Professional Documents
Culture Documents
November 2018
Uber
Our ref: 23334001
Client ref:
Technical Report
November 2018
Steer Uber
883 Boylston Street, 3rd Floor 1455 Market Street
Boston, MA 02116 San Francisco
CA 94103
Steer has prepared this material for Uber. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which
Steer has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other
purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer
shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer
has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the
time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made.
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Contents
1 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 9
Overview............................................................................................................................. 9
Study areas ......................................................................................................................... 9
Switchable trips methodology.......................................................................................... 11
Data sources ..................................................................................................................... 13
2 London ................................................................................................................... 15
Switchable trips ................................................................................................................ 15
Impacts analysis................................................................................................................ 22
Shared ebikes required..................................................................................................... 23
November 2018
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Figures
Figure 1.1: Greater London Study Area ...................................................................................... 10
Figure 1.2: New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area ................................................................... 11
Figure 1.3: New York MTC Region Study Area ............................................................................ 11
Figure 2.1: Mode share of daily complete trips.......................................................................... 15
Figure 2.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips .............................................................. 16
Figure 2.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike....................................................... 18
Figure 2.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike ........................................ 18
Figure 2.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips .................................................. 19
Figure 2.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike .......... 20
Figure 2.7: Total daily switchable trips ....................................................................................... 21
Figure 2.8: Number of shared ebikes required for Greater London........................................... 24
Figure 3.1: Mode share of daily complete trips.......................................................................... 25
Figure 3.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips .............................................................. 26
Figure 3.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike....................................................... 28
Figure 3.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike ........................................ 28
Figure 3.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips .................................................. 29
Figure 3.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike .......... 30
Figure 3.7: Total daily switchable trips ....................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.8: Number of shared ebikes required for New York City ............................................. 34
Tables
Table 1.1: Switchable trips criteria ............................................................................................. 12
Table 2.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions) .................................................................... 15
Table 2.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips) ................................ 17
Table 2.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode........................................... 19
Table 2.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) .. 20
Table 2.5: Total daily switchable trips ........................................................................................ 21
Table 3.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions) .................................................................... 25
Table 3.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips) ................................ 27
Table 3.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode........................................... 29
Table 3.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) .. 30
Table 3.5: Total daily switchable trips ........................................................................................ 31
November 2018
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Executive Summary
Introduction
Travel in our cities is an ongoing challenge. Every day millions of people compete for space on
the road and public transport networks to make journeys to work, to shop, to meet friends,
and for many other purposes. Growing populations compound these issues, with London
forecast to grow by 2.6 million people by 20411 and New York City forecast to grow by 0.6
million people by 20402.
Cities adapt to these challenges in many ways, from investing in the road and public transport
networks, to improving conditions to encourage more people to cycle. New innovations also
have a role to play, with publicly and privately-managed bike share systems in London and
New York helping to encourage more people to cycle, particularly in inner cities.
Shared ebikes, implemented at scale, offer the potential to switch a significant number of trips
from vehicles and also to provide easier access to public transport for the first/last mile
access/egress portion of these trips. This would grow the modest number of trips currently
served by publicly-managed bike share systems (29,000 per day3 in London and 47,000 per
day4 in New York) and increase the overall share of trips by bicycle. This report, undertaken by
Steer on behalf of Uber presents, for the first time, an analysis of the potential for shared
ebikes to revolutionize travel in two case study cities: London and New York.
Analysis approach
This analysis of switchable trips5 begins by investigating current trip making patterns to
identify the trips that are potentially in scope to switch to shared ebike. An in-scope trip may
or may not switch to shared ebike, however, depending on a number of factors such as the
current travel mode and the trip distance. The next step of the analysis therefore quantifies
the propensity to switch to shared ebike, given a positive step change in cycle mode share and
applies the corresponding switching fractions to the in-scope trips to predict the number of
trips that will actually switch.
The analysis considers both complete (end-to-end origin-destination) trips as well as the
first/last mile station access/egress portion of trips whose main portion is by public transport.
A final step estimates the network-level impacts of the switching to shared ebike in terms of
reductions in the number of vehicle trips, and in the accompanying congestion and emissions.
This general approach was applied consistently to analyze the potential demand for and
impacts of shared ebikes in London and New York, with some adjustments as needed to adapt
to data availability and differences in the two geographies. The analysis can be considered
conservative: it does not consider the possibility of new demand being induced by shared
1
Mayor’s Transport Strategy, March 2018
2
New York City Population Projections by Age/Sex & Borough, 2010-2040, December 2013
3
Average daily Santander Cycles trips, January-July 2018
4
Average Citi Bike daily ridership, July 2017 - June 2018
5
Switchable trips exclude those that are made by children or by people over 80 years of age, and trips
that are too long, too short, that involve accompanying children or carrying luggage. Other trips are
considered switchable.
November 2018 | 6
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
ebikes (because they provide greater accessibility and mobility and so encourage new trip
making). The analysis also does not explicitly model induced demand for transit, facilitated by
more convenient first/last mile access/egress by shared ebike to transit stations. Lastly, the
benefits of trip diversions from vehicles to shared ebikes are understated: benefits such as
public health improvements are not considered, and estimates of travel delay reductions
ignore potential average speed improvements resulting from the diversions.
Shared ebike potential – London
Across Greater London, of the 17.4 million trips made daily, about 8.2 million trips are
potentially switchable to shared ebike based on the criteria noted above.
Our analysis suggests that 813,000 daily trips in Greater London would switch to shared
ebike following a deployment at scale. These trips replace 720,000 complete trips previously
made by other modes and 93,000 public transport first/last mile access/egress trips. Based on
the volume of trips currently made by Greater London residents, this would represent a
shared ebike mode share of 4.7%, which is not unrealistic given a positive step change in cycle
use wholly consistent with the goals stated in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. As a
comparison, other progressive cities achieve a considerably higher cycle mode share
(Copenhagen 29%6 and Amsterdam 48%7).
Between 81,000 to 163,000 shared ebikes would be required to serve the 813,000 daily trips in
Greater London.
Shared ebike potential – New York
Across the 5 boroughs of New York City, of the 26.4 million trips made daily, about 10.3 million
trips are potentially switchable to shared ebike based on the criteria noted above.
Our analysis suggests that 1 million daily trips in New York City would switch to shared ebike
following a deployment at scale. These trips replace 901,000 complete trips previously made
by other modes and 97,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips. Based on
the volume of trips currently made by New York residents, this would represent a shared ebike
mode share of 3.8%, which again is not unrealistic given a positive step change in cycle use
consistent with the city’s stated goals. Again, as a comparison, other progressive cities achieve
a considerably higher cycle mode share (Copenhagen 29%6 and Amsterdam 48%7).
6
Cycling Embassy Denmark, Copenhagen City of Cyclists – Facts and Figures 2017
7
Knowledge Institute for Mobility Policy, 2017 data
November 2018 | 7
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
1 million daily trips switching to shared ebike in New York result in:
227,000 fewer daily vehicle trips
761,000 fewer daily vehicle-miles
25,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay
300 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions
0.2 fewer daily metric tons of NOx emissions.
Between 100,000 to 200,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 1 million
daily trips in New York City.
Best case
If shared ebike adoption in London and New York were to lead to the levels of cycling mode
share currently seen in European cities such as Copenhagen, a higher number of trips could be
switched to shared ebikes. Following a similar methodology, but assuming that a higher
proportion of trips would switch to shared ebikes from their current modes, a ‘best case’
scenario would see 3.2 million daily trips in London switch to shared ebike and 6 million trips
in New York City switch to shared ebike.
November 2018 | 8
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
1 Introduction
Overview
1.1 The purpose of this report is to illustrate the potential demand for and impacts of shared
ebikes following a deployment at scale in Greater London and New York. The report considers
the effects of shared ebikes in diverting end-to-end origin-destination trips from their vehicles,
and also in replacing other modes for the first/last mile access/egress portion of public
transport trips. This report, undertaken by Steer on behalf of Uber presents, for the first time,
an analysis of the potential for shared ebikes to revolutionize travel in the two case study
cities.
1.2 This chapter details the study areas of the two cities, the general switchable trips methodology
and the data sources used. The report then provides the following detail:
• Chapter 2 - Potential for London trips to switch to shared ebikes, their impact and number
of shared ebikes required;
• Chapter 3 - Potential for New York trips to switch to shared ebikes, their impact and
number of shared ebikes required; and
• Chapter 4 - Best case: considering European levels of cycling in London and New York.
Study areas
Greater London
1.1 We have analyzed the trips made by residents of Greater London, including inner and outer
London; see Figure 1.1 for a map of the study area. This area includes a total population of 8.2
million, which is forecast to increase to 10.8 million by 20418.
8
Mayor’s Transport Strategy, March 2018
November 2018 | 9
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
New York
1.2 To facilitate comparisons, we have analyzed both:
1) New York City (the 5 boroughs); and
2) the wider New York Metropolitan Transportation Council9 region (this analysis is
presented in Appendix A).
See Figures 1.2 and 1.3 for maps of the New York study area.
1.3 The population of New York City (8.4 million) is similar to that of Greater London (8.2 million),
and is projected to increase to 9 million by 204010. The 2017 population of the wider NYMTC
region is 22.2 million, and is projected to increase to 24.7 million by 204011.
9
The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, or NYMTC, is a regional council of governments
that is the Metropolitan Planning Organization for New York City, Long Island and the lower Hudson
Valley.
10
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/data-maps/nyc-
population/projections_report_2010_2040.pdf
11
2010-2050 Total Population https://tig.nymtc.org/
November 2018 | 10
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 11
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
1.5 Having identified the trips that could potentially switch from their current mode to shared
ebike, the analysis next considers the fraction of these that will actually switch, given a
deployment of shared ebikes at scale. The probability that a given trip will actually switch
depends on:
• trip distance; and
• trip mode.
1.6 This analysis takes into account the following data and assumptions:
Shared ebike assumptions
• sufficient shared ebikes are available to meet demand
Current cycling trends and transport policy
• current cycle mode share and trends;
• city ambitions to reduce vehicle (i.e. by car, taxi and other for-hire vehicle) trips and
increase public transport, walk and cycle trips; and
• improvements in cycle infrastructure which normalizes cycling for a wider range of people
and for more trips, facilitating a greater cycle mode share.
1.7 Note that the analysis follows a static approach, in that it does not consider possible induced
demand or other second-order or feedback effects of a shared ebike deployment at scale. It
starts with existing modal volumes and predicts their diversions to shared ebike, rather than
attempting to directly predict modal volumes using a full mode choice modeling approach.
1.8 This analysis is based on professional judgement and desk-based analysis. It could be refined
and made more rigorous using stated preference research with potential users.
November 2018 | 12
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Data sources
Greater London
1.9 The analysis relies on data collected by both Transport for London and the Department for
Transport. The following data sources were used:
• London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS): To consider the potential for trips to switch to
shared ebike, we have analyzed the London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS) conducted by
Transport for London. LTDS is a travel diary-based survey that captures detailed
information about the trips made by 8,000 randomly-selected Greater London residents.
The survey is designed to represent daily travel by all London residents. The LTDS has
been undertaken on an annual basis since 2005. Our analysis uses the most recent
2016/17 data.
• Department for Transport (DfT) Travel Time Data: To consider the delay on the road
network, we have used travel time data from the Department for Transport. This data
captures the average seconds of delay per vehicle per mile (converted to km values) for
major roads in inner London and outer London. Delay is calculated by subtracting derived
‘free flow’ travel times from observed travel times for individual road sections. The latest
2016 data has been used in this analysis.
• Vehicle Emissions Data: To quantify the emissions benefits of a reduction in the number
of vehicle trips, we have used data on the fleet profile of CO2 per km emissions for petrol
and diesel cars from Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of Excellence (EVCE) and
data on the fleet profile of NOx per km emissions from the Handbook Emission Factors for
Road Transport (HBEFA).
New York
1.10 The New York analysis relies on data from the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council
(NYMTC). The following data sources were used:
• New York Best Practice Model (NYBPM): The NYBPM is NYMTC's travel demand
forecasting model. The NYBPM model area includes twelve counties in New York,
fourteen counties in New Jersey, and two counties in Connecticut, and is made up of
3,500 transportation analysis zones. The NYBPM 2017 highway and transit trip tables12,
which showed the total trip making in the study area, were used as the starting points for
the shared ebike analysis.
• The 2010/2011 Regional Household Travel Survey (RHTS): The RHTS is a comprehensive
survey of the travel behavior characteristics and related demographics of residents within
the 28 counties of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan area. The survey
provides information on travel and mobility patterns, and other key travel statistics for
the region, and enables updates to state and regional travel demand models. There were
43,558 survey participants, drawn from 18,965 households and making 143,925 linked
trips. We used the 2010/2011 RHTS to evaluate the characteristics of BPM travelers and
trips, and these characteristics were ultimately used to identify the portion of trips that
12
NYMTC provided Steer with the 2017 highway trip tables from recent BPM model runs generated
during their Transportation Conformity Determination. NYMTC also provided Steer with 2010 transit
trip tables from the BPM model base year. The study team at Steer applied 2010-2017 transit growth
rates for MTA, MNR, LIRR, and NJT to estimate the 2017 transit trip table.
November 2018 | 13
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
were potentially switchable to shared ebike. We also used the RHTS to estimate the
volume of walk and bike trips in the study area.
• Congestion Management Process (CMP): The CMP establishes performance measures to
define transportation system congestion in the NYMTC area. We obtained the measures
of delay used for the shared ebike impact analysis from the CMP.
• Vehicle Emissions Data: To estimate the emissions benefits of reduced vehicle trips, we
used data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on CO2 emissions from
passenger gasoline vehicles.
November 2018 | 14
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
2 London
Switchable trips
Total daily trips
2.1 On an average day in 2016/17, Greater London residents made 17.4 million complete end-to-
end trips entirely within Greater London, and a further 0.2 million trips with an origin or
destination outside Greater London13.
2.2 Figure 2.1 shows that the most common main mode for complete trips is walking,
representing just over one-third of all trips. Car is the second most common main mode, with
just under one-third of all trips. Public transport is the main mode for 28% of all trips.
Figure 2.1: Mode share of daily complete trips
Taxi/ Underground/
National Rail/
Car Private Bus Docklands Light Walk Cycle Other Total
Overground
Hire Rail (DLR)
5.5 0.3 2.3 1.7 0.9 5.9 0.4 0.3 17.4
13
These 0.2 million trips are excluded from the analysis as they are not in scope to switch to a shared
ebike system implemented in Greater London
November 2018 | 15
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
20.0
18.0
16.0
14.0
9.0
12.0
Daily trips (millions)
10.0
Not switchable
8.0 Switchable
6.0
2.4
4.0 1.5 5.1 8.2
Mode
14
Trips in the ‘Other’ category, which includes motorcycle, scooter and boat, are assumed to be out of
scope to switch to shared ebike
November 2018 | 16
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 17
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
16% 15%
% switchable trips that switch to shared 14%
12%
10% 10% 10%
10%
8% 8%
ebikes
8%
6% 5% 5% 5%
4%
2%
0%
1-3km 3-7km 7-15km
Trip distance
Vehicle Public transport Walk/cycle
180,000
160,000
140,000
Daily switched trips
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
1-3km 3-7km 7-15km
Trip distance
Switched vehicle trips Switched public transport trips Switched walk/cycle trips
November 2018 | 18
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 19
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Table 2.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips)
2.18 The analysis assumes that 20% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips will
switch to shared ebike. This percentage is higher than the assumptions for complete trips to
reflect the relative inconvenience of traveling by conventional modes to and from public
transport stations.
2.19 By applying these switching fractions to the potentially switchable trips in Figure 2.5, 93,000
daily first/last mile access/egress trips would switch to shared ebike. Figure 2.6 shows the
source by category of the 93,000 daily first/last mile access/egress trips that are predicted to
switch to shared ebike. 26,000 trips are public transport trips that are too long to switch to
shared ebike in their entirety, while 67,000 trips are public transport trips that could have
switched to shared ebike but were predicted not to do so.
Figure 2.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
100,000
90,000
Daily switched first/last mile trips
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
Category A Category B Total
Trip type
November 2018 | 20
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
20
18
5%
Daily in-scope passenger trips (million)
16
14
42%
12
Switchable Switched
10
Switchable Not Switched
8 Not Switchable
6
53%
4
-
Total Daily Trips
15
Cycling Embassy Denmark, Copenhagen City of Cyclists – Facts and Figures 2017
16
Knowledge Institute for Mobility Policy, 2017 data
November 2018 | 21
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Impacts analysis
Overview
2.22 An increase in the number of shared ebike trips across Greater London will reduce the number
of vehicle trips and their associated congestion and emissions. Given the predicted travel
diversions from vehicles (car, taxi and private hire) to shared ebikes, we estimated the impacts
of:
• Vehicle trip reduction;
• Congestion reduction; and
• Emissions reduction.
2.23 The reduction in vehicle trips has been calculated in the switchable trips analysis presented
above. We assembled a variety of congestion measures for Greater London, sourced from the
Department for Transport, and focusing on measures of delay (the congestion-related increase
in travel time compared to free-flow conditions). We applied these measures to the diversions
(in terms of vehicle-km traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis.
2.24 We also assembled air quality impact data (emissions rates) for the UK and applied them to
the diversions (in terms of vehicle-km traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis
described above.
Vehicle trip reduction
2.25 A calculation of the Greater London vehicle trip reductions based on trips switching to shared
ebike use must consider average vehicle occupancy, to convert person trips into equivalent
vehicle trips. Across Greater London, vehicle occupancy for potentially switchable trips is 1.2
people per vehicle (excluding taxi/private hire drivers). Using this factor, the 3.4 million
potentially switchable daily person trips by vehicle (see Figure 2.2) involve 2.8 million daily
vehicle trips.
2.26 The reduction in vehicle trips has been calculated by applying the proportion of vehicle trips
that will switch to shared ebike from vehicles. As per Figure 2.3, these proportions are as
follows:
• Vehicle trip distance 1-3km: 10% of trips switch to shared ebike;
• Vehicle trip distance 3-5km: 8% of trips switch to shared ebike; and
• Vehicle trip distance 5-10km: 5% of trips switch to shared ebike.
2.27 This analysis results in a prediction of 230,000 fewer daily vehicle movements and a vehicle
travel reduction of 1,051,000 vehicle-km across Greater London.
Congestion reduction
2.28 To calculate the reduction in Greater London congestion, we consider the reduction both in
the number of vehicle trips and in the vehicle-km that these trips travel. The reduction in
vehicle-km is then converted into a corresponding reduction in vehicle delay (the difference
between actual and free-flow travel times), using an average delay per km traveled that was
determined from current travel conditions.
2.29 The analysis does not account for average speed increases that might occur when fewer
vehicles travel on the network; in this sense the congestion reduction estimates are
conservative. We have also not taken into account the possibility of additional vehicle trips on
the network for operational repositioning or maintenance of shared ebikes.
November 2018 | 22
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
2.30 Vehicle delay due to congestion is greater in Inner London than in Outer London. We have
taken into account the following average vehicle delays, sourced from Department for
Transport Travel Time Data to consider vehicle delay across Greater London:
• Inner London – 1.6 minutes delay per km traveled; and
• Outer London – 0.8 minutes delay per km traveled.
2.31 Switching of 230,000 daily vehicle movements to shared ebike results in a daily reduction of
1,051,000 vehicle-km traveled. This is based on an average trip distance of 4.6km from in-
scope trips, as determined from the LTDS.
2.32 Based on the average vehicle delay across Greater London, this translates into a daily delay
reduction of 21,100 vehicle-hours.
Emissions reduction
2.33 To calculate the reduction in Greater London emissions through vehicle trips switching to
shared ebike, we have taken into account the reduction in vehicle-km and the average
emission rates of the vehicles undertaking the trips. For London we have included analysis of
both CO2 and NOx given the prevalence of diesel fueled vehicles. We have not included in this
analysis the emissions implications of charging or collecting/distributing shared ebikes.
2.34 We have based our emissions reductions calculation on the following assumptions (data
sources in brackets):
• Petrol share of vehicles used for switchable trips in Greater London: 69% (LTDS)
• Diesel share of vehicles used for switchable trips in Greater London: 31% (LTDS)
• Petrol average CO2 emissions rate: 200g/km (Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of
Excellence)
• Diesel average CO2 emissions rate: 120g/km (Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of
Excellence)
• Petrol average NOx emissions rate: 0.08g/km (Handbook Emission Factors for Road
Transport)
• Diesel average NOx emissions rate: 0.47g/km (Handbook Emission Factors for Road
Transport)
2.35 The switching of 1,051,000 daily vehicle-km to shared ebike has the following impacts on CO2
and NOx emissions:
• Daily reduction of 184 metric tons of CO2
• Daily reduction of 0.2 metric tons of NOx
2.36 These reductions represent a 4% reduction in total daily vehicle CO2 and NOX emissions in the
Greater London area.
Shared ebikes required
2.37 Figure 2.8 shows the number of shared ebikes required to serve the demand estimated in this
chapter. The required number of shared ebikes depends on the assumed average number of
trips made per shared ebike per day. The analysis assumes either 10 or 5 daily trips per bike.
2.38 Based on 10 trips per bike per day, 81,000 shared ebikes are required across Greater London.
Based on 5 trips per bike per day, twice as many bikes are required: 163,000 shared ebikes
across Greater London.
November 2018 | 23
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
200,000
Number of shared ebikes required 180,000 163,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
81,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
Number of shared ebikes required
10 trips per bike per day 5 trips per bike per day
November 2018 | 24
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Walk to Drive to
Drive HOV HOV Walk to Drive to
Taxi Comm. Comm. Bike Walk Total
Alone 2 3+ Transit Transit
Rail Rail
2.6 3.0 2.0 0.7 7.2 0.3 0.3 0.05 0.3 9.9 26.4
November 2018 | 25
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 26
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 27
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 28
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
November 2018 | 29
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Table 3.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips)
3.14 We have assumed that 20% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips actually
switch to shared ebike. This percentage is higher than the assumption made for complete trips
to reflect the relative inconvenience of access to and egress from public transportation
stations by conventional modes.
3.15 When applied to the switchable trips shown in Figure 3.5, we predict that a total of 97,000
daily first/last mile access/egress trips will switch to shared ebike. Figure 3.6 shows the source
of the 97,000 daily trips by category. 23,000 trips are from Category A: first/last mile of public
transportation trips that are too long to switch to shared ebike (>15km end to end), while
74,000 are from Category B: first/last mile of public transportation trips that could switch to
shared ebike but were predicted not to do so.
Figure 3.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
November 2018 | 30
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
17
Cycling Embassy Denmark, Copenhagen City of Cyclists – Facts and Figures 2017
18
Knowledge Institute for Mobility Policy, 2017 data
November 2018 | 31
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Impacts analysis
Overview
3.18 Given the predicted travel diversions from vehicles (car/taxi) to shared ebikes, we estimated
the impacts in terms of:
• Vehicle trip reduction;
• Congestion reduction; and
• Emissions reduction.
3.19 The vehicle trip reduction has been calculated in the switchable trips analysis presented
above. We assembled air quality impact data (emissions rates) for the US and applied them to
the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis
described above.
3.20 We also assembled a variety of congestion measures for New York, focusing on measures of
delay (the congestion-related increase in travel time compared to free-flow conditions) and
also applied these to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the
switchable trips analysis.
Vehicle trip reduction
3.21 As shown in Table 3.3, of the 1 million daily trips predicted to switch to shared ebike, 313,000
trips switch from vehicle trips (while the others switch from public transportation and walk
trips). These are person trips.
3.22 Based on the average vehicle occupancy of 1.38 for vehicles within New York City, we
estimated that about 227,000 vehicle trips are replaced by shared ebike, which corresponds to
a reduction of 761,000 vehicle-miles traveled (VMT). This suggests the average shared ebike
trip distance is 3.4 miles.
Congestion reduction
3.23 We assembled a variety of automobile congestion measures for New York from NYMTC’s 2017
congestion management process. We focused on vehicle-hours of delay (VHD), which is the
sum of delays experienced by all vehicles on the network. Delay is the difference between
actual travel speed and free-flow travel speed, and is therefore readily understood by the
traveling public. Vehicles traveling in New York City experienced a total of 1.8 million hours of
delay in 201719, which suggests a delay of 2 minutes per vehicle per mile in New York City. We
then applied this estimate of delay to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled)
predicted from the switchable trips analysis.
3.24 For application, our approach assumed that the improvement in congestion measures
(vehicle-hours of delay) is proportional to the reduction in vehicle-miles traveled (with no
assumed improvement in average travel speed from the diversions). The analysis does not
account for average speed increases that might occur when fewer vehicles travel on the
network; in this sense the congestion reduction estimates are conservative. We have also not
taken into account the possibility of additional vehicle trips on the network for operational
repositioning or maintenance of shared ebikes.
19 https://www.nymtc.org/Required-Planning-Products/Congestion-Management-Process
November 2018 | 32
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
3.25 Our analysis shows a reduction of 25,000 hours of delay from vehicle trips switched to shared
ebike in New York City.
Emissions reduction
3.26 New York City adds about 150,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each day.
About 10% of these daily emissions are from the transportation sector, and about one-sixth of
the transportation sector emissions are from vehicle trips traveling within New York City. For
New York we have included an analysis of CO2 but not of NOx given the low proportion of
diesel fueled vehicles in the passenger fleet.
3.27 According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), emissions from passenger
vehicles are based on the fuel economy of the vehicle, and the amount of carbon in the
vehicle’s fuel. In the U.S. today, most passenger vehicles on the road are gasoline vehicles,
and average about 22.0 miles per gallon20. In turn, each gallon of gasoline creates about 8,887
grams of CO2 when burned21. Together, the EPA estimates an emission rate of about 404
grams of CO2 per mile from passenger vehicles.
3.28 This CO2 emission rate is applied to the diversions of vehicle trips to shared ebike (in terms of
vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis. Our analysis shows about
300 metric tons of carbon offset per day from vehicle trips replaced by shared ebike. We have
not included in this analysis the emissions implications of charging or collecting/distributing
shared ebikes.
20
Federal Highway Administration Highway Statistics 2016. This is representative of the light duty
passenger vehicle feet as a whole, including both new and existing vehicles. The average passenger
vehicle fuel economy is expected to increase over time as a result of greenhouse gas and fuel economy
standards developed in coordination between EPA, DOT and California.
21
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
November 2018 | 33
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
22
NYS Vehicle Registrations on File - End of year 2017
November 2018 | 34
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
4 Best Case
Overview
4.1 If shared ebike adoption in London and New York were to lead to the levels of cycling seen in
European cities such as Copenhagen, a higher number of trips could be switched to shared
ebikes. Following the methodology described above, but assuming that a higher proportion of
trips will switch, we have considered a ‘best case’ scenario where overall cycle mode share for
London and New York increases to the current cycle mode share in Copenhagen of 29%23.
London
4.2 In this best case scenario, 3.2 million daily trips would switch to shared ebike in London. These
trips replace 2.9 million complete trips previously made by other modes and 348,000 public
transport first/last mile access/egress trips. This would represent a shared ebike mode share
of 19.5%, with the remainder of cycling trips by personal bike or shared regular bikes. The
impacts of 3.2 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 920,000 fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 4,204,000 fewer daily vehicle-km;
• 84,500 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay;
• 736 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions; and
• 0.8 fewer daily metric tons of NOx emissions.
To serve 3.2 million daily trips would require deployment of between 325,000 and 650,000
shared ebikes across Greater London.
New York
4.3 In this best case scenario, 6 million trips would switch to shared ebike in New York City. These
trips would replace 2 million vehicle trips, 3 million public transportation end-to-end trips,
230,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips, and 640,000 walk trips. Based
on the volume of trips currently made by New York residents, this would be a shared ebike
mode share of 22.7%, with the remainder of cycling trips by personal bike or shared regular
bikes. The impacts of the 6 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 1.5 million fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 5 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 164,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay; and
• 2,000 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
600,000 to 1,200,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 6 million daily
trips in New York City.
23
Cycling Embassy Denmark, Copenhagen City of Cyclists – Facts and Figures 2017
November 2018 | 35
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Appendices
i
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
ii
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Table A.1: Daily complete trips by mode in the NYMTC region (millions)
Walk to Drive to
Drive HOV HOV Walk to Drive to
Taxi Comm. Comm. Bike Walk Total
Alone 2 3+ Transit Transit
Rail Rail
19.5 14.0 9.9 0.8 7.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 13.6 67.4
iii
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Figure A.3: Daily switchable complete trips within the NYMTC region
Table A.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode in the NYMTC region (millions)
iv
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Figure A.4: Potential of NYMTC region complete trips to switch to shared ebike
v
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Figure A.5: Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike in the NYMTC region
Table A.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by trip location and source mode in the NYMTC region
vi
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Figure A.6: Switchable public transportation first/last mile trips in the NYMTC region
Table A.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) in the NYMTC region
A.11 The analysis assumes that 20% and 10% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress
trips in NYC and outside NYC (Other), respectively, switch to shared ebike. When applied to
the switchable trips (Figure A.6), we predict that a total of 130,000 daily first/last mile
access/egress trips will switch to shared ebike.
Total switchable trips
A.12 As shown in Figure A.7 and Table A.5, of the 67.4 million trips made within the NYMTC region
by residents on a typical weekday in 2017, we have estimated that 64% are not switchable,
34% are switchable but not predicted to switch to shared ebike, and 2% (1.2 million trips) are
predicted to switch to shared ebike.
vii
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
viii
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Table A.6: VMT from vehicle trips in NYMTC region and reduction from shared ebike
Congestion reduction
A.16 Vehicles traveling in the NYMTC region experienced a total of 2.4 million hours of delay in
201725, which suggests a delay of 1 minute per vehicle per mile in the NYMTC region. We
applied this estimate of delay to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted
from the switchable trips analysis.
A.17 Table A.3 shows a reduction of 29,000 hours of delay from vehicle trips replaced by shared
ebike.
Table A.7: Daily vehicle-hours of delay from vehicle trips in the NYMTC region and reduction from shared ebike
Emissions reduction
A.18 About 86,500 metric tons of carbon dioxide are emitted to the atmosphere from vehicle trips
traveling within the NYMTC region each day. The CO2 emission rate of 404 g/gallon was
applied to the diversions of vehicle trips to shared ebike (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled)
predicted from the switchable trips analysis. Table A.4 shows a carbon offset of 550 metric
tons per day from vehicle trips replaced by shared ebike.
Table A.8: CO2 emissions from vehicle trips in the NYMTC region and offset from shared ebike
Impact summary
A.19 In summary, 1.2 million trips were predicted to switch to shared ebike in the NYMTC region.
These trips would replace 480,000 vehicle trips, 500,000 public transportation end-to-end
trips, 130,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips, and 92,000 walk trips.
Based on the volume of trips currently made in the New York MTC region, this would be a
shared ebike mode share of 1.7%, with the remainder of cycling trips by private bike or shared
regular bikes. The impacts of the 1.2 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the
following:
• 370,000 fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 1.4 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 29,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay; and
• 550 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
25
https://www.nymtc.org/Required-Planning-Products/Congestion-Management-Process
ix
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
120,000 to 240,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 1.2 million daily
trips in New York MTC region.
New York MTC Region – Best Case
A.20 In the best case scenario based on Copenhagen’s current cycling mode share, 7.3 million trips
would switch to shared ebike. These trips would replace 3.2 million vehicle trips, 3.1 million
public transportation end-to-end trips, 480,000 public transportation first/last mile
access/egress trips, and 600,000 walk trips. Based on the volume of trips currently made in
the New York MTC region, this would be a shared ebike mode share of 11% with the
remainder of cycling trips by private bike or shared regular bikes. The impacts of the 6 million
daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 2.4 million fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 9.3 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 190,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay; and
• 3,700 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
730,000 to 1,500,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 7.3 million daily
trips in New York MTC region.
x
Control Information
Steer Uber
883 Boylston Street, 3rd Floor 1455 Market Street
Boston, MA 02116 San Francisco
+1 (617) 391 2300 CA 94103
www.steergroup.com
Author/originator Reviewer/approver
Matthew Clark, Tolu Ogunbekun Jon Bottom