPassenger-mile) 2010 3,125 Auto 2035 2,344 2010 5,446 Aircraft 2035 5,446 2010 1,813 FOX-TGVHSR 2035 1,813 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Table 12 provides a profile of the energy, gasoline, and total fossil fue l savings for passengers diverted to HSR from the automobile and air transportation modes in Florida in 2010 and 2035. Over 1.67 trillion BTUs of energy will be saved across the corridor due to these mode switches in 201 0; and 2.11 trillion BTUs will be saved in 2035. On average this is equivalent to 3.5 gallons of gasoline for each diverted passenger in 2010 and 3.0 gallons in 2035. Since the diversion of trave l is to electric energy presently generated by coal and nuclear powered plants, even greater net savings of petroleum based fuel is realized from Page-31


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAlL thes e diversions since auto and air are exclusively fueled by petroleum based fuels. Over 386 thousand barrels of oil in 2010 and 506 thousand barrels in 2035 will be saved by diverting these passengers from auto and air to HSR travel in Florida. Much of this oil is imported To the extent these fuels are imported, the U.S. bal ance of payments will be red uced by these fuel substitution effects. Table 12. Energy Savings from Diverting Auto and Air Passengers to the FOX-HSR 2010 2035 Total Average Per Total Average Per Passenger Passenger Gross Transport BTUs Saved (mil.) 1 ,674,333 0.36 2 111,274 0.29 Gallons of Gasoline Saved 16,277,155 3.5 21,252,253 3.0 Barrels of Oil Saved 386, 361 0.083 506 006 0.070 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Page32


AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL The air quality impacts from the impleme ntat ion of the FOX high speed rail are calculated in a manne r similar to the other benefits estimates The relative energy efficiencies of the modes are applied t o the diverted traffic volumes to determine the savings associated with the shifts in mode. Table 13 summarizes emissions savings from introduction of the FOX-HSR for the years 2010 and 2035. The largest single category of emission reductions would be for carbon dioxide, with over 134,918 a nd 218,410 tons saved in 2010 and 2035 from auto a nd air passengers diverting to the HSR mode The second larges t reductions come from declines in carbon monoxide, with 21,625 and 35,006 tons saved in 2010 and 2035 respec t ively The third largest savings comes from reductions in hydrocarbons with 14,091 and 22, 814 tons of annual emissions eliminated In 2010 and 2035 due to these modal shifts. Fourth, oxides reductio ns would equal770 and 1,246 tons in 2010 and 2035. An and 164 tons of particulate matter and 38 and 62 tons o f tire wear part i cles would be removed in 20 10 and 2035 through introducing the FOX-HSR system Table 13 Net Reduct i ons in Air Quality Pollutants (tons) Year Pollutant Auto PJt Total FHSR t.let Carbon Dioxide (C02) 69,658 65, 260 1 34,918 41,257 9>3, 661 Carbon Monox ide (CO) 4,414 17, 220 21,634 9 21,625 Hydrocarbons (HC) 595 1 3,499 14 ,094 1 14 ,093 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 307 654 961 191 no ParticulateMatter (PM) 37 97 134 33 101 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (S02) 25 145 170 287 (117) Tim wear Matter 38 38 38 Totals 75,074 96,875 171,949 41,778 130,171 Carbon Dioxide (C02) 112,765 1 05,645 2 18,41 0 66,789 151,621 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 7 145 27,876 35,021 15 35,006 Hyons (HC) 963 21,8 53 22,816 2 22,814 Nttrogen Oxides (NOx) 497 1.058 1,555 309 1,246 Particulate Matter (PM) 61 157 218 54 164 2035 Sulfu r Dioxide (S02) 40 235 275 465 (190) Tire Wear Matter 62 62 62 Totals 121,533 156,824 278,357 67,634 210.723 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Page-33


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Finally, since power plant fuel sources typically employ higher sulfur content than auto and aircraft fuels total sulfur emissions are increased by 123 tons per year while the sulfuric acid component of sulfur emissions decline by 4 tons in 2010. Electrical Power Generation for HSR The potential environmental and energy benefrts from introduction of the HSR mode owe their existence to the use of relatively clean stationary sources of energy p r o d uct ion. Electric power plants use diverse fuel source mixes to produce efficient energy and can employ and manage large and efficient emission control technologies. This results in substantial improvements in air pollution emissions over conventional mobile transportation technologies in all but one regulated pollutant Across the central and south Florida peninsula 15.4% of electr ica l generat ion is from nuclear sources (virtually no air pollut ion) while 32% is f rom coal (all wnh regu lated or controlled emissions) The remainder is from oil and natural gas (relatively modest comparative emissions). All power plant emissions used in this analysis are derived from a weighted average from the actual 1995 per megawatt hour emi ss ions levels. A unique MWH emission factor was calculated for the five principal pollutants reported on in the F lorida Department of Envir on men tal Protection (FDEP} and Environmental P r otection Agency (EPA} a ir emission inventory. They are Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Sulfur Dioxide (S02), Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Particulate Matter (PM), and Carbon Monoxide (CO). Carbon Dioxide (C02) was separately calculated f rom separate research by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Finally the average emissions per megawatt hour for each pollutant for all of the power plants in operation in Central and South Florida were calculated for 1995 from the 1997 Air Pollutant Information Systems Facility Emission Report Florida Department of Environmental Protection A summary of those emission rates is provided in Table 14 with the detailed emissions data available in Appendix A. The FOX-HSR energy demands required to transport projected 2010 and 2035 ridership were then estimated. Comparisons between emissions and energy consumption for each mode were completed for all trave l ers diverted to the HSR mode fro m air and auto and the net differences were calculated to yield net emissions and energy consumption reductions for that year Page34


' . TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Tabl e 14. Power Plant Em i ssion Factors, 1995 Pollution Hydrocarbons Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Particulate Monox i de Oxides D ioxide Matters Category (HC) (CO) ( NOJ (S02) (PM) TonsperMWH 0,01 0 29 1.89 2.84 0.33 Source: Calcu l ated from data in FDEP's 1997 Air Pollutant Information Systems Facility Emission Report. A uto Emissions Table 1 5 provides USEPA emission factors used to generate automobile related emi ssions from passengers diverted from automobile to the HSR system. The number of passengers diverted from auto t o HSR i n 2010 assumes a weighted average occupancy of 2.2 passengers per vehicle. These occupanc i es were used along wit h average estimated passenger trip length provided by system ridership models. Table 15. Auto m o bile Emission Factors Pollut ion Hydrocarbons Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Particul ate Carbon Monox i de Ox i des D i oxide Matters Diox i de Category (HC) (CO) (NOJ (S02) (PM) (C02 ) Grams per 3.1 23 1 .6 0 13 0.195 363 vehicle m ile Source: US EPA, 1995 Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for an "Average Passenger Car Air craft A comparable analysis was generated for the air travel mode. The current and likely future fleet profile of aircraft transporting passengers between the F t. Lauderdale, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa airports was obtained from the Web site of the airports in the corridor. Figure 9 provides a profile of the size and cumulative percent of aircraft currently originating in Orlando flying to each of the other urban areas in the corridor. This profile includes both direct and through aircraft flights Over 80% of the existing a i rcraft operating in these Page35


Figure 9 Cumulat i ve D i stribut i on of A i rcraft by Number of Sea t s Ortando Interna t i onal Airport, 1997 100% 80% I 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 Airc raft Seati n g Capaci t y Source: Appendi x B. corrid o rs are under 50 seats. An even larg e r p e r c en tage of the direct fli ghts fa lls in the range o f 19 to 30 seats A i rcraft are typically Beechcraft (19 seats) Brasilia EMB -120 (30 seats). Dash 8 (37 seats) and so f orth. Table 16 contains a sample profi l e of the a i rcraft ope r ating in these corrido r s Appendix B provides more detai l ed informat i on on aircraft and flight schedu l es for the Orl ando I n ternationa l Airport. The meth o d used to est i mate ai r craft emi ssions was comp l icated by the differen t mixes o f commu t er aircraft operating within the Miami Ortando Tampa corridor. The methodology followed the recommendations in USEPA s Procedures for Emission Inventory Prepa r ation. A standard 50 seat commuter aircraft was used w ith engines and related emissio n and f uel consumpt i on data derived from the USEPA procedures. The estimatio n involved three step described below Page-36


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Table 16. Sampl e Aircraft Profile Number o f Flights Type of N u m b er Flight per Week Aircraft of Seats Duration From Miami to: Ft. Lau derdale 21 Beechc r aft 19 22 5 minutes 11 Brasilia EMB-120 30 30 minutes 73 Beechc r aft 1 9 65 minutes 36 Shorts 360 36 70 minutes Tampa/St. Petersburg 73 Das h 8 37 70 minutes 69 Saab SF -340 3 4 65mlnutes 5 Alen i a 46 70mlnutes West Palm Beach 28 Saab SF-340 34 35minu t es Fro m Tam pa to: Ft. Laude r dale I 67 737 I 1 29 I ? Source: CEFA and CUTR Step 1 This step adjusts approach and clim b out t im e to represent local conditions. Equation 3 below adjusts the times-in-mode, which are based o n a defaul t mixing height of 3000 f e et, to an airport specific value based on the l ocal mixing height. Equation 4 assumes the climb out mode begins with the transition f rom takeoff to c limb out at 500 feet and continues until the aircraft eXits the mixin g layer. Where T = 4 H ) a 3000 T. = 2 2 H 500 JC 2500 = = H = time in the approach mode for aircraft type j, in minutes time in the climb out mode for commercial aircraft type j in minutes mixing height for time and region of interest (3) (4) Page-37


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENER GY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH S PEED RAIL S t e p 2 Thi s s t e p calcu l ates e m i s s i ons for each aircraft type equation (5) below. w h ere Step 3. wher e FF E . = T 1 EI N OJ 'i;-I 1QQQ < I (5) J = mode ( i dl e, t ake off, climb ou t o r a p proach) e. = em i ssi o ns of pollutant i, in pou n ds, produced by a i rcraft type j for one L TO cyc l e T ; = t i me in mo d e for m ode k in minutes, for a irc r aft type j FF;o. = fue l flow for mode k in pounds per minute for each eng ine use d on aircra ft type j (See Table 17) EIIJI< = emiss i o n index f o r pollutan t i, i n pounds of pollutant per one t housand pounds of fue l in m ode k for ai r craft type j (See Tabl e 17) N = number of engines use d on aircraft type j Thi s step cal c ulates t otal emissions for all commercial aircraft as follows: TE, = L E,, L TO; (6) I TE, = LTO; = t otal e m issions of pollutant i, i n pou n ds, produ ce d by all commercial aircraft opera t ing in the reg i on o f inte rest (where j covers the ra ng e of commercia l a i rcraft o perating i n the area) t o t al n umb e r o f L T O cy cles for aircraft type j during t he inventory period (annua l d a t a avai la ble fro m A i rport Activit y S tati stics of Certificated Rou t e Air Carriers Page-38


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, A N D AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL The fina l step in t h i s emissions and energy modal compari son was to calcu l ate total emissions for the "standard" commuter aircraft type and to sum them for total aircraft emissions in the c o rridor using an i n d ustry w ide 63% capacity factor. Tabl e 17. Aircraft Fuel Rate and Emission Facto rs I Id l e TakeOff I C l imb Out I Approach F u e l Rates (LBSihour Operation) I 1 .92 1.o8 1 6.67 1 3 58 Em i ssions Rates (LBS Em i ssions/1000 LBS Fuel) Carbo n Mon o xide (CO) 64.00 1 .01 1 .20 23.02 Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 2.43 7 .81 7.00 8 .37 Total Hydrocar b on (HC) 50. 17 0.50 0.50 2 .19 Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 0.54 0.54 0.54 0 5 4 Particula t e (PM) 0.36 3 70 2 60 1.50 Sou r ce: Table 5-4 Modal Emissions Rates Civil Aircraft Engines Typica l Dur a t ion For C i vil PT6A 27 P&WC P 2 -2/80, Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation, Vol. IV: Mobile Sources USEPA 1996. Table 18 p rovides a summary of all emission reductions and estimates of savings per passenger for 2010 and 2035. These estimates i ndicate that the average passenger woul d reduce their automob ile and airplane p o llutio n l oadings into the Florida atmospher e by 56 t o 58 pounds per trip between 2010 a n d 2035 if the FOX-HSR project were in operati o n Table 18. Emissions Savings Summary 2010 2035 Tota l Emissi on D i fferences Tota l Per Passenger Total Per Passenger P ounds 261, 996 000 56 4 21,448,000 58 Tons 130,998 0.028 210 724 0.029 Source: CEFA and CUTR. Page39


this page IS blank


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL REFERENCES Allport, Roger J. and Marl< B. Brown "The Economic Benefrts of the European High Speed Rail Networl<." P r eprint. Transportation Research Board. 72nd Annua l Meeting. January 1014, 1993. Washington D.C. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). ' A Manual on User Benefit Analysis of Highway and Bus Transit Improvements 1977. Washington, D.C.: AASHTO 1978 Ben-Akiva, Moshe and Steven R. Lerman, 'Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand." Boston: MIT Press, 1985 Brand et al., Estimating User Benefits for H igh Speed Ground Transportation Systems ." Compendium of Technical Papers, 64th ITE Annual Meeting, October 1994. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. "High-Speed Ground Transportation for America." U S. Department of T ransportation. _lhttp : //www .bls. gov]. August, 1996. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation Volume IV: Mobile Sources. [http://www bts gov/NTLIDOCS]. 1996. Center for Urban Transportation Research "An Analysis of the Economic Impacts of Urban Transit Systems on Florida s Economy Report prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation and the Florida Trans i t Association. 1997. Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis and Center for Urban Transportation Research "Potential Statewide Impacts of Florida s Proposed High Speed Rail System Working Report, Florida Department of Transportation. October, 1991. Department of Environmental Protection. Facility Emission Report.". Tallahassee : Public Service Commission, 1996. Economic Research Associates. 'Economic Impact and Benefit/Cost of High Speed Rail for California. California Intercity High Speed Rail Comm i ssion. August, 1996 Psge-41


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS DF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL ECONorthwest, Benefit-Cost of RTA Plan Working Report Washington Research Council. 1996. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Resources Management. A i r Po llutant Information Systems Fa cility Emission Report." 1997 Flo r ida Department of Transportat ion. "The Florida Aviat i on System Plan Statewide Summary 1992-201 0." Executive Summary. Florid a Department of Transportation and Florida Overland eXp ress Pre-Certification Post F ran chise Agreement. November 12, 1996. Florida Department of Transportation. "Florida H igh Speed and Intercity Rai l Market and Ridership Study." Working Report. Ju ly, 1993. Flor ida Overland eXpress (FOX) "Florida High Speed Transportation System." Volume 1 Work ing Report Florida Department of Transportation, High Speed T rans portatio n Program. October 1995 Florida Overland EXpress (FOX). 'Florida High Speed Transportation System." Volume 2 Work ing Report Florida Department of Transportation, High Speed Transportation Program. October, 1995. F l oyd, Susan S., 1996 Florida Sla/islica/ Abstract. 13th edition Gainesville, FL: Univers ity of Fl orida. 1996. Greene, David L T ransportation and Energy. Lansdowne, VA: Eno Transportat i on Foun dat i on, Inc. 1996. Greenwood Michael J. et al., "Mi grat ion Regional Equilibrium and the Estimation of Compensating Differentia ls. American Economic Review. Volume 81, number 5. December, 1991. p.1382-1390 Levinson, David et al., "The Full Cost of In tercity Transportation A Comparison of H igh Speed Ra i l, Air and Highway Transportation in California." Berkeley: Institute of T ransp ortation Stud i es, University of California at Berkeley June 1996. Psge-42


TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALITY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Lieu, S. And George Treyz. "Estimating the Economic and Demographic Effects of an AJr Quality Management Plan: The Case of Southern California." Environment and Planning. Volume 24, number December, 1992. p. 1799-1811. Lynch, T.A. "Energy-Related, Environmental, and Economic Benefits of Florida's H igh-Speed Rail and Maglev Systems Proposals." Transportation Research Record 1255, Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Boa rd, National Research Council, 1 990. Lynch, T A "The Economics and Financing of High Speed Rail and Maglev Systems in Europe: An Assessment of Financing Methods and Results with the Growing I mporta nce of Public and Private Partnerships and I mplications for the U .S." Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis, Tallahassee: Flor ida State University March, 1995. National Research Council. Environmental Issues : Noise, Rail Noise, and High Speed Rail:" Transportation Research Record 1143, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board. 1g88. "Policy Analysis Applications of REMI Economic Forecasting and Simulation Models." International Journal of Public Administration. 1993. Regional Economic Models, Inc. Operator's Manual for a Multi-Region EDFS-53 Forecasting and Simulation Model. Volume 2. Amherst, MA: Regional Economic Models, Inc. July, 1996 Rickman, Dan S., "Alternative Labor Market Closures in a Regional Fo recasting and Simulation Model." Growth and Change. Volume 24, number 1. Winter, 1993. p. 32-50. Rickman, Dan S., et al., "Multiregional Stock Adjustment E quations of Residential and Nonresidential Investment." Journal of Regional Science. Volume 33, number 2, May, 1993. p. 207-219 Shao, Gang, "Bui lding u.s. National and Regional Forecasting and Simulation Models." Economics Systems Research. Volume 5, number 1. 1993. p. 63-77. Small, Kenneth A., and Harvey S. Rosen, "Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models." Econometrica, 49, 1g81, pp. 105-130). Page-43


TRA\IEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUALiTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Thompson Chris and Tim Bawden, "What Are the Potential Economic Development Impacts of High Speed Rail?" Economic Development Quarterly. Volume 6, Number 3, August 1992 p.297. Treyz George I. et al., "The Dynamics of U.S. Internal Migration: The Review of Economic and Statistics Volume 75, number 2. May 1993. p. 209-214. Treyz, George. "The Employment Sector of a Regional Policy Simulation Model." The Review of Economics and Statistics. 1980. Treyz George. "Prediction the Economic Effects of State Policy Initiatives." Growth and Change. Volume 12, number 2. April, 1981. p. 2-9. Treyz George 1., "Reg ional Economic Modeling: A Systematic Approach to Economic Forecasting and Policy Analysis." Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 19g3. p 506. Treyz, George. "The REMI Economic-Demographic Forecasting and Simulation Model." International Regional Science Review. Volume 14, number 3. 1gg2. p 221-253. U.S. Department of Energy "Carbon Dioxide and Climate ." Working Glossary. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 1g87 U .S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors. Volume II: Mobile Sources AP-42, Ann Arbor, Ml: September, 1985 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for an "Average Passenger Car. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 1995 Vickerman Roger. "The Economic Impact of High Speed Rail." Transit Economics. September/October 1g96, pp. 63-70. Page-44





























APPENDIXB TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY, AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAIL Flight Schedules, Orlando International Airport 1997 Table B-1. F l ight Schedules Market ltiMral)' Days Seats B 1




TRAVEL TIME, SAFETY, ENERGY AND AIR QUAUTY IMPACTS OF FLORIDA HIGH SPEED RAI L Table B-1. F l ight Schedu l es (continued) M; Aicfne ttinerary B-3

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam 2200409Ia 4500
controlfield tag 001 025971167
005 20110809140317.0
006 m d
007 cr bn|||||||||
008 110808s1997 fluab ob 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00195
HE2771.F6 (ONLINE)
0 245
Travel time, safety, energy, and air quality impacts of Florida high speed rail
h [electronic resource] /
prepared by Thomas A. Lynch ... [et al.]
[Tallahassee, Fla.] :
b Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis ;
[Tampa, Fla.] :
Center for Urban Transportation Research,
1 online resource (44, [17 p.]) :
ill., maps.
Title from cover of e-book (viewed Aug. 8, 2011).
"Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation and Florida Overland eXpress."
"June 1997."
Includes bibliographical references (p. 41-44).
High speed trains
x Environmental aspects
z Florida.
Passenger traffic
Travel time (Traffic engineering)
Air quality management
1 700
Lynch, Thomas A.
q (Thomas Anthony)
Dept. of Transportation.
Florida State University.
Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis.
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
Florida Overland eXpress.
i Print version:
t Travel time, safety, energy and air quality impacts of Florida high speed rail.
d [Tallahassee, Fla.] : Center for Economic Forecasting and Analysis ; [Tampa, Fla.] : Center for Urban Transportation Research, [1997]
w (OCoLC)37398340
Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856