SOUTH BAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Zero Emission Local Use Vehicles The Neglected Sustainable Transportation Mode Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Demonstration Final Report June 30, 2013 Prepared by: Walter Siembab, Research Director David Magarian, Project Manager JUNE 30, 2013 1 P a g e | 2 Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 6 1.1 NEV Definition .............................................................................................. 7 1.2 Brief History of the NEV .............................................................................. 8 1.3 South Bay Context ...................................................................................... 14 1.3.1 Development Pattern ................................................................................................... 15 1.3.2 Mobility ........................................................................................................................ 16 2. NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLE RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION ..... 18 2.1 Objectives ................................................................................................. 18 2.2 Demonstration Methodology .................................................................... 19 2.2.1 Vehicle fleet ................................................................................................................ 20 2.2.2 Participant Recruitment and Selection ....................................................................... 21 2.2.3 Geographic Area ......................................................................................................... 22 2.2.4 Data collection ............................................................................................................ 23 3. RESEARCH FINDINGS .................................................................. 25 3.1 Question 1: Will South Bay residents drive NEVs to satisfy a significant portion of their travel needs? ................................................................................ 25 3.1.1 NEV usage ............................................................................................................... 26 3.1.2 NEV usage vs. total household travel ..................................................................... 28 3.1.3 Driving patterns of those over 55 ........................................................................... 30 P a g e | 3 3.1.4 Destination frequencies .......................................................................................... 32 3.1.5 Driver Satisfaction .................................................................................................. 35 3.1.6 Factors that Affected NEV Driving Experience ...................................................... 37 3.1.7 Two Southern California Testimonials ................................................................... 42 3.2 Question 2: Does the usage have the potential to produce significant environmental and economic benefits? ............................................................... 44 3.2.1 Environmental Benefits .......................................................................................... 44 3.2.2 Hypothetical NEV market penetration ................................................................... 47 3.2.3 Projected Environmental benefits .......................................................................... 48 3.2.4 Projected Economic benefits ................................................................................... 51 3.3 Question 3: Can NEVs (LUVs) become a significant market segment? ...... 52 3.3.1 Speed and Route Issues .......................................................................................... 53 3.3.2 Range and Charging Issues ..................................................................................... 59 3.3.3 Range Matching Vehicle Purchases ........................................................................ 60 3.3.4 Price and Quality..................................................................................................... 62 3.3.5 Retailing Issues ....................................................................................................... 66 3.3.6 Government Role .................................................................................................... 69 4. EMERGING LOCAL USE VEHICLE (LUV) TECHNOLOGIES ......................... 75 Quadricycles; Renault Twizy; Toyota COMS; and Honda Micro-Commuter Prototype ..... 75 Hiriko (MIT) Folding Urban Car ........................................................................................ 78 Wheelchair-Operated NEV ................................................................................................. 79 Self-driving Low Speed Vehicles ......................................................................................... 80 Cargo Trikes & Local Delivery Vehicles ............................................................................... 81 Hybrid Electric Trikes and Bikes ........................................................................................ 82 P a g e | 4 Bigger Cargo Bikes .............................................................................................................. 83 E-Scooters ........................................................................................................................... 84 Gyroscopic Personal Mobility Devices; Segway; Toyota Winglets ..................................... 85 5. THE LAND USE CONNECTION: NEIGHBORHOOD VEHICLES AND NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN ....................................................................... 87 5.1 Trip Lengths and Compactness of the South Bay Development Pattern ... 90 5.2 Trip Legs, Routes and Transit .................................................................. 94 5.3 Destinations and Neighborhood Design ................................................... 97 5.3.1 NEV “Hot Spots” ..................................................................................................... 98 6. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................ 111 APPENDIX A: VEHICLE PROFILES ....................................................... 118 Wheego ............................................................................................................................... 118 GEM ................................................................................................................................... 121 Miles Wagon ....................................................................................................................... 124 Miles Pickup ....................................................................................................................... 126 Vantage Crewcab ................................................................................................................ 129 Columbia ParCar-Summit .............................................................................. 131 Appendix B Participating Household Profiles ................................................ 134 Appendix C Data ............................................................................................ 154 Appendix D Data methods ............................................................................. 163 P a g e | 5 GPS data processing ........................................................................................................... 163 Vehicle Emissions Analysis based on Vehicle Use Analysis .............................................. 165 Trip function and the built environment ........................................................................... 171 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................................. 173 Survey Data Collection & Focus Groups ............................................................................ 173 Appendix E Data limitations .......................................................................... 174 Data cleaning ...................................................................................................................... 174 Evolution of data collection techniques ............................................................................. 175 Vehicle data only ................................................................................................................ 176 NAICS Dictionary ............................................................................................................... 177 P a g e | 6 1. Introduction Burning fossil fuels as the basis for mobility is not sustainable. Direct Cost: South Bay households currently pay over $1.5 billion annually for gasoline. Current inflation-adjusted gasoline prices are higher than the previous peak in 1981. The long term trend is for continuing price increases. Indirect cost: Monetary cost of air pollution in Southern California is at least $14.6 billion per year. Climate impact: Carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere has surpassed 400 parts per million, thought to be the threshold beyond which there will be profound changes in nearly every aspect of life. In March 2013, California Governor Brown issued an executive order directing state government to help accelerate the market for zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) in California. “Accelerating the market for ZEVs is a cornerstone of California’s long-term transportation strategy to reduce