Downloaded 94 times
Uploaded byVijai Krishnan V
Congestion Pricing
This document discusses congestion pricing, including its history, objectives, classification, determinations, acceptability, advantages, disadvantages, and case studies. Congestion pricing aims to reduce congestion by charging fees, typically varying by time of day or congestion levels, for vehicles using certain roads or entering designated zones. While it provides benefits like reduced travel times and emissions, challenges include public resistance, impacts on surrounding roads, and upfront investment needs for alternative transit options. Case studies show it has worked to decrease traffic in places like Singapore, London, and Stockholm.
More Related Content
Congestion Pricing
- 1. Vijai Krishnan V M3TE No. 18 RIT Kottayam
- 2. Introduction Congestion Need for CongestionPricing History Congestion Pricing Objectives & Assumptions Classification & Determination Acceptability Advantages, Disadvantages & Challenges Case Studies Conclusion 11/6/2018 2Congestion Pricing
- 3. Congestion & associatedproblems Similar to toll Means of Traffic Demand Management Reduce use of passenger vehicles Intended to change travel behavior to reduce congestion Price charged from travellers to account actual congestion cost due to their use of network Supply – Demand – Price relation 11/6/2018 3Congestion Pricing
- 4. Motionless or slowmoving lines of vehicles on a freeway or urban street Expressed in terms flow rates, capacity, volume, speed & delay Occur when road capacity does not meet traffic demand at adequate speed Recurring & non-recurring congestion Recurring – congestion during a predictable & repeated time of day 11/6/2018 4Congestion Pricing
- 5. Escalating growth ofprivate vehicles Frustrating & costly delays No user should diminish the value of other Accidents Air pollution – source of NO2, CO2 & PM Noise pollution Global warming National energy security issues Limitations for building new infrastructure 11/6/2018 5Congestion Pricing
- 6. William Vickrey proposedidea of congestion pricing during 1950s & 1960s Implementation was impractical Advancement in E-toll by 1990s Toll roads operated without tollbooth Renewed interest in road congestion pricing 11/6/2018 6Congestion Pricing
- 7. 1975: First implementedin Singapore 1998: Singapore implemented Electronic Pricing System 2003: London 2006: Stockholm 11/6/2018 7Congestion Pricing
- 8. Monetarize & internalizetransportation & environmental costs – delay, pollution, accidents 11/6/2018 8Congestion Pricing Demand-based strategy designed to encourage a shift of peak period trips to off-peak periods or routes away from congested facilities or alternative modes (HOVs/ Public transit), by charging a toll for using the facility during peak demand periods
- 9.
- 10. Toll increases withcongestion levels HOVs, Emergency vehicles, EVs are exempted or discounted Users giving high value to travel time (TT Savers) pay more to use the same facility at same time Others shift their route, mode or time Need upper bound for pricing 11/6/2018 10Congestion Pricing
- 11. Options for RoadUsers On Priced Highway 1. Drive free in congestion 2. Ride a bus or carpool in tolled lane without paying a toll 3. Drive alone & pay a toll On Un-priced Highway 1. Drive in congestion 2. Ride a bus that will be also delayed by congestion 11/6/2018 11Congestion Pricing
- 12.
- 13. Minimize total traveltime Maximize net social benefit Maintain optimum travel speed Improve environmental performance Travel demand & link capacities are time dependent Link price depend on entry time Commuters react to prices by adjusting route choice 11/6/2018 13Congestion Pricing
- 14. 1. Based ontype of Scheme 2. Based on degree to which toll vary over time 3. Based on technology 4. Others 11/6/2018 14Congestion Pricing
- 15. Based on Typeof Scheme Price one or more lanes of a freeway – higher LOS on tolled lanes o HOT Lanes Prices are set dynamically based on traffic level in priced lanes Prices are changed to maintain an optimum traffic flow Price entire road/ collection of roads Price entire roadway system Pigouvian Taxation o Toll vary with congestion level & vehicle type Distance-based schemes o No. of kilometres driven 11/6/2018 15Congestion Pricing
- 16. Time-based pricing oUser who need to use the facility during peak congestion period have to pay more, while the users who are willing to use at off-peak times pay less Facility-based schemes o Toll is levied at single or multiple points of a facility Zone-based schemes o Pay fees to enter/exit/to travel within all roads in a specified zone (CBD) without crossing boundary Cordon-based schemes o Area based charging scheme o Pay toll to ‘cross’ a cordon (No charge for traveling inside) 11/6/2018 16Congestion Pricing
- 17. Based on TimeDifferentiation Flat Pricing o Constant over time Scheduled/ Variable Pricing o Vary by time of day, day of week, season etc based on predetermined schedule Responsive/ Dynamic Pricing o Vary real time as a function of prevailing traffic conditions o Aims to maintain free-flow speed o Tolls are based on forecast congestion 11/6/2018 17Congestion Pricing
- 18. Others Dimensions ofDifferentiation Vehicle type No. of axles Weight Speed 11/6/2018 18Congestion Pricing
- 19. Based on Technologies ANPR Camera DSRC - RFID - ETC VIN Satellite systems & cellular networks 11/6/2018 19Congestion Pricing
- 20.
- 21.
- 22. Delhi: Marginal CongestionCost Speed flow equations for cars (4-lanes) Value of travel time (Cars) y = speed x = PCUs 11/6/2018 22Congestion Pricing # Source: H. M. Shivanand Swamy & Minoti Rawat, Congestion Pricing: A Case of Delhi, Urban Mobility India Conference, 2016
- 23. Per CapitaIncome Delhi 2013-14 = 118411 Per Capita Income India 2013-14 = 39904 Ratio of PCI = PCI(Delhi) / PCI(India) = 2.97 VOT for individual (Delhi 2014) = 2.97 x 88.96 = 264 Marginal Congestion Cost = q = traffic volume in PCUs v = speed b = VOT dv/dq = slope of speed-flow relation 11/6/2018 23Congestion Pricing
- 24. Congestion costfor car based on travel time reduction 13-26% of respondent will shift to public transport Significant reduction in v/c ratio 11/6/2018 24Congestion Pricing
- 25.
- 26. Pigouvian Toll Q= flow on link (veh/hr) C(Q) = generalized cost of a trip on the link (VOC+TT Cost) Total cost of Q trips per hr, TC = c(Q)Q Marginal Social Cost of a trip, MSC = dTC/dQ = c(Q)+c’(Q)Q Marginal External Cost, MEC = MSC – c(Q) Pigouvian toll = c’(Q)Q 11/6/2018 26Congestion Pricing
- 27. Depends on Experience Interest in environmental issues Value of time Frequency of car use Dislike of government intervention 11/6/2018 27Congestion Pricing
- 28. Reduce congestion duringpeak periods More efficient use of transportation system Smooth traffic flows – time savings Revenue generation Improve travel time reliability & road safety Encourage transit use, vehicle pooling Reduce vehicle emission & energy consumption New road construction & parking space savings Indirect benefits: Improve public health, environment, quality of life 11/6/2018 28Congestion Pricing
- 29. Transit improvements inaffected area Improvements for pedestrian and cyclists Subsidizing improvements to non-priced highways Rebating fuel taxes 11/6/2018 29Congestion Pricing
- 30. Change travel patternon non-priced roads causing congestion Need control on HGV diversions Damage to infrastructure & safety concerns on un- tolled roads of lower standards 11/6/2018 30Congestion Pricing
- 31. Lack of necessarytechnology Resistance from affected users & shop owners Limited understanding of public about the schemes & policies Opposition by political parties Uncertainty about revenue & land use change Upfront investment in public transit to absorb ridership & provide affordable mobility Convenient & flexible payment systems 11/6/2018 31Congestion Pricing
- 32. Singapore Scheme –ALS & ERP Objective – To control traffic congestion in CBD during peak hours Result – 31-44% drop in traffic & 0.85% reduction in CO2, travel speed increased from 11mph to 21mph Limitations/Advantages o Labour intensive o Not equitable to motorists o Rush to enter RZ just before/after restricted hours o Charges are reduced when speed > optimal speed 11/6/2018 32Congestion Pricing
- 33. London Scheme –Covers central London bounded by Inner Ring Road Objective – Reduce traffic & air pollution, yield revenues, pay back initial cost Result – Reduced cars & CO2 emission by 20%, congestion by 30% Limitation/Advantages o All vehicles pay same charge o ANPR system was a failure & 40% do not pay 11/6/2018 33Congestion Pricing
- 34.
- 35. Stockholm, Sweden Objective– Reduce congestion, increase accessibility & improve environment Result :– o Reduced avg. journey time & queuing times dropped by 30% in rush hours o 6% changed their mode & no. of cars in park & ride facilities grew by 23% Limitation/Advantages o Two routes were left free of charge – only connection to city centre - travel time & vehicle increased 11/6/2018 35Congestion Pricing
- 36. SR-91, California, USA 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 PricedFree Speed (mph) 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 Priced Free Vehicles per lane 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% High income Low income Percent approval (I-15) 11/6/2018 36Congestion Pricing
- 37. Hong Kong Pilotimplementation VPS Cordon-based charging scheme Unsuccessful – lack of public & local govt. support Advantages o Reduced traffic emissions & noise in charging zone o Deteriorated bypasses & surrounding areas of charging zone 11/6/2018 37Congestion Pricing
- 38. Congestion is apersistent & growing problem in metropolitan cities worldwide Innovative solution to maintain traffic flow & reduce emissions Increased mobility & public transit Reduced travel time Public health benefits – walking, cycling, clean environment, less accidents Important for highly congested metropolitan cities 11/6/2018 38Congestion Pricing
Editor's Notes
- #4 Traffic congestion is common in large cities and on major highways & it impose significant burden in lost time, uncertainty & aggravation (make worse) for passenger & freight transportation UK estimated that the cost of congestion forms 1.5% of GDP. In US in 2007, congestion caused 4.2 billion hours of travel delay & 2.8 billion gallons of extra fuel consumption Need to determine the prices that should be charged to travelers in order to account for the actual congestion costs induced by their use of the network. Intent to change travel behavior – shift some drivers to less congested periods/ nodes/ routes/ shared-vehicles Supply – Demand – Price:- Supply (Road infrastructure) is fixed, but demand varies. To align supply & demand, price has to be adjusted – If demand exceeds supply, price increases & some prefer not to use it. Force people to pay for the negative externalities they create making users more aware of their impact on environment
- #5 Congestion occurs when the road capacity does not meet traffic demand at an adequate speed Non-recurring – random or unpredictable – temporarily increase demand or reduce capacity (accidents, disabled vehicles, road construction, weather)
- #6 No user should diminish the value of other:- When there is no charge for entry, motorists do not consider that they are imposing a cost on others; resulting market failure is known as congestion. Under high volume condition, one additional vehicle entering road may cause traffic to further slow down creating congestion & delay for others. Unless all roads are priced, motorists will have opportunities to shift travel to other parts of the system to avoid the charges. These motorists will incur cost of using a less appealing route or mode. Motorists who previously used the alternative route may experience –ve effect of higher traffic volume & more congestion. Revenue obtained from pricing can be used to enhance capacity of non-priced roads so as to reduce congestion on these roads. Optimum flow on highway occurs when vehicle flow at 45mph Pollution – Delhi – odd even policy – need for cleaner air – sustainable idea like congestion pricing Air pollution: In US, congestion cost was estimated at $87billion in 2007 with about 28million tons of CO2 emitted per year due to fuel wasted from inefficient vehicle operation due to congestion Efforts to reduce congestion through road building fail to keep pace with transportation demand & are likely to generate additional vehicle traffic, which worsen air quality and create further demand for road building Fuel wastage
- #9 Time-based pricing is done similar to that of airline tickets To avoid the term “toll”, experts use “Pricing”, eventhough the concept is same Cost include – Toll collection infrastructure, staffing & enforcement, Inconvenience to motorists, Financial costs to consumers for paying the toll based on their VOT Congestion tolls can be implemented at scales ranging from individual lanes on single links to national road networks. Tolls can be differentiated by time of day, road type, vehicle characteristics and can be set in real time according to current traffic conditions.
- #11 Those who choose an alternate route/ mode/ cancel their trip, are not traveling when, where or how they want If upper bound for the congestion price is not set, then imposing higher toll to reduce flow on a particular link, will force most of the users to shift to alternate route making that link congested and this link will not be used for serving its ultimate purpose. (people will not use this facility & it remain unused as desired) Toll increases with congestion levels: since cost suffered by users is increasing with quantity of vehicles
- #13 Flow chart showing how congestion pricing affects various transportation & human factors
- #14 * optimum travel speed – 45mph – when demand exceeds a certain point, speed drops & results in stop & go condition. Pricing can manage demand to maintain optimum speed of travel
- #15 Implemented by highway agencies or local authorities or state or federal govts. (US)
- #16 Implemented by highway agencies or local authorities or state or federal govts. (US)
- #17 * Congestion level Traffic volume – tolls rise & fall depending on traffic levels
- #18 In cordon based schemes, vehicle need to pay a toll to cross a cordon in inbound/ outbound/ both directions In Zonal schemes, vehicle intended to enter/exit or travel within the specified zone need to pay the toll. Where as in cordon only the vehicle entering/exiting (Crossing) the cordon required to pay Variable pricing (able to cop up with demand) & area based schemes (less chance of traffic diversion) is preferred Flat tolls may be considered for maximizing revenue, whereas variable/responsive tolls are preferable to control congestion
- #19 Flat tolls: used when technology is poor to change tolls wrt time, traffic etc
- #20 ANPR – use digital camera & optical character recognition software to read license plates DSRC – RFID (To access the distance travelled by a vehicle, it has to be detected at a sequence of locations) Uses ETC (Electronic-Toll Collection) technology – RFID on vehicles Satellite systems & cellular networks – require in-vehicle systems only, no road side infrastructure – Disadvantage: Signal loss in tunnels & signal interception by high rise buildings & overpasses
- #23 * It is difficult & complex to include all key determinants (vehicle, time, traffic level, emission, speed, accidents, weight, axles etc). Hence only significant factors are considered & others are ignored based on the traffic & other characteristics of the location of application
- #25 PCUs will decrease significantly
- #28 Experience: People having more experience with congestion charging have higher acceptance Interest on environmental issues: People who concern about environmental problems will favour congestion charging Value of time: People with higher perceived value of time have higher acceptance Frequency of car use: More the travellers use their car, lower will be the acceptance Dislike of government intervention: People who thinks that government intervention is less and apt, less possiblity for public opposition
- #29 Congestion reduces to 13 – 30% Accidents will be more on congested road Efficient use of transportation system – personal, public & goods transportation Improve TT reliability – important for goods delivery, business persons etc. Reduced emission & energy consumption less HCs, CO2, CO, NO2 etc Indirect benefits: Improve air quality & decrease GHG emissions (15-20%). Increase livability Reduction in fine particulate matter Improve public health – increased walking & cycling
- #30 Public confidence that revenues will be used for transportation improvement is an important element of any congestion charging strategy
- #31 * Change travel pattern on non-priced roads causing congestion, if the traffic is more than its capacity
- #32 Lack of necessary technology:- recent advances in electronic toll collection prompted greater interest in congestion pricing. Difficult to secure public acceptance – shop owners may oppose as business may decrease due to less traffic. Difficult to take into account lower income & higher income group in determining an effective price Utilizing the revenue for affected community may help to reduce the protest Political opposition: government may reject the implementation of ERP due to the perception that public interest on govt will decline Upfront investments in public transit may be necessary to absorb increased ridership and to provide affordable mobility for low‐income populations Convenient & flexible payment systems: smart/debit card systems for commuters to use in public transits Land use change:- Unclear – increase decentralization
- #33 First city to implement cordon-based congestion pricing in 1975. Electronic Pricing System implemented in 1998, now charges for different roads at different times automatically as vehicle passes under gantries 24,700 cars reduced & 22% rise in speed during peaks ALS – Area Licensing Scheme, ERP – Electronic Road Pricing Paper system of daily licenses for vehicles entering CBD during peak periods Focus on restraining traffic – increased vehicle & parking, enhance PT – Even after 10yrs (1975-’88) traffic levels remained 31% below original levels even as the employment in the city had increased by a third & vehicle ownership by 77%. Bus ridership increased by 20% due to congestion charging, transit improvements & related policies. Smart card is inserted in an in-vehicle units & these units communicate with overhead gantries at pricing locations. Appropriate charge will be debited from smart card. If vehicle does not have a valid smart card (balance), enforcement cameras will take photograph of the vehicle to assess a fine. Congestion price + fine can be paid online (for failure to carry sufficient balance) Motor vehicles & heavy vehicles were also added to the system Traffic levels are reviewed every 3 months to determine appropriate toll levels. Toll rate is less on Saturdays 70 charging points to ensure that traffic moves at uncongested speed 85% of time Operating cost is <10% of revenue collected & capital expense 40% of initial annual revenue No charge on some Saturdays to demonstrate people that the system is not primarily for revenue generation US$ 3 Tolls are varied every half an hour
- #34 In 2003 From 7:00 to 18:00 – Mon to Fri except holidays Overhead cameras to recognize license plates Payment – online, mobile, stations etc 5 – 8 British Pounds Increased bus ridership (faster & more reliable) by 6% & cycling by 12% during charging hours & 66% increase in cycling within charging zone Since pvt vehicle had dropped, some lanes are dedicated for public transit Control of NO2 & PM was important in London, (transportation is the largest source) EVs are exempted from charge to promote environment friendly vehicles Revenue generated was used for funding buses, cycling & pedestrian facilities (enhance accessibility & shift to alternative travel options) Discounts provided for residents of charging zone Two-thirds of people approved congestion pricing Net annual benefit of $183 million & benefit-cost ratio of 2.27
- #36 In 2006 – trial – during trial, volumes reduced by 20% & speed increased by 20%, transit ridership increased by 6-9%. When trial ended, traffic rebounded to earlier level. Cordon based scheme – cordon surrounds the city center & has 18 control points Toll is paid for each inbound passage upto a daily maximum of $8.5 In effect from 6.30 to 18.30. No charge on weekends, holidays or day before holidays Toll is $1.4, $2.1 or $2.8 depending on time of day Shorter travel time, increased road safety, public health & environmental benefits Operating costs = 25% of annual revenue Upfront investment was made in buses, trains & park-ride lots so that more buses, trains are allotted during peak hours etc CO2 emission decreased by 15% + reduction in NO2 & PM Norway : Generate 5 times the revenue required to maintain toll system
- #37 SR – State Route 1st – Throughput on priced & un-priced roads 2nd – Speed on priced & un-priced roads 3rd – Public acceptability Toll payers save 20-30minutes Variable toll pricing
- #38 VPS (Vehicle Positioning System):- GPS-Satellite communicate with In-Vehicle Units & determine location of the vehicle – no roadside equipment was required. Supplementary benefits such as navigation, ITS applications etc Emergency vehicle are exempted Other failures: Cordon tolling schemes in New York ( proposal was stopped by state legislature), Edinburgh & Manchester – rejected by public referenda – submitted an online petition (1.8million signs) against pricing
- #39 As passenger vehicles & usages grows in developing countries such as India, congestion charging will be an innovative solution to maintain traffic flow Essential for highly congested metropolitan cities, where there is no space for further expansion of road infrastructure to keep up with increased demand of vehicles