The Exploratory Advanced Research Program

Novel Surface Transportation Modes

FINAL REPORT • DECEMBER 2015

a

Foreword

The 21st century is still in its adolescence—a phase denoted for transition amid a search for clarity of identity. The formative years of the new millennium have featured transformative innovations that will continue to influence how we live and work for generations, and in the decades ahead, the world will continue to be shaped by events and forces that are both anticipated and unexpected. In just 15 years, information technology and wireless communications have radically remade everything from the retail marketplace to how we stay in touch with friends and family.

The effect of these paradigm shifts will be enduring and pervasive across industries. How decisionmakers in the public and private sectors respond to the growing influence of emerging technologies on transportation safety and efficiency will determine whether innovation is a disruptive force or one for progress. This is why it is absolutely critical for the United States to modernize existing modes of transport to improve safety, mobility, and environmental sustainability. Innovations like vehicle-to-infrastructure communications and global positioning systems are revolutionizing the U.S. transportation system, but limiting the scope of the national strategy to long- established systems and industries is short-sighted. The U.S. Department of Transportation should not create or maintain arbitrary barriers to innovation; it should be facilitating new opportunities for entrepreneurs with game-changing ideas.

The Novel Surface Transportation Modes project is an initiative fundamentally designed around this concept. This project provided an opportunity for individuals and businesses to make a case for surface transportation solutions that are compelling but categorically “outside of the box.” Many of these innovators failed to be heard in the past because there was simply no existing avenue for their proposal. The lessons learned will guide future initiatives like this one. The Novel Surface Transportation Modes project is a promising step forward in the effort to find new and more effective mechanisms for exploring novel transportation solutions.

Gregory D. Winfree Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology U.S. Department of Transportation

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. b Cover photo illustration: © Dreamstime.com Technical Report Documentation Page

i Executive Summary

This report summarizes an initial stage On December 2–3, 2014, in San Francisco, investigation into current research and de­ CA, and McLean, VA, with remote par­ velopment of alternative modal concepts. ticipation from both domestic and inter­ The research project was a multimodal national participants, the EAR Program effort, organized by the Federal Highway convened a workshop on Novel Surface Administration’s (FHWA’s) Exploratory Transportation Modes. Subject matter Advanced Research (EAR) Program, experts, USDOT staff, and developers of with the participation of the Federal novel modal concepts gathered to discuss Transit Administration, Federal Railroad broad trends in transportation innovation, Administration, and Office of the Assistant hear public and private sector perspec­ Secretary for Research and Technology. tives, and listen to presentations of the Staff from the John A. Volpe National concepts under development by the in­ Transportation Systems Center (Volpe novators in attendance. Center) conducted this project on behalf of the EAR Program. The authors of this report discuss the cur­ rent state of novel surface transportation The project goals were to gain a better modal concepts, identify opportunities understanding of novel surface transpor­ and challenges for these concepts, and tation concepts that fall outside of the present a set of potential future research EAR Program’s regular technology scans; needs. The authors have summarized the facilitate interaction and information- information from both research on novel sharing among the U.S. Department of modes and the viewpoints shared at the Transportation (USDOT), State and local novel modes workshop. governments, and private sector innovators; and explore the role of the public sector in The research team for this study identified advancing transportation innovation. The four key challenges common to novel mode research team sought preliminary infor­ development. These challenges include: mation on novel modal concepts through literature reviews and used these findings • Addressing connections to existing to establish the project scope. FHWA also modes and last-mile issues. issued a request for information on novel • Increasing attention given to passenger surface transportation systems and re­ experience and comfort. ceived 34 submissions. These submissions • Providing sound methods for predicting comprised a range of concepts for both travel demand and mode choice. passenger and freight transportation and • Enhancing the management and mitiga­ represented a wide range of technological tion of risk from an investor perspective. readiness levels.

ii Researchers also identified four key op­ investor and societal risk of adopting novel portunities for innovators that are common modes, which would enhance the likelihood among novel modes. These opportunities of investment. include: The research team also identified six op­ • Engaging with Government agencies portunities for USDOT to facilitate the outside of the transportation sector development and deployment of novel (e.g., Department of Defense (DOD), modes. These opportunities include: Department of Health and Human Services, and Department of Energy • Providing technical support to State (DOE)). agencies to reduce barriers to innovation. • Working with universities for testing, • Encouraging innovation. prototype development, and research. • Improving travel demand and mode- • Working together to develop standards choice models. in collaboration with Government and • Facilitating connections between inno­ other stakeholders. vators and university and Government • Taking advantage of unique settings that researchers. may be conducive to a new transportation • Developing novel testing facilities and system (e.g., self-contained campuses, paradigms. airports, and other facilities) or to a spe­ • Providing a forum for testing, standard­ cific market (e.g., freight, passenger, and ization, and specifications. overseas locations). Addressing these opportunities would By taking advantage of these opportuni­ greatly enhance the societal environment ties, innovators would be able to address for innovation with regard to novel trans­ several of the key concerns relating to portation modes within the United States.

iii iv Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION 1

Project Scope 1 Process 2

PART ONE: NOVEL MODES IN CONTEXT 4 Why Consider Novel Modes? 5 Societal Pull Factors 5 Technological “Push” Factors 7

PART TWO: ASSESSMENT 10 Existing Conditions 11 Major Modal Types Identified 11 Summary 14 Observations 14 Outlook 16 Evaluation Considerations 17 Technological Maturity 17 Environmental, Social, and Economic Sustainability 20 Reliability and Resilience 21 Regulatory Challenges 22 Roles in Transportation Innovation 22 Federal Level 22 State and Local Agencies 23 Private Sector 23 Universities and Research Institutes 23 Findings 23 Innovation Context 23 Challenges 24 Opportunities 25

v Table of Contents, cont'd Future Research and Support Needs 26 Technical Assistance 26 Improved Access 26 Travel-Demand Forecasts 26 Outreach Activities 27 Testing and Validating 27 Testing, Standards, and Certification 27

CONCLUSION 28

APPENDICES 30 APPENDIX A: LIST OF RFI RESPONDENTS 31 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT 32 CONCEPT SUMMARIES

REFERENCES 38

vi List of Tables

Table 1. Current and future societal needs for transportation systems. 7

Table 2. A summary of major modal concept types. 15

Table 3. The EAR Program’s technology readiness level for highway research scale. 18

vii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

ATN automated transit network

DOD Department of Defense

DOE Department of Energy

EAR Exploratory Advanced Research

EV electric vehicle

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GHG greenhouse gas

HHS Department of Health and Human Services

PRT personal rapid transit

R&D research and development

RFI request for information

TEV tracked electric vehicle

TRL technology readiness level

USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation

viii ix

x Introduction

he U.S. Department of Transportation are already showing promise in areas (USDOT) funds critical research in many previously considered the realm of science Tareas, ranging from materials development fiction, such as automated vehicles. U.S. to behavioral economics. Research results Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx’s from USDOT research programs help to inform 30-year framework for the future of trans­ public sector and industry stakeholders and portation, Beyond Traffic, provides an offer guidance for policy formation, invest­ overview of some of these future trends ment decisions, and regulation. The USDOT’s and highlights promising technologies.(1) ongoing mission to advance transportation safety and mobility in a cost-effective way This report summarizes an initial stage means that these research programs typically investigation into current research and focus on well-defined needs and seek regular development (R&D) of alternative modal stakeholder input; however, it is periodically concepts. The goals of the project were necessary to look beyond these well-defined to gain a better understanding of novel programs to question what may be on the surface transportation concepts that fall horizon. In accordance, the Federal Highway outside of the EAR Program’s regular Administration’s (FHWA’s) Exploratory Advanced technology scans; facilitate interaction Research (EAR) Program focuses on longer and information-sharing among USDOT, term, higher risk research areas—with a higher State and local governments, and private payoff potential—in diverse areas of highway sector innovators; and explore the role of transportation, ranging from advanced trans­ the public sector in advancing transporta­ portation modeling to nano-materials. tion innovation. This research project was a multimodal effort, organized by the EAR Transportation technology has mostly evolved Program, with the participation of the incrementally over time, but there have also Federal Transit Administration, Federal been instances in which new technologies Railroad Administration, and Office of have proved highly disruptive to existing the Assistant Secretary for Research and modes of travel. Historical examples of this Technology. Staff from the John A. Volpe include steam ships displacing sailing vessels National Transportation Systems Center and railroads displacing canals in the 19th (Volpe Center) conducted this project on century, and trucks, buses, and air service behalf of the EAR Program. displacing passenger and freight rail service in the 20th century. During each transition, PROJECT SCOPE the Government played a critical role in the adoption of new modal technologies. Today, For this project, the term novel trans­ rapid advances in transportation technology portation systems includes intercity (i.e.,

1 long distance) and daily travel contexts, both not meet any of the criteria presented domestic and global. The research team in this list. Moreover, the novel modes of limited the scope of the project to surface greatest interest are those that are not in transportation only, which is defined here widespread use today and may meaningfully broadly as including elevated or subsurface change travel options, travel behavior, systems but not maritime or air transporta­ economic output, development and opera­ tion. They also determined that proposals tion of transportation rights-of-way, and for novel transportation systems must have land-development patterns. conceptually progressed beyond a mere idea (i.e., there must have been studies, or serious PROCESS consideration, of basic engineering concepts) but not progressed to the point of being a Volpe Center staff conducted this research proven, market-ready system. The research project for the EAR Program. In addition, team defined this stage as having completed a multimodal team of internal USDOT one or more full-scale field demonstrations stakeholders guided the development of and having commercial partners, suppliers, or the project scope, in collaboration with the customers in place. They acknowledged that project team and EAR Program, and partici­ there are many other approaches that could pated in shaping and reviewing the project. substitute transportation demand (e.g., three- The research team sought preliminary dimensional printing or telecommuting) but information on novel modal concepts such substitution strategies were not within through literature reviews. Researchers the scope of this project. used these findings to establish the project The research team noted that novel modes scope outlined in the previous section. will likely have more than one of the following Following this, FHWA issued a request for attributes. A novel mode should: information (RFI) on novel surface transpor­ tation systems and received 34 submissions. • Showcase a breakthrough technology. These submissions comprised a range of • Represent a new mode not captured by concepts for both passenger and freight conventional transportation demand models. transportation and represented a wide • Establish a new vehicle type or new propul­ range of technological readiness levels. sion technology or system. A full list of submissions can be found in • Represent a new ownership structure or Appendix A. business model. • Offer a new service concept (e.g., manual or On December 2–3, 2014, the EAR Program automated, point-to-point or hub and spoke, convened a workshop on Novel Surface roundtrip or one-way, private or shared). Transportation Modes. The EAR staff • Introduce a new system-management concept. coordinated simultaneous convening of • Implement a new fueling source or infra­ the workshop in San Francisco, CA, and structure. McLean, VA, with remote participation from both domestic and international The research team did not consider this to be a participants. Subject matter experts, complete list of attributes and acknowledged USDOT staff, and developers of novel modal that there may be a novel mode that does concepts gathered to discuss broad trends

2 in transportation innovation, hear public and A selection of 24 RFI respondents also private sector perspectives, and listen to pre­ provided short pitches to summarize their sentations of the concepts under development novel mode concepts. Brief overviews of by the innovators in attendance. Expert speak­ these concept summaries are presented in ers provided context-setting presentations on Appendix B. These pitches were followed transportation history, travel demand, freight, by expert panel discussion of key themes. and investment. In addition, the expert panelists A summary of the workshop is available discussed State and local perspectives and at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/advancedre­ project financing and business model issues. search/pubs.cfm.

3

Part One: Novel Modes in Context

4 Why Consider Novel Modes?

The U.S. transportation system offers to take advantage of technological advances. historically unprecedented levels of mobility, The following pages summarize key societal but the research team noted that it does and technological factors in transportation not meet the needs of all users and comes innovation today. with significant financial and other costs. In accordance, transportation operators and Societal Pull Factors the traveling public are constantly searching Although the current surface transportation for improvements in speed, access, safety, system provides users with high levels and environmental performance. of personal mobility, it has significant shortcomings that could create demand Over the past few decades, capacity for novel modes. In particular, the current expansion constraints, funding limitations, surface transportation system is costly and shifting public preferences have led to in terms of expenditure levels and its a focus on improved system management impacts on human health and the natural over new construction, particularly by environment. In addition, the current making use of newly available information system leaves segments of the population and communication technologies. Although underserved. The key limitations noted real improvements in performance have by the research team are outlined in the been made, the surface transportation following sections. system continues to face significant issues with congestion and emissions. There are User costs also other emerging challenges, such The Bureau of Transportation Statistics as preserving mobility for an aging estimates that the United States collectively population. In accordance, government spends approximately $800 billion per and industry may benefit by considering year on motor vehicles, fuels, and related an entirely new approach. items.(2) At the household level, an estimate from the Census Bureau puts the annual New products and services are sometimes spending total for vehicles, fuel, and other described as arising from a combination of vehicle expenses at approximately $8,466 societal or market “pull” and technology per household, which is higher than food “push.” The former refers to products that and any other expense category except are explicitly designed to address unmet for housing and shelter.(3) The American needs or other opportunities in the market, Automobile Association separately estimates whereas the latter refers to a process by the direct financial costs of driving a family which new products are designed primarily sedan at approximately $0.59 per 1.6 km (1 mi)

5 or just under $9,000 per year for a typical Safety driver.(4) For many households, maintaining According to the National Highway basic mobility, including access to jobs and Traffic Safety Administration report, Traffic services, requires one or more vehicles with Safety Facts 2013, 30,057 fatalities and costs that can consume a significant share just under 1.6 million non-fatal injuries of disposable income. resulted from traffic crashes in 2013. This equates to 10.35 deaths per 100,000 Public Infrastructure Costs people, which compares unfavorably to Public sector expenditures on roads, bridges, and other highly developed countries and other infrastructure include roughly $40 billion represents a very large societal cost.(7) per year from Federal-aid programs under Although much progress has been made the current Moving Ahead for Progress in the over the past decades, motor-vehicle 21st Century Act, in addition to an estimated crashes are still the leading cause of death $250 billion in State and local expenditures. for several age groups. (5) According to FHWA’s Conditions and Performance Report, these levels are not Environment adequate to maintain the road system in its The United States is the second largest current condition nor to reduce the backlog emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs) after of deferred maintenance.(6) Other public costs, China, and approximately 20 percent of such as emergency response related to traffic those GHGs come from surface transporta­ crashes and police costs associated with tion, principally cars and trucks. The United traffic control and enforcement, are harder States has announced a target to reduce to quantify but are undoubtedly substantial. GHG emissions by 26–28 percent below The financial demands of maintaining the 2005 levels by 2025.(8) Emissions of criteria country’s enormous roadway infrastructure pollutants as designated under the Clean are such that the potential insolvency of Air Act have been reduced considerably in the Highway Trust Fund continues to be a recent years but continue to contribute to pressing issue. health problems, such as asthma.(9)

Limited Options for Non-Drivers Other Factors The interaction between the current surface Another source of societal pull factors could transportation system and the low-density come from demographic and attitudinal development patterns typical in the United changes toward transportation. For example, States has meant that those who are unable driver license and vehicle ownership rates to drive (e.g., because of age or disability) and among younger Americans have declined, those who cannot afford or do not want to and there is some evidence that this group own a car have fairly limited mobility options is more open to innovative approaches, or are constrained in their choices of living and such as bike sharing and ride sourcing. This working locations. This presents a very large group could serve as a source of demand- societal cost in terms of foregone employment side pull for novel surface transportation opportunities, limited access to services, and systems as an alternative to car ownership more broadly in reduced community cohesion. or conventional transit services.

6 Over the long term, broader societal vehicles in real time and other wireless trends could also spur interest in new transmission (e.g., electrical charging), forms of transportation. These could continued advances in computing power include changes in settlement patterns, that enable real-time processing of large employment locations, or freight flows that amounts of information, materials science stretch the limits of existing transportation innovations in lightweight composites and systems. Likewise, challenges with security, solar charging, and new business models for public health, resource constraints, or transportation services (e.g., vehicle sharing adaptations to a changing climate could and pop-up services). also lead to interest in new modal options. More optimistically, rising personal incomes Improved communications, new sensor over time would also tend to foster interest technologies, and computing power are in transportation systems that offer travel- driving advances in partial or complete time savings, greater convenience, or automation of vehicles. Automated vehicles productivity improvements. This dynamic, are defined as those vehicles in which at and other key points about societal pull least some aspects of a safety–critical factors, are distilled in table 1. control function (e.g., steering, throttle, or braking) occur without direct driver input. Automated vehicles may use onboard Technological “Push” Factors sensors, cameras, global positioning systems, Technological innovation can drive and telecommunications to obtain the transportation development and innovation. information necessary to make judgments Recent technological advances of particular regarding safety–critical situations and relevance to transportation include improve­ act appropriately by effectuating control ments in wireless communications to at some level.(10) Although fully-automated

Table 1. Current and future societal needs for transportation systems.

Current Transportation Future and Emerging Systems Transportation Systems

Current Societal Needs Existing systems provide Future systems would high levels of mobility and need to be cheaper, safer, convenience but at high faster, more comfortable, cost and with notable and more convenient than limitations. is the current set of trans­ portation options.

Future and Emerging Current modes may not Future systems would be Societal Needs be able to adapt to future developed to respond to needs or societal changes. new and emerging needs (e.g., for independent mo­ bility for growing elderly population).

7 (i.e., driverless) vehicles may be many years also have a greatly reduced risk of electric away, automation has progressed rapidly, shock; however, they tend to be less efficient and a growing share of vehicles on the because they lose charge as waste heat and market today already have limited forms need to power the charging source as well as of automated control (e.g., adaptive cruise the destination. These charging mechanisms control, lane-keeping, and forward-collision can be slower to charge, but transmission avoidance). Potential benefits of automation efficiency can approach that of wired systems include improvements in safety and a when coils are of a similar size and in close reduction in accident rates; improvements proximity.(11) Technologies are also improving to in traffic flow and fuel efficiency by using reduce losses. For example, several inductive sensors and communications to maintain charging systems have been successfully headways; reduced travel times because of demonstrated in transit environments in the reduced congestion, accidents, and arbitrary United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Korea.(12) driver behaviors that cause bottlenecks; and The Society of Automotive Engineers is also improvements in air quality. Such systems developing a standard frequency and minimum leverage current infrastructure and vehicle performance, safety, and testing criteria for ownership models while taking advantage inductive charging of electric vehicles, which of automation to reduce error and improve is expected to further innovation in this area.(13) system efficiency. Many of the current impediments to broader electric-vehicle (EV) adoption relate to the Recent advances in inductive charging of vehicles’ limited range and the time and batteries have attracted a great deal of dedicated locations needed for recharging. attention for transportation uses, such as The extent that widespread, cost-effective, charging of electric buses during routine inductive-charging systems can be developed stops and in pavement charging options. would likely significantly increase EVs’ market Inductive charging, also called wireless penetration relative to internal combustion charging, is the transfer of a charge from vehicles. In time, motorists could recharge one electrical system to another in close their vehicles while driving or cordlessly proximity by creating an electromagnetic recharge at office parks and shopping centers. field in the power source to induce an electromagnetic charge into a destination Advances in materials science may contribute device. The advantage to this mechanism to both propulsion and construction materials is that it can be done simply by proximity in existing vehicles. A variety of thin-film and does not require vehicles to stop and photovoltaic materials are in development plug in to a fixed electrical outlet. Inductive that will be lightweight and cheaper to charging is considered key to the future construct than traditional photovoltaic cells. of electric vehicles to overcome barriers, These materials may become part of vehicle such as lack of personal charging space windows and surfaces in the future to assist and locations, length of the charging in propelling the vehicle with renewable period, and the desire to charge while solar power. Advances in battery and energy driving. Inductive-charging mechanisms storage technologies, such as organically­

8 based batteries that can recycle spent Recent developments in vehicle sharing lithium and batteries with increased (e.g., car and bicycle sharing) and pop-up efficiency and reduced toxicity, may further ride services that respond to immediate enable the expansion of EVs by increasing requests (e.g., taxi services such as Uber and range, reducing cost, and improving bus services such as Bridj) have begun to environmental footprints.(14) Novel composite dramatically alter how a significant segment of materials will also increasingly enable the the population travels.(16) All of these services production of lighter weight vehicles with depend on improved wireless communications, better fuel economy and similar or better mobile phone applications, global positioning safety profiles than current vehicles. The systems, electronic payment systems, and Department of Energy (DOE) estimates access to an ad-hoc workforce. As of 2011, over that a 10-percent reduction in road vehicle half a million people in the United States and weight can lead to a 6–8 percent fuel- Canada participated in car-sharing services. efficiency improvement and suggests (17) Survey results suggest that for a certain that high-efficiency engines made of portion of users, car sharing led to a new advanced materials can also lead to lifestyle involving an increase in travel by non- improvements in efficiency. In addition, motorized travel modes and public transit in DOE estimates that the combination of concert with their increased use of car sharing. reduced weight and engine improvements Other segments of the population, particularly associated with advanced materials could those who began car-sharing membership as save over 5 billion gallons of fuel annually carless households, exhibited a decrease in by 2030.(15) public transit use.(14)

9

Part Two: Assessment

10

Existing Conditions

The project research team reviewed rapid transit (PRT) and automated transit literature reviews, along with the submis­ network (ATN) systems typically involve sions received following the RFI, to better fixed guideways, yet have the flexibility understand basic characteristics of novel to provide point-to-point service within transportation systems. USDOT staff also this framework. The introduction of PRT provided input based on their knowledge and ATN systems as a general concept is of additional concepts and research not new, for example, the Morgantown, in progress. The review is necessarily WV, PRT system began service in 1975 somewhat limited based on the project and the Ultra PRT system opened at scope outlined earlier in this publica­ Heathrow Airport in the United Kingdom tion. As noted previously, the research in 2011. Each novel mode concept that team did not consider maritime or avia­ the research team reviewed in this project tion concepts, nor many current trends typically offers a refinement to the idea, considered to be novel modes (e.g., ride such as lower costs or improved system sourcing through a mobile application) control. Although there are a few existing because of their use of existing technolo­ examples of commercial PRT systems, gies and systems. An overview of the sur­ these are generally very limited in scale, face transportation novel mode concepts and the overall concept is not yet in wide­ that the researchers reviewed is outlined spread deployment. The research team in the following section, together with a therefore included PRT and ATN within brief discussion of some of the factors the scope of the research, especially with impacting potential viability. respect to future innovations relating to the concept. PRT and ATN systems offer the prospect of combining the flexibil­ Major Modal Types Identified ity and convenience of personal vehicles Proposed systems may not fit exclusively into one with the energy savings and other effi­ typology and may share elements of two or more. ciencies of mass transit; however, it is un­ clear whether such systems can feasibly Personal Rapid Transit and Automated scale up to serve high passenger loads Transit Network Systems without reverting to something more like There are many variations on the theme conventional fixed-route transit. In addi­ of small, automated, public-transportation tion, although PRT and ATN systems are vehicles that provide on-demand service sometimes described as a potential means for individuals or small groups. Personal of addressing the “last-mile” problem of

11 conventional transit services, they too oper­ system to cover the distance between the ate on fixed guideways and can face last- airport and the traveler’s ultimate origin mile problems of their own—particularly in and destination, thus removing much of the context of low-density settlement pat­ the inconvenience of changing modes. terns in most metropolitan areas. The infrastructure needed to implement these types of approaches often includes Platooning and Quasi-Rail Systems interchange stations or facilities and po­ Platooning concepts involve automated tentially more significant infrastructure operation of conventional automobiles or when the second mode is not in common newly developed vehicle types in platoons that use already. In addition, significant vehicle would reduce travel times, fuel consumption, design changes would be required for and labor costs. In some applications they many systems. The need to operate safely use a fixed-guideway system. Platooning in two different modal environments may concepts require advanced safety systems require design compromises that increase to ensure that vehicles can travel at very cost, add weight, or reduce fuel economy. close headways and, in some cases, also re­ Such systems can also face development quire the development of a fixed guideway challenges because of regulatory issues and specialized vehicles. The close spacing related to the demands of meeting two is designed to improve throughput and different, and potentially conflicting, sets speeds, while also improving fuel economy of safety and emissions rules. through reduced aerodynamic drag. One key challenge for the commercialization of Tube Transportation these systems is that similar technologies Tube transportation refers to a set of (e.g., cooperative adaptive cruise control) concepts for very high-speed intercity are currently in development for conven­ travel using capsule-like vehicles pro­ tional automobiles. These systems could pelled through tubes that have been provide many of the benefits of platooning fully or partially evacuated to reduce without the need for developing an alternative aerodynamic resistance. Entrepreneur modal system. Elon Musk’s Hyperloop concept, proposed for implementation in California, is a high- Hybrid Mode Concepts profile example. There are other examples Hybrid mode systems combine the functionality of this approach, and multiple competing of two different transportation modes. In concepts exist for the specifics of vehicle theory, this allows users to take advantage design, propulsion, and operation. Tube of the benefits of both modes. For ex­ transportation is a surface concept, but ample, a hybrid highway–rail vehicle could its high speeds of potentially 1,300 km/h take advantage of the flexibility of highway (800 mi/h) and its limited, long-distance travel and the fuel economy of rail trans­ route corridors would likely make it more portation. A specific example of a hybrid of a natural comparison to aviation than mode that is progressing toward commer­ to automobiles and transit systems. The cialization is the concept of a “roadable technology for this concept is still under aircraft,” such as the aircraft developed development, and its cost-effectiveness by Terrafugia. The on-road capabilities of is not known. The very high speeds also this aircraft allow it to use the regular road present challenges for right-of-way

12 alignment and passenger comfort while human power, such as electric-assist bicycles, the low-oxygen environment of the tube may provide similar benefits in terms of in­ could require robust emergency protocols creasing the radius of non-motorized trips. and onboard life-support systems. Personal Mobility Vehicles Infrastructure-Based Vehicle Charging Personal mobility vehicle is an umbrella Mobile recharging of EVs would address term for a variety of low-speed, single- some of the key limitations of market pen­ passenger motorized vehicles that may etration and foster greater use of vehicles travel on sidewalks, public roads, and with no tailpipe emissions. These concepts in some cases, within buildings and el­ comprise various forms of recharging for evators. Seated and standing prototypes vehicles while traveling on the roadway, have been tested in Japan, where the usually through contact or near contact primary intended market is the rapidly with a new form of dedicated infrastruc­ aging population. Some vehicles are pi­ ture. A variety of systems have reached loted by the user and others have self- the prototype or demonstration phase, driving capabilities. These vehicles can but the cost-effectiveness and commercial greatly expand the mobility options of viability of more widespread deployments those who have physical difficulties with has not yet been shown. These systems driving and walking. Unlike the current also generally do not address the limita­ generation of mobility scooters, many tions of automobile travel, in particular of these vehicles are intended to have congestion, high vehicle ownership costs, both in-building and on-road capabili­ and limited options for non-drivers. ties, which raises an additional series of engineering and safety challenges. Powered Exoskeleton Powered exoskeletons are wearable suits that Self-Driving Electric Shuttles use motors to provide additional power to the Self-driving electric shuttles are low- wearer’s limbs, thereby increasing strength speed, fully automated (driverless) EVs and improving endurance. Several prototypes that can serve as multi-passenger shuttles have been designed for use in military and and on-demand personal transport within other settings and for people with mobility a defined area. They are typically envi­ impairments. At least one product is in com­ sioned for controlled environments, such mercial use overseas. If commercialized more as campuses and military bases, or for broadly for the general public, these kinds of urban areas with little or no vehicle traffic. suits would reduce exertion and fatigue on There are a range of vehicle types and siz­ walking trips and could expand the distance es, ranging from small pods to minibuses. that travelers are willing to walk to destina­ Active field operational tests are underway tions and other travel modes. In turn this could in the United States and Europe, including increase the role for pedestrian trips and miti­ the U.S. Army’s Autonomous Robotics gate the last-mile problem associated with for Installation and Base Operations se­ fixed guideway transit. Reaching this level of ries of pilot programs and the European consumer acceptance would likely require CityMobil2 program. For campuses and significant advances in cost, weight, and ease certain other environments, the self-driv­ of use. More familiar technologies to augment ing electric shuttle concept offers some of

13 the advantages of PRT and ATN systems overall vehicle–miles traveled, and therefore with additional flexibility to add or modify also emissions because of the repositioning services without the challenges of devel­ movements of empty vehicles between oping an entirely new fixed-guideway in­ trips. The wait times can also grow sig­ frastructure. Further advances in sensor nificantly during times of peak demand. systems are needed before widespread This concept would require significant adoption can be expected. cultural change to implement, as most motorists are accustomed to having their Shared Fleet of On-Demand Self-Driving cars immediately available and com­ Vehicles monly leave personal items in the vehicle A shared fleet of on-demand, self-driving between trips. vehicles is a novel mode primarily in its business model and operational concept, Summary rather than in the vehicles themselves or A brief summary of the major modal the highway infrastructure. It is possible that concept types considered by the project some upgrades may be needed to enable research team is shown in table 2. fully automated operation (e.g., improved pavement markings and onboard sensing). Observations The concept, which has been articulated in All of the proposed novel modes are various forms in research publications, is unique in some way; however, several of predicated on replacing the current para­ them have attributes in common. These digm of personal automobile ownership with shared attributes are summarized in the the idea of “mobility as a service.” Mobility following section. would be provided by a shared fleet of self-driving taxis that could be summoned Motor Vehicle-Based Systems on-demand by using mobile technology. The majority of concepts reviewed by the Compared with conventional taxicabs, this research team focus on a motor vehicle, concept envisions shorter wait times and but a few concepts propose a new cycling greater availability through centrally coor­ or pedestrian infrastructure. There were dinated fleet optimization, as well as the relatively few operator-powered transpor­ ability to offer significantly lower fares be­ tation concepts. cause of reduced labor costs. Because cars currently spend most of their time parked, Heavy Infrastructure Demands this approach would allow personal mobility Several of the concepts envision an exten­ needs to be met with a much smaller vehicle sive and entirely new infrastructure that may fleet, yielding economic and environmental be elevated, at grade level, or sub surface. benefits. The approach could also incorpo­ These systems must provide a correspond­ rate changes to vehicle propulsion, such as ing large level of benefit to justify their cost electrification, particularly because the fleet and impact on an already crowded built approach could yield economies of scale environment. Examples of these systems with the necessary fueling infrastructure. At include evacuated tube transportation sys­ the same time, some simulations have shown tems, variations on maglev technology, and that this approach can actually increase some PRT and ATN systems.

14 Table 2. A summary of major modal concept types. Concept Infrastructure Vehicles/ Automation Business Markets/ Propulsion Model(s) Scale/ Locations PRT/ATN Fixed guideway Small electric Fully Public Local rail or similar rail vehicles automated service passenger transport, campus or urban center Platooning/ Quasi- Modified Conventional Partial to full Public Passenger Rail roadway or new or modified automation service or and freight on fixed guideway automobiles fee-for­ highways and service major routes Hybrid Mode Existing Varies Generally Individual or Varies infrastructure not a key shared from two or component vehicle more modes ownership (e.g., roads and airports) Tube Evacuated Specialized Fully Fee-for- Intercity Transport tube system transports automated service passenger transport on major corridors, possibly very light freight Infrastructure- Charging Electric Varies Public Passenger Based Vehicle equipment vehicles, service or and freight Charging in roadway potentially with fee-for­ on equipped modifications service roadways Powered Existing Electric None to partial Individual Local Exoskeleton infrastructure assist to or shared passenger (sidewalks) human power ownership transport (wearable suit for pedestrian) Personal Mobility Existing road Very small Varies Individual or Local Vehicle and sidewalk electric shared passenger infrastructure vehicle vehicle transport and and indoors ownership indoor movements Self-Driving Existing Small- to Fully Public Passenger Electric Shuttles infrastructure mid-size automated service transport on electric campuses and vehicle in some urban centers Shared Fleet of Existing road Automobiles Fully Fee-for- Regional On-Demand infrastructure automated service passenger Vehicles transport within metro areas

15 Automation they diminish the business case for many Several of the concepts that the research novel modal concepts. team reviewed seek to minimize human labor. This is typically to reduce labor costs, Automation address human factors issues, improve The concept of automation promises to safety, and expand operational capabilities. improve roadway operations without requiring massive additional infrastructure Diversity in Deployment Scale and Scope investment of changes in travel behavior. There are large variations in the degree Market-ready automation of automobiles to which the novel modes are intended and transit vehicles could make the devel­ to disrupt the current transportation mar­ opment of other modes unnecessary or less ketplace. Some are small scale or niche cost-effective. For example, many of the products that are intended only for certain concepts reviewed in this project are based environments (e.g., institutional campuses on the idea of on-demand fixed-guideway or central business districts). Other concepts service; however, a fleet of on-demand auto­ envision more widespread use but with a mated vehicles could provide on-demand strong focus on serving only certain types service to a wider service area, without of trips (e.g., long-distance travel). A few the associated costs of maintaining a concepts envision that the novel mode will dedicated guideway. lead to near-total replacement of current road and rail networks. Vehicle Sharing As vehicle-sharing options become more Outlook familiar over time, and as more businesses Many of the reviewed concepts are in an and transportation infrastructure cater to early stage of development, which means them, the increased usage of such services it is not possible to meaningfully evaluate may result in reduced personal vehicle owner­ their potential. The project team identified ship and changes in mode choice associated the following features as highly relevant to with vehicle-sharing options. This could en­ the potential of many of the concepts to courage the adoption of a novel mode that be adopted. supports car-sharing services. Car sharing might also be a mechanism for addressing Changing Transportation Landscape last–mile issues with many transit-oriented Many of the concepts reviewed by the modes. It is also possible that car sharing research team are motivated by long­ may provide the ease of automobile usage standing transportation issues, such as without the need for ownership and may highway congestion and vehicle emissions; reduce transit usage for some parts of the however, the transportation landscape is population. This may be dependent on the changing. Changes in vehicle automation, segment of the population in which the wireless technologies, improved materi­ greatest car-sharing growth occurs. als and batteries, and vehicle ownership models could increase the safety, conve­ Electric Vehicles nience, and fuel efficiency of the existing The combination of wireless and inductive transportation system to the point where charging opportunities; improved batteries

16 that enable more efficient, environmentally- EVALUATION CONSIDERATIONS friendly energy storage; and lightweight vehicles made from innovative composites Novel modes include a combination of new is likely to drive improvements in EV range, technologies and new application of tech­ cost, and environmental profiles. This kind nologies that exist or are currently being of development would tend to diminish developed. There are commonly accepted the value proposition for some of the practices for evaluating novel technology proposed novel modes that are predicated maturity, but other considerations must largely on saving energy through new also be weighed when considering the modes or infrastructure. A counterpoint potential of a novel mode. Some of the here is that existing strains on the national elements that can be considered when electric grid may need to be resolved evaluating novel modal concepts are out­ before EVs can be fully implemented, even lined in the following section. with improvements in battery storage. A flexible grid in which one can provide Technological Maturity power to the grid or draw from it would It is critical for developers and potential be ideal. investors or customers to understand the maturity of technology. The appropri­ Federal Infrastructure Funding ate next step depends on the maturity Federal infrastructure funding from the of a technology and may include further Highway Trust Fund has been reduced, research, bench testing in a laboratory, a and competing budgetary obligations naturalistic trial in the field, or implemen­ (e.g., military and social security) have also tation. Technology readiness level (TRL) reduced funding in this area. This is particu­ scales are widely used by U.S. Government larly significant for concepts that require agencies to evaluate the maturity of large-scale changes in infrastructure. novel or developing technologies. For example, the Department of Defense Opportunities (DOD) and National Aeronautics and There may be opportunities for novel Space Administration both use technology modes to complement the transporta­ readiness assessments when considering tion innovations that are being “pushed” novel applications. This tool has also by these technological shifts. Ongoing been adapted for bioenergy technology developments in vehicle automation development and for the EAR Program. could provide enabling technologies or The adapted TRL scale used by the EAR synergies for novel modes that are based Program is shown in table 3. on automated operation. In addition, complementary approaches to address­ Technology readiness assessments start ing last-mile issues, such as car- and with the observation of a phenomena that bicycle-sharing schemes, may facilitate could potentially provide an opportunity the deployment of transit-oriented novel (TRL 1). This is followed by the invention mode approaches. Such complementarity of an approach to take advantage of the may be an important contributor to the observed phenomena or opportunity (TRL success of novel mode implementation in 2) and experimental exploration and proof coming decades. of concept (TRL 3–4). The next levels involve

17 Table 3. The EAR Program’s technology readiness level for highway research scale. Technology Description To achieve the given TRL, readiness you must answer yes to level Every question. Discuss (TRL) any uncertain answers. Basic Research 1 Basic • Do basic scientific principles support the principles concept? and research • Has the technology development methodology or approach been developed?

2 Application • Are potential system applications identified? formulated • Are system components and the user interface at least partly described? • Do preliminary analyses or experiments confirm that the application might meet the user need?

3 Proof of • Are system performance metrics established? concept • Is system feasibility fully established? • Do experiments or modeling and simulation validate performance predictions of system capability? • Does the technology address a need or introduce an innovation in the field of transportation? Applied Research 4 Components • Are end-user requirements documented? validated in • Does a plausible draft integration plan laboratory exist, and is component compatibility environment demonstrated? • Were individual components successfully tested in a laboratory environment (i.e., a fully controlled test environment where a limited number of critical functions are tested)?

5 Integrated • Are external and internal system interfaces components documented? demonstrated • Are target and minimum operational in a laboratory requirements developed? environment • Is component integration demonstrated in a laboratory environment (i.e., a fully controlled setting)?

18 Table 3. The EAR Program’s technology readiness level for highway research scale. Technology Description To achieve the given TRL, readiness you must answer yes to level Every question. Discuss (TRL) any uncertain answers. Development 6 Prototype • Is the operational environment fully known (i.e., demonstrated user community, physical environment, and in relevant input data characteristics as appropriate)? environment • Was the prototype tested in a realistic environ­ ment outside of the laboratory (i.e., a relevant environment)? • Does the prototype satisfy all operational requirements when confronted with realistic problems? 7 Prototype • Are available components representative of demonstrated production components? in relevant • Is the fully integrated prototype demonstrated environment in an operational environment (i.e., real world conditions, including the user community)? • Are all interfaces tested individually under stressed and anomalous conditions? 8 Technology • Are all system components’ form, fit, and proven function compatible with each other and with in operational the operational environment? environment • Is the technology proven in an operational environment (i.e., does it meet target perfor­ mance measures)? • Was a rigorous test and evaluation process completed successfully? • Does the technology meet its stated purpose and functionality as designed? Implementation 9 Technology • Is the technology deployed in its intended refined and operational environment? adopted • Is information about the technology disseminated to the user community? • Is the technology adopted by the user community?

19 validation, scale up, and prototyping (TRL be one that can be maintained without 5–7), followed by full-scale demonstration resources over time. and testing (TRL 8). The final level is com­ mercialization (TRL 9). Environmental Performance Improved environmental performance is There can be one or several “exit criteria” often a key selling point for novel modal for each level that demonstrate comple­ concepts. There are many environmental tion of that TRL. For example at TRL 2 (i.e., challenges associated with existing modes formulation of technology or application that could be avoided with advance concept), DOD dictates that the proponent consideration. Therefore, novel mode evalu­ has begun invention of the technology or ations should assess overall environmental application, but these are still speculative. performance and the relative performance The exit criterion is to have published papers of a novel mode compared with existing or other works that outline the application modes that would be replaced. or technology under consideration, with some supporting analyses. Once this has Environmental benefits may include been completed, the technology or ap­ improved fuel efficiency or use of alternative plication is considered TRL 2 and working propulsion options that reduce dependence toward TRL 3. on fossil fuels. This approach would reduce GHG emissions and improve local air quality An evaluator who wants to understand while avoiding other environmental issues the technical readiness of a novel mode or associated with fossil resource. Other technology could request a rigorous self- secondary environmental elements may assessment by the novel mode proponent also be integrated into the design (e.g., rain­ by using a TRL scale, with documentation water capture and green roofs or walls). and data to support the self-assessment. Large-scale infrastructure development, An alternative option could be for an however, particularly with a substantial evaluator to attempt to perform a TRL evalu­ land area footprint, may lead to the release ation with the information provided by a of carbon from land-use change (i.e., a proponent, although such an evaluator- change in land surface area from carbon- estimated TRL will likely be constrained by sequestering vegetation to man-made the available information. surfaces). In addition, the production and installation of any infrastructure will also Environmental, Social, and Economic carry an initial release of life-cycle GHG Sustainability emissions that must be counted against In addition to the technical maturity of the potential benefits of a novel mode a novel mode, there are other consider­ during the payback period. Moreover, ations that may influence the assessment infrastructure installation may affect bio­ of viability. These can include environmen­ diversity, storm-water runoff, hydrology tal, social, economic sustainability, and and other ecosystem functions, wetlands, viability issues as well as considerations and endangered and threatened species. related to the regulatory landscape. In this Developers and evaluators of novel modes project, the term sustainability includes should be aware of these and other en­ environmental, social, and economic aspects. vironmental considerations, particularly A sustainable activity is considered to those required to be considered under the

20 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 reasonable administrative costs. This model (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.). Regulatory and may be based on user fees, device sales, funding agencies must also consider the po­ subscriptions, public subsidies, or other tential environmental impacts and benefits revenue streams. of a novel mode as part of the evaluation. The scale and scalability of a novel mode Social Sustainability will have critical implications for economic The term social sustainability reflects the so­ viability. Questions for an evaluator to cietal acceptance and equity of an activity. consider include, at what scale will an in­ For novel modes, the primary social need is stallation break even? Can the mode easily to address safety. This not only applies to the be expanded or scaled up? Will there be technical performance of a novel mode (e.g., intermediate benefits prior to full-scale crash rates, redundancies, and monitoring of implementation? The intended ownership vehicle and infrastructure condition) but also model of the mode is also a critical consid­ to usage modes (e.g., late-night service eration. It will be critical to establish how and vehicle sharing). Safety is likely to be society will finance the development and the highest priority for regulatory agencies deployment of a novel mode. For example, and community planners. Evaluators who will it be a public–public, public–private, or assess novel modes should expect failure- private–private ownership model? Likewise, mode analyses for infrastructure, vehicles, who will pay for changes in existing modes to and a variety of use cases. Social accept­ accommodate interfacing with the novel ability will also be affected by perceptions modes? Who will pay for modal failures of the novel mode’s impact on issues like in service, performance, or safety? Who property values, visual landscapes, privacy, is responsible for long-term maintenance? and equal access to transportation. The Economic sustainability considerations evaluator should expect the proponent to may also include the ability to pay a living be able to describe potential impacts on wage to workers across the pay scale. environmental justice communities (e.g., placement of infrastructure, accessibility, Reliability and Resilience or cost). Reliability and resilience are also com­ ponents of long-term system viability. Economic Sustainability Reliability refers to consistency of operations The term economic sustainability is fo­ and performance (e.g., travel time, on-time cused on economic feasibility and equity. performance, and energy or fuel efficiency) Any evaluation of a novel mode will assess as well as the level of ongoing maintenance the business model and market. An evalu­ and repair. Resilience measures focus on ator should consider whether the novel tolerance to a variety of conditions or the mode proponent has identified the target ability to rapidly recover from changes in user population, analyzed users’ willing­ conditions or disruption. In many cases, ness to pay, and addressed any cultural the design considerations for reliability or psychological barriers to novel mode and resilience may be the same. For ex­ adoption and use. A viable business model ample, duplication of critical components will need to be identified that covers the of a system (i.e., redundancy) may make operational costs of the system, provides an overall system both more reliable and a return on invested capital, and has more resilient with backups and fail-safes

21 in place to maintain performance and avoid local agencies. For entirely new modes, disruption. In other cases, the approach regulatory oversight may be unclear. to reliability and resilience may differ. For Novel mode proponents need to be example, to maximize system reliability and aware of regulatory requirements for ongoing performance, one might focus their proposed mode, and this should on overbuilding of facilities or “harden­ also be a consideration for viability when ing” against issues like extreme weather evaluating a proposal. For example, use events; however, to maximize resilience of and interchange with existing infra­ and the ability to quickly recover from structure (e.g., highway or railway right­ disruption, one might intentionally allow of-ways) requires an understanding of the certain portions of the system to fail if that associated legal and regulatory restric­ means that the overall system can quickly tions. In addition, occupational health and inexpensively be brought back online and safety regulations, environmental after failure. Evaluators who assess novel regulations and land-use restrictions, modes should include estimates of ongoing ownership considerations, and national reliability of performance, ongoing mainte­ and international standards all need to nance and repair requirements, and expected be considered as part of any novel mode system tolerance to environmental and implementation and should be addressed economic conditions. Novel modes that as early as possible in the novel mode design, focus on coastal or low-lying areas may be development, and implementation. particularly vulnerable to extreme weather events or climatic variations and should Roles in Transportation Innovation be evaluated for resiliency to inundation, storm surge, and high winds in particular. Public and private sector organizations Those modes that rely on proprietary have complementary, and sometimes replacement parts or a consistent high overlapping, roles to play in transportation level of maintenance may prove vulnerable innovation. A brief overview of these to supplier issues or reduced operational organizations and their roles is outlined in budgets. Failure-mode analyses address the following sections. reliability and resilience issues. Federal Level Regulatory Challenges At the Federal level, the USDOT and other Technical readiness and sustainability agencies support transportation innova­ performance of a novel mode can both be tion through direct funding of research addressed; however, the novel mode may and demonstration projects. Additional never reach commercialization without support is available through technology appropriate regulatory systems in place transfer, access to test beds and research to enable novel mode development and facilities, and other supporting activities, implementation or to reduce barriers to such as standards, outreach, policy guid­ entry into the marketplace. Regulatory ance, and international harmonization. frameworks vary by mode in that some Federal investment in innovation is driven modes are regulated at the Federal level by each agency’s mission, and the topics and others may be regulated by State or that are selected will typically have broad- reaching applications.

22 State and Local Agencies Innovation Context State and local agencies, including State The major findings regarding innovation DOTs, localities, and regional transit authori­ context for novel modal systems are sum­ ties, are the entities that own and operate marized in the following sections. most of the country’s highway and transit systems. As such, they are typically the Transportation Innovation primary “customers” for innovative prod­ Transportation innovation has histori­ ucts. These agencies are often constrained cally been mostly incremental rather than by budgets and procedural requirements, revolutionary. A review of transportation but some agencies are actively fostering history suggests that today’s highway, innovation through demonstration projects, transit, and freight systems are the products streamlined processes, and partnerships. In of decades of incremental improvements in more limited cases, they may also provide areas such as vehicle propulsion, control direct research funding for projects with systems, materials, and telecommunica­ high local relevance. tions. Transportation investments have long time horizons and have almost Private Sector always involved interaction between the The private sector works to identify and public and private sector. The success develop new transportation concepts and of new concepts has been influenced at business models that will generate a return least as much by legal and institutional on investment. This may include advocacy considerations as by technological ones. for modes and projects and collaborative efforts to work on technical standards or Current Road and Transit Systems other industrywide priorities. Current road and transit systems offer high levels of mobility and convenience. Although Universities and Research Institutes new transportation concepts may provide Universities and research institutes typically significant advantages in travel speed, emis­ support earlier stage R&D projects and sions, or other service characteristics, they feasibility studies. Academia also plays an will also likely need to provide comparable important role in the evaluation of projects levels of personal convenience and flex­ and concepts. This role includes evalua­ ibility to be considered as alternatives. For tion of environmental impacts, technical example, roadways are simple and offer a performance, cost-effectiveness, and overall flexible deployment environment for a wide societal impact. range of uses. New concepts like bus rapid transit and bike sharing can be incorporated Findings into the transportation system without major modifications. The following pages summarize major findings regarding innovation context and Partial Automation challenges and opportunities for novel Passenger and freight transportation are modal systems. both introducing partial automation. The

23 development of semi-automated systems on one-seat rides and view transfers as offers efficiency improvements without the undesirable, any transitions should be as need for dedicated right-of-way. For exam­ seamless as possible. ple, freight distribution centers can process shipments more quickly with automated Passenger Comfort systems, and automotive “driver-assist” Increased attention to passenger experience systems may improve highway through­ and comfort is warranted. Passenger comfort put and safety. These developments are (e.g., vehicle interiors, seating, and windows) still ongoing but offer the possibility of and the overall passenger experience addressing some of the limitations of exerts a strong influence on mode choice current transportation modes. and will need to be addressed as new transportation concepts move forward. In Personal Travel Patterns particular, high travel speeds will require Personal travel patterns are in transition. careful management. Survey data show shifts from “mainte­ nance” travel (e.g., commuting or errands) Travel Demand to other trip purposes. Travel patterns are Forecasting travel demand and mode also shifting to more situational, rather choice has become more difficult in gen­ than habitual, mode choice, and attitudes eral and even more so for novel modes. toward transportation are changing among After decades of fairly steady growth, younger age groups. In addition, concurrent there have been significant fluctuations technological and societal changes have in vehicle-miles traveled in recent years. influenced the overall need to travel and This has caused several public and private have introduced a range of substitutes traffic forecasts to miss the mark. Personal for travel, such as videoconferencing and travel patterns are also in transition, which social media. makes it more difficult to forecast overall travel demand and mode shares. This challenge Challenges is even greater for novel modes as there is The major findings regarding challenges little to no historical data to draw upon, and for novel modal systems are summarized consumer demand is difficult to estimate for as follows. entirely new concepts.

Connections to Existing Modes Risk Management New concepts need to consider connections Potential investors in transportation systems to existing modes and the whole trip place a strong emphasis on managing chain, including the first and last mile. The and mitigating risks. For the public sector relatively low-density land-use patterns in particular, there are often concerns in the United States make it difficult for about system complexity, reliability, and fixed guideway systems to transport all maintenance requirements because of passengers to the doorstep of their ulti­ fluctuating budgets and workforce issues. mate destination, particularly outside of Agency budgets often go through lean highly developed urban centers. Because periods when routine maintenance may travelers tend to place a strong premium be neglected, so it is important that the

24 assets be robust to that kind of neglect. procurement processes, and implemented The rigidities of the public procurement public–private partnerships and other process can also limit investment in novel initiatives to facilitate the development technology. For the private sector, the is­ of new transportation concepts. Although sues are somewhat different, but there is these agencies, and others like them, are in still a strong focus on risk management. the minority within the public sector, they Key issues include developing a business represent an opportunity to partner with a model (i.e., a viable means of generat­ public agency that is willing to address its ing revenues from the system) and the barriers to innovation head on to develop potentially long time periods before improved transportation services. initial investments are repaid. As a result of these risk considerations, investors in Changes in Travel Patterns both the public and private sectors have a Changes in travel patterns are breaking preference for time-tested technology and the automobile “monoculture.” Private systems that are easier to build, operate, automobiles continue to predominate in sur­ and maintain. face transportation, but survey data have begun to show lower driver licensure and Opportunities vehicle ownership rates among younger The research team’s major findings regarding age groups. This is accompanied by a opportunities for novel modal systems are greater willingness to use new concepts summarized below. such as bike sharing, car sharing, and mobile applications. This suggests greater Federal Research Programs openness to new transportation modes Novel modes and their underlying technologies that are developed. may have other applications that would be of interest to Federal research programs out­ University Partnerships side of USDOT (e.g., DOD, the Department University partnerships can help with of Health and Human Services (HHS), research, modeling, and demonstrations. and DOE). Innovators should consider University partnerships can include student whether there are non-transportation research projects, independent validation, applications of the underlying technolo­ use of test facilities, development of pro­ gies that may attract research funding in totypes, or other work. In addition to the fields such as defense, health, or energy. practical benefits of these partnerships, There are many examples of new prod­ the association of a university with the ucts being commercialized outside their concept can help the concept gain traction initial focus area. and greater visibility.

State and Local Agencies Standards Setting Some State and local agencies are ac­ Standards setting can accelerate innovation tively pursuing transportation innovation. in some cases. Workshop participants at the Jurisdictions such as the State of Texas and EAR Program’s Novel Surface Transportation the City of San José, CA, have established Modes workshop in December 2014 dis­ innovation zones, made changes to their cussed situations in which standards can

25 foster or stifle innovation. Many participants public procurement processes, workforce said that standards could be helpful in the issues, and budget uncertainties. The pro­ development of PRT and ATN systems motion of information exchange is an estab­ by reducing the risk of dependence on a lished Federal role in transportation, and the single supplier or maintenance organiza­ USDOT already has several programs that tion for long-term system viability. The promote peer-to-peer learning among State Federal Government, or public sector, and local agencies. One possibility would be does not need to set these standards but a case study or “lessons learned” research in some cases could be a convener and based on selected local agencies that have bring stakeholder groups together. In had prior success in this area. other cases, professional associations and other standards-setting bodies may take Improved Access the lead. Improved access to Federal research facilities and test beds is another area Specific Applications where USDOT could enhance its support Novel mode concepts should focus on of new concepts. Where security and specific applications in which they may be other considerations permit, providing more viable as a niche product for certain greater access to these facilities would trip types or settings. For some novel allow innovators to test and refine their mode concepts, the most relevant near- concepts and gather data that can be used term applications may be in specific trip for evaluation. The availability of test beds types or operating environments, such as is an important part of moving toward campus settings, urban centers, or small greater technological readiness. Moreover, freight shipments. Other systems may evidence of successful and safe operation also be best suited to overseas emerging in a closed setting is often required before markets, where the existing transportation transportation agencies will entertain the infrastructure is more limited. prospect of a demonstration project on public roadways.

FUTURE RESEARCH AND SUPPORT Travel-Demand Forecasts NEEDS Further research into improving travel- demand forecasts and mode-choice mod­ Based on the major findings noted in the els would help to support new concepts previous sections, the research team iden­ in transportation. The evolving transporta­ tified several areas where USDOT could tion landscape, demographic and attitudinal enhance its support of new concepts in changes, volatile fuel prices, and other surface transportation. These are outlined in factors have made it more difficult for the following pages. planners and modelers to forecast travel demand and mode choice. This has pre­ Technical Assistance sented challenges for both conventional Technical assistance could be provided to and novel modes, but improved modeling State and local agencies on how to reduce capabilities are particularly important for as­ institutional barriers to innovation. Some sessing the viability and cost-effectiveness of of the barriers identified include inflexible new concepts.

26 Outreach Activities methods and must incorporate simulation Outreach to connect innovators with and other elements into their validation Federal programs and universities is approaches. This is an emerging area with another area where USDOT can enhance many current research efforts, and it is an its efforts. USDOT can help to connect important one for novel modes because of transportation innovators with its exist­ the risk-averse nature of many transporta­ ing programs, such as the Small Business tion agencies. USDOT could have a role to Innovation Research program and the EAR play in sponsoring further research in this Program, as well as foster connections to area and disseminating findings. related programs at other Federal agen­ cies. Universities are also a potentially Testing, Standards, and Certification valuable source of research and evaluation Support is also needed for independent support for novel concepts. USDOT can testing, standards, and certification. Novel play a role in facilitating outreach between transportation modes are likely to require innovators and universities, either through standardization to address investment, informal outreach or more formally safety, and operational risks before they through the University Transportation become economically and socially viable. Centers Program. USDOT could work with the National Institute of Standards and Testing, or pri­ Testing and Validating vate independent standards and testing Further research into new paradigms for institutions, to set specifications and pro­ testing and validation of complex systems tocols for an incipient technology. This would also help to support new concepts in would aid in developing and establishing transportation. Concepts involving artificial consistent standards and compliance intelligence or automation often cannot testing for infrastructure and operations be adequately tested using conventional of novel modes.

27 CONCLUSION could present challenges for these novel modes but may also spur demand for new This report on FHWA’s novel surface trans­ mobility options. USDOT will continue to portation modes research, sponsored by monitor these developments and fund criti­ the EAR Program, discusses the current cal transportation research to improve pas­ state of novel surface transportation modal senger and freight transportation system in concepts, identifies opportunities and the United States. challenges for these concepts, and pres­ ents a set of potential future research and The research team for this study identified technical support needs. Information in this four key outstanding challenges common to report has been summarized from research novel mode development. These challenges on novel modes along with the viewpoints include (1) addressing connections to exist­ shared at the Novel Surface Transportation ing modes and last-mile issues, (2) increas­ Modes workshop, convened by the EAR ing attention given to passenger experience Program in December 2014. and comfort, (3) improving accuracy of predicting travel demand and mode choice, Transportation technologies evolve over and (4) enhancing management and mitiga­ time in response to changing societal needs tion of risk from an investor perspective. and technological advances. The 20th cen­ tury saw the rise of privately owned motor Researchers for this study also identified vehicles traveling on public roadways as six key opportunities for innovators that the dominant surface transportation in the are common among novel modes. These United States, complemented by bus and opportunities include: rail services. These conventional modes provide a very high level of mobility and • Engaging with Government agencies flexibility and set a high bar for novel outside of the transportation sector modes to overcome in garnering public (e.g., DOD, DOE, or HHS). interest and market share. Interest in novel • Engaging with State and local agencies. concepts remains high, in part because of • Addressing changes in travel patterns high societal costs and other limitations of and a greater openness to new trans­ current modes. portation modes. • Working with universities for testing, Modal concepts reviewed in this project prototype development, and research. were largely relatively early in their • Working together to develop standards technical maturity, although a few are in collaboration with Government and closer to implementation. Each concept is other stakeholders. unique, though many involve common ele­ • Taking advantage of unique settings ments such as automation and advanced that may be most conducive to a propulsion and control. Some concepts new transportation system (e.g., self- have been designed for widespread adop­ contained campuses, airports, and tion and displacement of current modes, other facilities) or to a specific market whereas others are highly targeted to par­ (e.g., freight, passenger, or locations ticular applications. As documented pre­ with limited, legacy infrastructure such viously in this report, changing personal as with emerging economies or signifi­ travel behavior and societal needs, along cant shifts in land-use and settlement with emerging technological innovations, patterns). 28 By taking advantage of these opportunities, • Improving travel-demand and mode- innovators would be able to address many choice models. of the key concerns relating to investor and • Facilitating connections between inno­ societal risk of adopting novel modes and vators and university and Government would enhance the likelihood of investment. researchers. • Developing novel testing facilities and The research team also identified six paradigms. opportunities for USDOT to facilitate the • Supporting independent testing, stan­ development and deployment of novel dardization, and specifications. modes. These opportunities include: Addressing these opportunities would greatly • Providing technical support to State enhance the societal environment for inno­ and local agencies to reduce barriers to vation with regard to novel transportation innovation. modes within the United States. • Supporting access to Federal research facilities and test beds.

29

Appendices

30 APPENDIX A: LIST OF RFI RESPONDENTS Project Title Submitter Advanced Transportation Technologies, New West Greogory Wilcox Technologies Airbornway Corporation Ramesh B. Malla Beamways AB Bengt Gustafsson BeemCar Ltd. Peter Lovering BiModal Glideway William D. Davis, Jr. BM Design Oy, Bubblemotion Asko Kauppi CargoFish Physical Internet Robert DeDomenico CyberTrain International Neil B. Sinclair Davidheiser Design and Third Generation Roadway Roger Davidheiser Electrodynamic Wheels Jonathan Bird Elways AB Gunnar Asplund ET3 Daryl Oster Fastran Ennis C. Sullivan II Freedom Transit, Solar Transportation Technologies Jim Beregi (Hybrid-) Electric Roadtrains Bruce McHenery Hybrid Personal Transport, Inc. Thomas Pumbelly Innov8Transport Patrick Kennedy Interstate Traveler Co. Justin Sutton LeviCar Unlimited Josh Levi Lumod GmbH, Speedway Christian Foerg Magna Force, Inc., Lev X Jo Klinski MonoCab VRT David Whittaker Overland ATS, Elevated Dual Mode High Speed Rail Waldemar F. Kissel, Jr. Owen Transit Group William E. Owen SkyTran and The Ferguson Group Bill Ferguson SHWEEB-CAN Robert Laurence SwiftTram Becky English Taxi 2000, SkyWeb Express Mike Lester TEV (Tracked Electric Vehicle) Project Caroline Carrick Transit Control Solutions Peter Muller Tubular Rail, Inc. Robert Pulliam Tunnel Bus System Li Mingshen VECTORR™ Technology, Flight Rail Corporation Max P. Schlienger Zetta Research Kim Rubin

31 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title Aerial Highway Submitted by Rodger L. Gibson, Airbornway Corporation

Summary • Autonomous, freight/passenger car that runs on a light aerial cable from which it draws electricity.

Status Proof of concept developed.

Project Title Automated Transit Network Submitted by Eugene Nishinaga and Peter Muller, Transit Control Solutions/PRT Consulting Inc.

Summary • New vehicular control algorithms implemented through Transit Control Solutions, which can integrate with existing commercial off-the-shelf products.

Status 1/32 scale model (45.72-m (150-ft track)) constructed. Tests conducted and findings are summarized in report. Software engineering currently in progress.

Project Title Beamways Adaptive ATN System Submitted by Bengt Gustafsson, Beamways AB

Summary • Automated transit network with adaptable vehicle size and platooning. • Vehicles suspended on elevated monorail system. • Solar-powered.

Status Technology patented. Costing and guideway structural study completed. Simulation completed. University team working on system.

Project Title BeemCar Submitted by Peter Lovering, BeemCar Ltd.

Summary • Personal rapid transit system. • Lightweight pods suspended from a network of carbon fiber beams propelled by Linear Synchronous Motor and partly powered by solar energy.

Status Seeking funding for demonstration.

32 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title Bubblemotion Submitted by Asko Kauppi, BM Design Oy

Summary • Automated personal rapid transit system. • Vehicles travel on elevated rail.

Status Static track strength simulations and cost–benefit analysis completed.

Project Title CargoFish Submitted by Robert DeDomenico, CargoFish Physical Internet

Summary • Initial phase: Track-based, underground, capillary network that delivers small payloads using small motor-driven traction drive track vehicles. • Secondary phase: Larger, heavier gauge arterial network is installed to move people and freight.

Status Operational proof-of-concept prototype developed.

Project Title Comprehensive MagLev Submitted by Joshua Levin, LeviCar Unlimited

Summary • Vehicle body can attach to a road chassis for conventional driving or the maglev chassis/track for guideway transportation. • Dual mode. Vehicles can travel on existing streets.

Status Hardware components built and tested together and functioned properly together as a prototype.

Project Title Drive on Drive off Truck Ferry Submitted by Robert Pulliam, Tubular Rail, Inc.

Summary • Expansion of the current national rail system to incorporate flatbeds (accommodating three to four trucks) into the rolling stock. • Trucks align on 18 m by 24 m (60 ft by 80 ft) flatbed perpen­ dicular to movement of train. • Supporting rails on either side of the main track 9 m (30 ft) from the center.

Status Technology patented and demonstration model built.

33 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title Electric Dual Mode Skyway Submitted by Travis Knapp, Innov8Transport

Summary • Automated high-speed road/rail. • Wheel-wing technology that enables existing vehicles (e.g., car, bus, and truck) to dock onto road/rail. • On/off-board at designated locations. • Automated platooning.

Status Full-scale wheel-wing latches have been built and tested.

Project Title Elevated Dual Mode High-Speed Rail Submitted by Waldemar Kissel, Overland ATS, LLC

Summary • Elevated steel rail infrastructure with electrified security rail in center. • Vehicles have bimodal wheels and multipurpose sensory saddle.

Status Multiple patents issued and pending. Model and demonstration prototypes developed.

Project Title Hybrid Electric Roadtrains Submitted by Bruce McHenry, Tommaso Gecchelin, and Dr. Tim Gordon, McHenry Enterprises

Summary • “Combine” through mechanical coupling to form a single, train-like vehicle. • Hybrid-electric vehicles; range of the vehicle is not limited by storage of electricity. • Requires driver in the lead vehicle.

Status Conceptual phase of development.

Project Title Hybrid Personal Rail Transit System Submitted by Thomas Pumpelly, Hybrid Personal Transit, Inc.

Summary • Infrastructure: Elevated electrified monorail located in a freeway median. • Modified vehicles drive onto monorail from roadway access points. Vehicles can use existing infrastructure. • Dual mode. Vehicles can travel on existing streets.

Status Conceptual drawings prepared. Preliminary engineering designs for system components done. Simulations conducted.

34 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title Hydrogen Super Highway Submitted by Justin Sutton, Interstate Traveler Co., LLC

Summary • Integrates elevated maglev transportation system with municipal conduit. • Solar-powered, converted to hydrogen power to self-sustain system. • Operating system will facilitate routing and position control.

Status Computer simulations performed.

Project Title Infrastructure System for Powering Vehicles while Driving Submitted by Gunnar Asplund, Elways AB

Summary • Conductive system feeds all vehicle types (e.g., electric vehicles) electricity through rail in road while driving. • Conductors placed beneath the surface and only energized when a vehicle passes.

Status Technology patented and demonstration model built.

Project Title Low-Cost Maglev Transportation Using Electrodynamic Wheels Submitted by Jonathan Bird, University of North Carolina at Charlotte and Electrodynamic Wheels

Summary • Maglev transportation using electrodynamic wheels passive guideway.

Status Sub-scale force and three-dimensional eddy-current analyses complete. Sub-scale vehicle demonstration complete.

Project Title MonoCab VRT Submitted by David Whittaker, MonoCab VRT

Summary • Elevated guideways. • Propulsion by electrically powered drive trains at each end of vehicle, incorporates regenerative braking.

Status Concept report and case studies prepared. Trailer mounted display model developed.

35 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title OTG HighRoad and Silver Bullet Submitted by William Owen, Owen Transit Group, Inc.

Summary • Elevated, automated guideway with a T-shaped rail that supports two-way transportation. • Silver Bullet faster than HighRoad and designed for commuting.

Status Engineering analyses, business plan, and ridership analysis complete.

Project Title SkySMART Submitted by Robert Laurence, SHWEEB US-Fl. Inc

Summary • Suspended, bi-directional, steel and hypercomposite guideway that operates above, below, or at ground level. • SMARTpods full automated. • Runs off of grid electric, solar, battery, and optional human power.

Status Proof of concept completed. Final R&D in progress.

Project Title SkyTran Automated Transit Networks Submitted by John Cole, SkyTran, Inc.

Summary • An aircraft that “flies” within an elevated guideway system via magnetic containment. • Propulsion by “magnetic screw.” Spinning magnet arrays within the tubular reaction rail induce eddy current forces that center and propel the magnet array axially within the rail. • Travels up to 241 km/h (150 mi/h) and can add up to three lanes of capacity.

Status Working 1/5 scale prototype that demonstrates propulsion and levitation. Will soon demonstrate switching.

Project Title Speedway Submitted by Christian Foerg, Lumod GmbH

Summary • Long distance, electric propulsion for any vehicle. • Wandering magnetic field under the road powers vehicles and inductively charges their internal batteries.

Status Initial technical test completed.

36 APPENDIX B: SELECTION OF RFI RESPONDENT CONCEPT SUMMARIES Project Title The TEV Project Submitted by Will Jones and Caroline Jones Carrick, TEV Project

Summary • Restricted, electrified highway lane. • Rubber tired electric cars, driverless minicabs and buses, and automated-vehicle platoons can draw electricity from the track.

Status Design studies, animations, and technical report developed.

Project Title A Third Generation of Roadway Submitted by Roger Davidheiser, Davidheiser Design

Summary • Light-weight vehicles that interface with track infrastructure electrically and autonomously, providing high-speed travel. • Dual mode. Vehicles can travel on existing streets.

Status Scale model constructed. Studies performed.

Project Title UltraLight Rail Transit Submitted by Neil Sinclair, CyberTran International

Summary • Small, light, autonomous, high-speed passenger rail vehicles for long-distance commuting.

Status Near full-scale test deployments developed.

Project Title VECTORR™ High-Speed Passenger Rail Submitted by Max Schlienger and John Reardan, Flight Rail Corporation

Summary • High-speed, elevated guideway system that uses vacuum/ pressure to propel a free piston, magnetically coupled to the vehicle, for propulsion. • Stationary power systems can use a wide range of fuels, including electricity.

Status 1/6 scale prototype constructed. Testing conducted.

37 REFERENCES

1. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2015). Beyond traffic: Trends and choices. Washington, DC. Retrieved November 25, 2015, from https://www.transportation.gov/ sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Draft_Beyond_Traffic_Framework.pdf.

2. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. (2015). National Transportation Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved November 9, 2015, from http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita. dot.gov.bts/files/NTS_Entire_15Q3.pdf.

3. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. (2015). Passenger travel facts and figures 2015. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita. dot.gov.bts/files/PTFF_Complete.pdf.

4. American Automobile Association News Room. (2014). Driving cost per mile. Orlando, FL. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://newsroom.aaa.com/tag/driving-cost-per­ mile/.

5. Federal Highway Administration. (2012). Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act. A summary of highway provisions. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/summaryinfo.cfm.

6. Federal Highway Administration. (2013). Conditions and performance report. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2013cpr/.

7. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2015). Traffic safety facts 2013. Washington, DC. Retrieved November 9, 2015, from http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/ Pubs/812139.pdf.

8. The White House: Office of the Press Secretary. (2015). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the Federal Government and across the supply chain. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/19/fact­ sheet-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-federal-government-and-acro.

9. Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Six common air pollutants. Washington, DC. Retrieved November 4, 2015, from http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/.

10. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2015). Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http:// www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/Automated_Vehicles_Policy.pdf.

11. Van Wageningen, D., & Waffenschmidt, E. (2015). Transfer efficiency. Piscataway, NJ. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/technology/ transfer-efficiency.html.

12. Laursen, L. (2015). Another transit system tests inductive-charging buses. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/transportation/infrastructure/ another-transit-system-tests-inductivecharging-buses.

38 13. Schneider, J. (2011). Wireless charging of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles: SAE TIR J2954 [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://www.rmi.org/Content/ Files/SAE%20Wireless%20Charging%20Overview.pdf.

14. Renault, S., Brandell, D., & Edström, K. (2014). Environmentally-friendly lithium recycling from a spent organic Li-ion battery. Chemsuschem, 7(10), 2859–2867. Weinheim, Germany.

15. U.S. Department of Energy. (2015). Vehicle technologies office: Lightweight materials for cars and trucks. Washington, DC. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from http://energy.gov/eere/ vehicles/vehicle-technologies-office-lightweight-materials-cars-and-trucks.

16. Johnston, K. (2015, April 11). Data-driven bus service set to roll out. The Boston Globe. Boston, MA. Retrieved October 21, 2015, from https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/04/10/ data-driven-pop-bus-service-launch-boston/yz4EjzZC9nXnl22O6JcV2I/story.html.

17. Martin, E., & Shaheen, S. (2011). The impact of carsharing on public transit and non- motorized travel: An exploration of North American carsharing survey data. Energies, 4(12), 2094–2114. Basel, Switzerland.

39 40 About the EAR Program

Federal legislation establishes an Exploratory Advanced Research (EAR) Program for transportation to address longer term, higher risk, breakthrough research with the potential for dramatic long-term improvements to transportation systems, improvements in planning, building, renewing, and operating safe, congestion-free, and environmentally sound transportation facilities. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) EAR Program secures broad scientific participation and extensive coverage of advanced ideas and new technologies through stakeholder engagement, topic identification, and sponsored research. The uncertainties in the research approach and outcomes challenge organizations and researchers to be innovative problem-solvers, which can lead to new research techniques, instruments, and processes that can be applied to future high-risk and applied research projects.

For more information, please visit the EAR Program Web site at http://www.fhwa.dot. gov/advancedresearch/.

41 Office of Corporate Research, Technology, and Innovation Management Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike Publication No. OSTR-2015-01 McLean, VA 22101-2296 HRTM-30/12-15(WEB)E