This document summarizes a presentation about three potential revolutions in global transportation by 2030/2050: electrification of vehicles, real-time shared mobility, and vehicle automation. It outlines three scenarios for how these revolutions may play out: Business As Usual with limited changes; a Technology-Dominant scenario where automation and electrification grow substantially but shared mobility does not; and an Avoid-Shift-Improve scenario where all three revolutions are adopted at large scale alongside supportive urban planning and pricing policies. The presentation analyzes the impacts of these scenarios on passenger travel, vehicle sales, and energy use in the United States. The next steps are to refine the results and develop full narratives and policy implications.

1. www.TransformingTransportation.org
Charting the Path to a Sustainable
Mobility Future:
Three Revolutions in Global Transportation by 2030/2050
Lew Fulton, UC Davis, ITS STEPS Program
Presented at Transforming Transportation 2017

2. Charting the Path to a Sustainable Mobility Future: Three
Revolutions in Global Transportation by 2030/2050
Lew Fulton
UC Davis, ITS STEPS Program Transforming Transportation
January 13, 2017

3. Passenger Transport “Revolutions”
1. Streetcars (~1890)
2. Automobiles (~1910)
3. Airplanes (~1930)
4. Limited-access highways (1930s….1956)
2010+
1. Vehicle electrification
 low carbon vehicles and fuels
2. Real-time, shared mobility
 less vehicle use
3. Vehicle automation (2025?)
 Uncertain impacts

4. Heaven… or Hell
• Ride sharing, multimodal
(transit/NMT) ecosystem
• More compact, livable
cities
• “Right-sizing” of vehicles
• Reduction in traffic/travel
times
• Fuel efficiency
improvements/
electrification/lower CO2
• More single-occupant
(and zero occupant)
vehicles
• More sprawl/car-
dependence
• Bigger vehicles
• Longer trips/ time spent
traveling/ increased
traffic congestion
• Higher energy use/CO2

5. Vehicle Automation Increases or Reduces
Energy Use (and GHGs)?!
Wadud et al, 2015

6. Questions and conflicts
• Automation – lower per-trip costs, lower “time cost” for being
in vehicles – longer trips?
– Empty running (zero passengers) of vehicles
• For-hire vehicles – giving discounts for sharing may be less
interesting with no driver costs
• Ride sharing – at conflict with public transit use?
• Private vehicles – decreased negative costs may mean less
public sharing?
• Assumed electrification with automation – but not necessarily

7. 3 Revolutions study builds on two previous
ITDP / UC Davis studies
Global High Shift Scenario
• High future urban mode shares of
transit and active transport around
the world; cut car use in half
• Much lower CO2, significantly
cheaper transportation system costs
Global HS Cycling Scenario
• Added very high cycling and e-biking
mode shares to previous study
• Cut CO2 use an additional 10% and
lowered costs

8. Study scope – two main aspects
• Investigate and report on the current (2016) status
of a range of types of new mobility services around
the world
• Create 3 Revolutions urban passenger/vehicle travel
scenarios to 2030, 2050

9. Creating 3 Revolutions scenarios to 2030, 2050
• Explore scenarios related to how much the technologies and
services could grow and shape future transport
• How may patterns vary in different countries?
• What types of overall mobility, energy and environmental
impacts might these services have in the context of broader
urban transport system developments?
• Explore interactions between the three revolutions
• Develop narratives on how each scenario could develop
• Identification of policies that could steer existing trends to
maximize mobility and sustainability benefits to cities

10. Rough guide to the three scenarios
Electrificat
ion
Automation
Shared
Vehicles
Urban
Planning/
Pricing/TDM
Policies
Aligned with
1.5 Degree
Scenario
Scenario 1: Business
as usual (BAU),
Limited Intervention
Low Low Low Low No
Scenario 2:
Technology-
dominant 2R
HIGH HIGH Low Low YES
Scenario 3: Avoid
Shift Improve 3R
HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH YES

11. Supportive Policies – to be linked to scenarios
• 2R Scenario:
– Subsidies for automation & Electrification
– Little restriction on automation (after early 2020s)
• 3R Scenario:
– Compact Urban Development policies
– Tax policies
– Investment in Transit/walking/cycling
– Heavy promotion of sharing and public transit, eg VKT tax, graduated
by occupancy:
• ZOV = highest fee
• SOV = high fee
• Shared rides = low/no fee
• Minibus = no fee?
• Bus, BRT, Transit = subsidized
– Scrappage or conversion incentives -> Shared AV/EV

12. Passenger kms of travel, aggregated modes, USA
• Automated vehicle travel not significant by 2030 in any scenario, but dominates in
2050. Results in much higher travel in 2R
• US remains car dominated to 2050 - increase in travel mode mix in 3R, but mostly
due to TNCs. Also significant minibus travel. Non-car travel reaches 18% in 3R
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
Base Year BAU 2R 3R BAU 2R 3R
2015 2030 2050
United States
Billionkilmoeters
Other
Bus/rail
Minibus
Public AV
Public LDV
Private AV
Private LDV

13. US LDV sales evolution by scenario
• BAU Case – sales rise slowly with
little change in vehicle types
• 2R Case – sales rise slowly with
major changes in private vehicles,
but few public vehicles
• 3R Case - Sales decline fast through
2035, then recover somewhat
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Sales,millions
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
sales,millions
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Vehiclesales,millions
Private ICE Private EV Private AV/EV
Public ICE Public EV Public AV/EV

14. US LDV energy use by scenario
• BAU - liquid fuels (green)
dominates but drops due to
efficiency improvements
• 2R – electricity (blue) dominant by
2050
• 3R – electricity use in 2050 about
40% lower than 2R level due to
mobility changes
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilionliters,gasolineequiv.
TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilionliters,gasolineequiv.
TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bilionliters,gasolineequiv.
TOTAL Liquid fuel TOTAL electricity

15. Next Steps
• Refine results, add 1R, finish cost analysis
• Develop full narratives and integrate policy requirements
• Deeper visualizations to output set
• Report launch in March 2017 (I hope)