APTD-1372
TRANSPORTATION CONTROL
STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE METROPOLITAN
LOS ANGELES REGION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
APTD-1372
TRANSPORTATION CONTROL
STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE METROPOLITAN
LOS ANGELES REGION
Prepared by
TRW Transportation and Environmental Operations
One Space Park
Redondo Beach, California 90278
Contract No. 68-02-0048
EPA Project Officer: Fred Winkler
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
December 1972
-------
The APTD (Air Pollution Technical Data) series of reports is issued
by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and
Water Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, to report technical
data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies of APTD reports
are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors
and grantees, and non-profit organizations - as supplies permit from
the Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, or may be obtained
for a nominal cost, from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
TRW Transportation and Environmental Operations of Redondo Beach,
California, in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-02-0048. The contents
of this report are reproduced herein as received from the TRW
Transportation and Environmental Operations. The opinions, findings,
and conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily
those of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. APTD-1372
II
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 .0 SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1 Limitations of the Transportation Control Strategy Analysis.
1.2 Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations. . . . . . . . .
2.0 INTRODUCTION.
. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
.........
. . . .
2.1 Regional Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Problem Definition and Description. . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1 Air Quality in the South Coast Air Basin. . . . . . .
2.2.2 Contributing Factors to the Problem. . . . . . . . .
2.3 The Prospects of Achieving the Ambient Air
Quality Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
. . . .
3.0 CONTROL STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT.
. . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . .
3.1 California State Implementation Plan Review. . . . . . . . .
3.2 The Ca1tech Environmental Quality Laboratory Plan. . . . . .
3.3 Emission Inventory Revision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4 Control Strategy Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5 Interim Control Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.0 MOTOR VEHICLE ORIENTED CONTROL STRATEGIES.
. . . .
.....
4. 1
Inspection/Maintenance Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
4.1.1 The Northrop Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.1.2 Technical Advisory Committee Report. . . . . . . . . 72
4.1.3 California Air Resources Board Report. . . . . . . . 72
4.1.4 Legislative Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.1.5 Governor's Task Force on Vehicle Inspection. . . . . 74
4.1.6 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 76
4.2 Retrofit Device Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 77
4.3 Gaseous Fuel Conversion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4.4 Evaporative Loss Controls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
-iii-
Page
1
2
4
7
9
15
15
18
34
37
37
50
55
56
59
. . 66
-------
Page
5.0 THE SOUTH COAST TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC DATA BASE. . . . . . . 97
6.0 TRAFFIC FLOW STRATEGIES. . . . . . .
. . . . . .
105
. . . .
. 0 . .
6.1 The Impact of Pre~ently Proposed Traffic
Improvement Programs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.2 The Impact of Ramp ~~eteri ng. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.3 The Impact of a 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit. . . . . . . . . . . . 116
6.4 The Impact of Staggered Work Hours. . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
7.0 VMT REDUCTION PROGRAMS. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . JI .
7. 1
The Impact of Presently Planned Programs. . . . . . . . . .
7.1.1 Public Transportation Organization. . . . . . . . . .
7.1.2 Southern California Rapid Transit District. . . . . .
7.1.3 Orange County Transit District. . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1.4 Los Angeles Yellow Cab Company. . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1.5 Summary of Impact of Presently Planned Programs. . .
7.2 Analytical Methodology and The Los Angeles
r~etropo 1 itan Area Mode Choi ce Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
7.3 The Impact of Improved Public Transit. . . . . . . . . . . . 152
7.4 The Impact of Incentives to Discourage Auto Use. . . . . . . 153
7.5 The Impact of Improved Transit Service and
Incentives to Discourage Auto Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
7.6 The Impact of Auto Free Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
7.7 The Impact of Increased Parking Costs. . . . . . . . . . . 157
7.8 The Impact of the Four-Day Work Week. . . . . . . . . . . . 159
7.9 The Impact of Increased Carpooling. . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
7.10 The Impact of Exclusive Bus and Carpool Lanes
on the Freeway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
8.0 REGULATORY PROGRAMS
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8. 1 L i m i ta t ion
8.2 Limitation
8.3 Limitation
of Second, Third,. ..Car Ownership. . . . . . . . 172
of Auto Registrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
of Gasoline Consumed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
- i v-
129
132
132
133
136
137
137
. 171 \
-------
Page
9.0 SUPPLY OF ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. .
. . . . . .
. . 183
10.0 PROPOSED CONTROL STRATEGY (SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN) . . . . . . . . 188
10.1 Implementation Obstacles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
10.2 Implementation Time Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APpmOICES
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 202
. . . . . . . . . . .
A.
B.
Air Quality Standards and Emission Inventory. . .
. . . .
. . A-l
Air Quality Data, Monitoring Stations and Methods. . . . . . . B-1
C.
. C-1
Economic Data for the South Coast Air Basin
. . . . . . . .
D.
Governmental Organizations and Transportation Funding
Mechani sms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
D- 1
E.
F.
Sample Calculations
. . . . . . .
. . E-l
. . . . .
. . . . . . .
Public Opinion Surveys Los Angeles Metropolitan Region
. . . .
F- 1
G.
H.
. . . . . G-l
Expanded Transportation Data. . .
. . . . . . . . .
Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice Model for
Various Incomes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . H-l
1-1
1.
J.
Gasoline Rationing During World War II . . . .
. . . . . . . .
Recent Air Pollution Legislation in California.
. . . . . .
. J- 1
K.
L.
Study Contacts. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . K- 1
. . . . . .
Evaporative Losses from Service Station Fuel ing Operations. . Lu 1
M.
N.
Conversion of Fleet Vehicles to Gaseous Fuels
. . . . . . .
. M- 1
Emission Inventory Revision - EPA (December 1972)
. . . .
. . N- 1
-v-
-------
2. 1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
4. 1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
LIST OF TABLES
Population and Land Area - South Coast Air Basin
California Population Projections (1970-1980)
Summary of Meteorological Data - Los Angeles County
Ozone Related Weather Factors
Page
11
14
28
29
California Air Resources Board Implementation Plan Reductions
From Periodic Vehicle Inspection 46
Draft of Proposed Changes to EPA Title 40 (40 CFR-Part 51)
October, 1972-Reductions from Inspection/Maintenance
Estimated Effect on Total Emissions From Vehicle Emission
Control Options in the South Coast Air Basin - 1975
Estimated Emission Reductions Due to Vehicle Emission Control
Options for the South Coast Air Basin - 1975
EQL Strategy #1 for Motor Vehicles
Compilation of Control Strategy Affects on June 30, 1977
Control Strategy Options
Evaluation of Some Interim Control Strategies
Comparison of Costs for Four Proposed Inspection Methods
(1972 State-Owned and Operated Facilities)
Emission Profile Changes for Total Fleet
Annual Cost of Governor's Task Force Recommended Program
California Statewide
Retrofit Control Measures
Summary of Cost and Effectivene~~ Calculations
California Private Fleet Vehicle Statistics
Gasoline Powered Vehicle Emissions
Emissions from Motor Vehicles Using NG
-vii-
46
48
49
52
57
58
65
70
71
75
81
82
86
88
89
-------
4.9
LI ST OF TABLES (corn I D)
Emissions from Motor Vehicles Using LPG
4.10 Difference in Emissions Between Gasoline Powered Vehicles
and Natural Gas Powered Vehicles
4.11
Difference in Emissions Between Gasoline Powered Vehicles
and LPG Powered Vehicles
Page
90
91
92
5. 1 VMT Projections for the LARTS Area 98
5.2 Peak Period VMT for the LARTS Area 99
5.3 Peak Period VMT by County - LARTS Area - 1977 99
5.4 Average Travel Data (one way) on Trips for Various Purposes 101
5.5 Temporal Distribution of Traffic 104
6. 1
6.2
6.3
6.4
7. 1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
Miles of Freeways, Five-County Los Angeles Metropolitan
Area (Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino) 112
Current Volumes and Capacities on Selected Arterials in the
Los Angeles Area
Vehicle t~iles Travelled - "42-Mile Loop" (October 12, 1972)
Relative Emission "Trade-Offs" Associated with a 55 MPH
Speed Limit
Per Cent of Workers Using Public Transportation, 1960
(Bus and Rapid Rail Transit)
Fraction of Transit Ridership Required to Obtain Various
% VMT Reductions
The Impact of Presently Planned Programs
Control of t1arginal Utility Parameters
Assumed Values of Marginal Utility Parameters For a Typical
Commute Trip
Marginal Utility Parameter Combinations
-viii-
115
118
123
130
132
138
143
145
145
-------
7.7
7.8
7.9
LIST OF TABLES (CorlT'D)
Type of Parking - First Trip to Work (Average Weekday)
Trip Frequency by Trip Type and Day of Week
Current Automobile Occupancy Rates in the South Coast Basin
7.10 Average Automobile Occupancies Required to Obtain Various
VMf Reductions
7.11
9.1
10. 1
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
Summary of Impacts for Various Control Strategies
Current Supply of Buses in South Coast Basin
Proposed Implementation Time Schedule
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
South Coast Air Basin Emission Inventory
South Coast Air Basin Comparison of Emissions by County
Air Quality Data - Los Angeles County (Carbon Monoxide)
Air Quality Data - Los Angeles County (Nitrogen Dioxide)
Air Quality Data - Los Angeles County (Oxidant)
Air Quality Data - Los Angeles County (Ozone)
Air Quality Monitoring Stations - South Coast Air Basin
(1970)
National Air Quality Standards and Reference Methods
California Air Quality Standards and Reference Methods
LAAPCD - Methods Employed for Ambient Air Monitoring
Definitions of Principle of Detection
-ix-
Page
158
160
161
164
170
184
199
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-5
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-11
-------
C-l
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-7
LIST OF TABLES (CO~n'D)
Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 -
United States
Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 - Sum of
Air Quality Control Regions
Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 - Air
Quality Control Region, Los Angeles, California
Page
C-l
C-l
C-2
Economic Projections
Los Angeles Air Quality Control Region C-3
Total Personal Income - Los Angeles County and California
Projections of Real Per Capita Personal Income
Price Index (1957-59 = 100)
0-1 Amounts and Distribution of Federal and State Funds
F-l Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Attitude Survey
F-2 Results of the Los Angeles Attitude Survey
F-3 Results of Project Clean Air Public Atti tudes Survey
F-4 Mass Transit Study Group Telephone Survey
G-l
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-5
G-6
G-7
Trip Generation by Family Size
Person Trip Per Household by Vehicle Ownership
Trip Generation by Household Income
Percentage Distribution of LARTS Employment - 1960, 1967
Person Trips By Trip Type Average Weekday
Average Weekend Day Trips Compared With Average Weekday
Tri ps
The Typical Three-Trip Day Pattern (Represents 18% of All
Three-Trip Days, 1.6% Of All Car-Days)
-x-
C-4
C-4
C-5
0-4
F-4
F-9
F-19
F-27
G-l
G-l
G-2
G-2
G-3
G-4
G-14
-------
L-l
L-2
L-3
L-4
M-l
M-2
N-l
LIST OF TABLES (CO~JT'D)
Projections of Service Stations and Related Equipment
(South Coast Air Basin)
Costs Associated with Various Vapor Recovery Systems
(South Coast Air Basin - 1977)
Annualized Costs for Vapor Recovery Systems
Vapor Recoveries from Various Systems
(South Coast Air Basin - 1985)
Gaseous Fuel Conversion Systems Approved for Tax Free Use
by the Air Resources Board
Report of the GSA Sawtelle Fleet Experience
Compilation of Control Strategy Affects on June 30, 1977
-xi-
Page
L-3
L-ll
L-ll
L-12
M-ll
M-16
N-5
-------
2. 1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
LIST OF FIGURES
South Coast Air Basin
Air Flow Patterns - South Coast Air Basin
(October 1200-1800 PST)
Air Flow Patterns - South Coast Air Basin
(October 0000-0700 PST)
Percentage of Emissions From Major Sources in the South Coast
Ai r Basi n - 1970
Summer Contaminant Concentration Levels, PPM
(August i969, September 1969, August 1970, September 1970)
Major Air Pollutants - Monthly Maximum Hourly Averages West
San Fernando Valley (Monitored in Reseda) 1965-1970
Population, Motor Vehicles, Daily Gasoline Consumption -
State of California
Population, Motor Vehicles, Daily Gasoline Consumption -
Los Angeles County
State of California Projections for Population, Motor
Vehicles, and Gasoline Consumption (1970-1990)
2.10 South Coast Air Basin Projection for Population, r'1otor
Vehicles, and Gasoline Consumption (1970-1990)
2.9
2.11
Miles of Freeway, Five-County Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
(Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino)
2.12 Personal Income Expenditures
3. 1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy Carbon
Monoxide Emission Controls (1970-1980)
Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy Nitrogen
Oxides Emission Controls (197D-1980)
Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy Photochemical
Oxidant Emission Controls (Based on Controlling Reactive
Hydrocarbons)
Breakdown of Improvement in Oxidant Air Quality for Downtown
Los Angeles
-xiii-
Page
10
12
13
16
17
19
22
23
24
25
30
32
43
44
45
53
-------
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
4. 1
5. 1
5.2
6. 1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.9
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT1D)
Various Projections for Improvement in Oxidant Air Quality
for the South Coast Air Basin
State of California - Monthly Gasoline Consumption
(1968- 1972 )
Correlation of Monthly Gasoline Consumption with Oxidant
Air Quality Violations
Correlation of Monthly Gasoline Consumption with Nitrogen
Dioxide Air Quality Violations
Emission Reductions from Gaseous Fuel Conversion
(South Coast Air Basin - 1977)
Spatial Distribution of Non-Freeway Traffic
Spatial Distribution of Freeway Traffic
Average Speed vs. Average Emissions (Carbon Monoxide)
Average Speed vs. Average Emission (Hydrocarbons)
Average Speed vs. Average Emissions (Nitric Oxide)
~ivision of Highways - "42-Mile Loop"
Cumulative Frequency of Freeway Speeds
U10nitoring Station SO 27)
Cumulative Frequency of Freeway Speeds
(Monitoring Station SO 16)
Cumulative Frequency of Freeway Speeds
(r10nitori ng Stati on H 8)
Cumulative Frequency of Freeway Speeds
(Monitoring Station H 24)
Cumulative Fre~uency of Freeway Speeds
(Monitoring Station SM 12)
6.10 Cumulative Frequency of Freeway Speeds
(Monitoring Station SM 27)
-xiv-
Pa~
54
60
61
62
87
102
103
107
108
109
117
120
120
121
121
122
122
-------
6.11
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D)
Diurnal Variation of Mean 1-Hour Average Oxidant Concentration
at Selected California Sites, October, 1965
6.12 Average Solar Radiation Measured with Pyranometer for 1-Hour
Intervals in Los Angeles
7. 1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.10
7.11
VMT Reduction vs. Transit Ridership
Per Cent Transit vs. Marginal Utility
Transit Fare (One Way) vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership
Page
126
128
131
141
146
Transit Access and Waiting Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership 147
Transit Riding Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership
Automobile Operating and Parking Cost (One Way) vs. Per Cent
Transit Ridership
Automobile Riding Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership
Automobile Terminal Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership
148
149
150
151
Effect of Automobile Operating Cost, Parking Cost, and Transit
Riding Time on Transit Ridership 154
1970 Employment in the LARTS Study Area
Distribution of Weekday Driver Trips to Work Via Freeway by
Number in Vehicles
7.12 VMT Reduction vs. Automobile Occupancy
8. 1
8.2
8.3
9. 1
10. 1
Relative Costs for Varying Degrees of Controls
Trends in Public Transit Patronage in the United States
Gas Rationing Monitoring Network
Bus Requirements for Commute Transit Riderships
The Impact of Proposed Control Strategy on Reducing Reactive
Hydrocarbon Emissions (1977)
-xv-
156
162
163
173
177
180
185
194
-------
B-1
D-l
G-l
G-2
r,- 3
G-4
G-5
G-6
G-7
G-8
G-9
1:- 1
H-2
H-3
H-4
fI-5
H-6
LIST OF FIGURES (COHT'D)
Page
Location of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
(South Coast Air Basin - 1970)
B-7
Flow of State Motor Vehicle Fees and Related Highway User
Taxes in California for the 1972-1973 Fiscal Year
D-3
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Tri p Purpose at
Destination G-5
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Tri p Purpose at
Destination (continued) G-6
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Tri p Purpose at G-7
Destination (continued)
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Tri p Purpose at G-8
Destination (continued)
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Tri p Purpose at
Destination (continued) G-9
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips by Trip Purpose at
Destination (continued) G-10
Distribution of Trips Time, Weekday Trips G-ll
Distribution of Tri p Di stance, Weekday Trips G-12
Distribution of Trip Distance, G-13
Transit Fare (One Way) vs. Percent Transit Ridership
H-2
Transit Access and Waiting Time vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Transit Riding Time vs. Percent Transit Ridership
H-3
H-4
Automobile Operating and Parking Cost (One Way) vs.
Percent Transit Ridership
H-5
H-6
Automobile Riding Time vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Automobile Terminal Parking Time vs. Percent Transit
Ride rs hip
H-7
-xvi-
-------
M-l
M-2
M-3
M-4
M-5
M-6
~'1-7
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D)
Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in August 1975 for Southern
Ca 1 iforni a
Summary of Propane Supply and Demand Annual Averages for
California
Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in February 1975 for
Southern California
Dual Fuel Systems, Inc. Compressed Natural Gas System
Schematic
Schematic Diagram for Impco LP-Gas Operation
Schematic Diagram for Impco Dual Fuel Operation
Reactivity of Exhaust Produced from Propane/Propylene
Mixtures Compared to Gasoline and Natural Gas
-xvii-
Page
~1-5
M-6
r-J-8
M-13
~1- 14
M-15
M-20
-------
1.0 SUMMARY
This report presents the results of an analysis of a wide range of
transportation control strategies aimed at reducing the air pollution in
the California South Coast Air Basin (Metropolitan Los Angeles Region).
The study was directed at identifying measures which would allow attain-
ment of the national ambient air quality standards promulgated pursuant
to the Clean Air Act of 1970.
Target date for attainment of the stan-
dards is no later than 1977.
The pollutants of most concern in the Los Angeles area are carbon
monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and photochemical oxidants.
Of these, the
most severe problems have come from photochemical oxidants, primarily ozone.
Since ozone is a secondary pollutant (i.e., it is not emitted directly as
a pollutant), its control is dependent on eliminating the reactive hydro-
carbons and nitrogen oxides which lead to its formation.
Stationary Sources - Presently, stationary source contributions to the
overall problem are much less than mobile sources.
However, they do
comprise a very significant problem.
Unless further controls of these
sources are implemented, it is very likely the air quality standards will
be exceeded from their emissions alone.
No analysis was carried out on
reductions possible from additional controls of these sources.
The
reductions stated in Chapter 10 have been assumed possible by EPA and
have been accepted.
-1-
-------
Mobile Sources - There are many categories of mobile source emissions;
this report has examined only the most significant categories -- in-use
heavy and light duty motor vehicles.
The evaluation of sources such as
motorcycles, aircraft, tractors, etc. has been made by others.
As motor
vehicle controls become increasingly stringent, it will be important to
investigate measures to control these sources.
Left uncontrolled, they
will contribute significant amounts of pollution by 1977.
1.1
Limitations of the Transportation Control Strategy Analysis
To be acceptable, an air pollution control strategy must reduce
emission levels sufficiently to allow for the attainment and maintenance
of national ambient air quality standards.
In addition, an implementable
transportation control strategy must consider the economic factors assoc-
iated with its adoption as well as the social and political changes
necessary to accommodate each specific control measure.
The ai r quality
benefits must be balanced against the social and economic costs of imple-
mentation.
Limitations in the data and analytical methods became obvious
during the course of the study, and care must be taken in the interpreta-
tion and evaluation of the control strategy recommendations.
The proposed
control strategy must be considered as an initial attempt to quantify the
relationship between transportation processes and the regional air pollution
problem.
Further study is needed and warranted before embarking on controls
that are likely to significantly disrupt the life styles of the Basin's
residents.
Several specific areas which need to be confirmed and validated
by future study are listed below.
-2-
-------
Emission Factors - The mobile source emission estimates in this
study are based upon the best available emission factors.
These emission
factors are being revised in light of in-use and new vehicle testing programs
being considered by the Environmental Protection Agency.
It is highly
recommended that new emission factors be utilized as they become available
to recompute the severity of the mobile source generated emissions in the
region.
Preliminary data indicates that emissions generated during the first
few minutes of vehicle operation represent a large portion of the total
emissions during any individual vehicle trip.
This implies the reduction
in the total vehicle trips may be more important than reducing the vehicle
miles traveled.
Unfortunately, the data relating to this phenomenon were
not sufficiently developed to be used in this study.
It should be noted that stationary source estimates also suffer from
inaccuracies in the projection of industrial growth.
The change in
emission factors for these sources, including the results from the appli-
cation of as yet untested control technologies, is yet another source of
error.
Traffic Data Projects - Historically, traffic data projections have
not been collected with the intent of using them for estimating motor
vehicle emissions.
The data, including vehicle flow speeds and modal
mixes, were reworked into the format necessary for emission calculations.
Potential inaccuracies were introduced by this process.
Projections of
motor vehicle growth and VMT have been prepared by various agencies and
-3-
-------
little unanimity has been found concerning appropriate growth rates.
Changes in traffic as well as ambient air quality should be closely
monitored between now and 1977 so that deviations can be determined and
appropriate adjustments made in the control strategy.
Analytical Technique - The key calculation in control measure assess-
ment is relating emission levels to expected ambient air qual ity.
Due to
time and contractual constraints, it was not possible to utilize sophisti-
cated modeling techniques to develop this relationship.
Therefore, control
strategy reductions were based on a rollback technique that relates existing
emissions and air quality on a proportional basis.
The use of modeling is
highly recommended since it can consider the effects of local meteorological
and topographical features and describes the geographical extent of the
regional air pollution problem.
Such procedures, using models now under
development, should be utilized between now and 1977, and the results used
to modify (if required) the control strategy recommended in this document.
1.2
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
The following summarize the major findings, conclusions, and recom-
mendations that have emerged as a result of this study.
Findings:
. Photochemical oxidants are substantially above the national
ambient air quality standards a significant portion of the
time.
. The geography and meteorology of the Basin contribute to the
severity of the air pollution and the difficulties of its
elimination.
. Presently. stationary source contributions to the air
pollution problem are much less than those from mobile
sources.
-4-
-------
. A number of interrelated contributing factors have given
rise to the present air pollution situation, including,
physical growth, affluence, transportation and land use
patterns, and governmental organization.
. The existing and projected alternative modes of trans-
portation are inadequate to handle large increases in
ri dershi p.
. The present life styles of the ~asin's resiaents are
incompatible with the established air quality goals; no
existing or foreseeable technological solutions would be
able to solve the problem by 1977.
. Numerous studies of the problem have been conducted with
agreement on one issue -- it will be extremely difficult
to reach the air quality standards by 1977 without a llJassive
change in the life styles of the ~asin's residents. Such a
change would be so disruptive, the "cure might be worse than
the disease.1I
Conclusions:
. Additional stationary source controls will be necessary to
achieve the air quality standards.
. Presently planned transportation improvement programs will
result in very minor improvements of the air quality.
. All of the incentive type measures evaluated were relatively
ineffective for significantly reducing the VMT.
. As a control measure, gasoline rationing appears to be the
most effective means of significantly reducing VMT to the
levels required to reach the air quality standards.
. The use of vehicles cannot be significantly restrained
without providing some alternative means of transportation.
. Annual inspection/maintenance is necessary to obtain the
full benefit of Federal and State vehicle emission control
programs.
. The conversion of fleet vehicles to burn a gaseous fuel by
1975 would result in a significant reduction in emissions
from vehicles which account for a disproportionate share of
the VMT.
-5-
-------
.
No additional retrofit programs beyond the currently
scheduled ones are warranted until completion of the
State's evaluation programs.
. The implementation of evaporative loss controls from
fueling operations should be instituted as soon as the
appropriate devices become available.
Recommendations: (see Chapter 10.0)
It is recommended that the Phase I control measures be
implemented as quickly as possible.
The continuation of the State's
ongoing motor vehicle control program plus these measures should
result in a significant improvement of the air quality by 1977.
The
final decision regarding the implementation of the Phase II measure
should be deferred until a careful analysis is made of the impact of
such a program on the occupants of the region.
At present, a large
discrepancy exists between the VMT reduction necessary to attain the
air quality standards, and the supply of alternative modes of trans-
portation.
It is further recommended that a detailed evaluation be made of
both the short and long range transportation needs of the region.
As much as possible, these needs should be reflected in consistent
short and long term planning goals.
-6-
-------
2.0
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a study to evaluate potential
transportation control measures which will allow attainment of the nation-
al ambient air quality standards by 1977 in California's South Coast Air
Basin (Los Angeles region).
The control measures evaluated include an
assessment of their technical effectiveness and institutional, political,
and social feasibility.
The study was conducted by the Transportation and
Environmental Operations of TRW, Inc., in conjunction with the DeLeuw,
Cather and Company organization, a fully owned subsidiary.
Chapters 2 and 3 present a brief description of the Los Angeles air
pollution problem and review some of the work done to date on it.
The
following five chapters delve into various specific control strategies
(Chapters 4 through 8).
Many of these programs have been discussed for
years in the South Coast Basin and for various reasons have not been
widely implemented.
The traffic (or VMT) oriented strategies are quanti-
fied for the first time to our knowledge (Chapters 6 and 7).
Chapter 9 discusses the supply of alternative modes of transportation
and shows the lack of any foreseeable short range transportation system(s)
which would be able to accomodate a large reduction in private automobile
travel.
Finally, Chapter 10 proposes a control strategy which would if
implemented, in all probability. allow for attainment of the air quality
standards.
Unanswered is the question of how the residents of the Basin
will be able to retain any significant degree of mobility if attempts are
made to enforce such a control strategy.
Following the main body of the report are a series of appendices,
each of which is self-contained, and designed to provide additional support
-7-
-------
material.
Time was too limited to allow for a detailed analysis of all
the reports which have been written on the subject in the Los Angeles
area; the principal information sources which were used in preparing this
document have been included in the bibliography.
-8-
-------
2.1
Regional Description
The South Coast Air Basin as defined by the State of California,
"consists of all of Orange and Ventura Counties and portions of Los
Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and Santa Barbara Counties:I(79)
Geographically, the Basin is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean,
on the south by San Diego County and by a series of mountain ranges on
the north and west, namely, the San Gabriel, San Bernardino. San Gorgonio,
San Jacinto, and Santa Ynez Mountains.
A map of the Basin is shown in
Figure 2.1.
Due to problems of data availability for information disaggregated
beyond the county levels, some of the technical analysis performed in
this report has considered the Basin to include all of Los Angeles, Ventura1
Riverside, Orange and San Bernardino Counties.
The difference between
either definition, as far as the air pollution analyses is insignificant.
The minor difference which does exist can be seen by comparing Tables 2.1
and 2.2.
Part of the discrepancy in population estimates for 1970 can be
accounted for by subtracting the military population estimates assumed in
Table 2.2.
As readily seen from the above tables, roughly one half of
the State's population resides in the South Coast Air Basin, in a land area
which comprises approximately six per cent of the State's total land area.
-9-
-------
Bas i n
N
SANTA
BAR BAR A
...
ANGELES
o
('~
~4'
Los ~ngeles San Bernal"dino
'5 A N BE.
~,r_~NARD I NO
, . L-.
. . Riverside --
. '
Santa Ana 'l..
ORANGE',
R I V E R SID E
,I>
-1('
I~
/
('
Figure 2.1.
South Coast Air Basin
Source:
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
The State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving and
Maintaini~ National Ambient Air Quality Standards, Jan. 3D, 1972.
-10-
-------
Table 2.1. Population and Land Area - South Coast Air Basin
% of County's Area in Popul a ti on
County's Population Population in Basin Density
County in Basin - 1970 Basin (Mi2) (persons/Mi2)
Los Angeles 6,923,922 98.8 2,768 2,501
Orange 1,419,200 100.0 782 1,815
Riverside 320,038 70.4 1,851 173
San Bernardino 530,755 79.3 1 ,135 468
Santa Barbara 149,916 56.9 281 523
Ventura 376,200 100.0 1 ,863 202
Totals 9,717 ,031 8,680
Source:
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board, The
State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving and Mainta~
ing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, January 30, 1972.
Based on information supplied by the State Department of Finance.
Climatically, the South Coast Air Basin can be classified as a sub-
tropicai region characterized by dry summer seasons. Although the coast
can be moderately cool, the inland valleys frequently experience very hot
summers.
The total annual rainfall into the Basin is moderate and occurs
predominantly during the winter season; often times, the summer season is
completely void of any precipitation.
Wind patterns in and throughout the Basin vary as a function of both
time of day and season.
Typically, during the summer daylight hours, winds
flow from the west, sweeping across the Basin in an easterly manner.
In
the evenings the predominant wind direction frequently reverses itself.
Figures 2.2 and 2.3 illustrate this for a typical October day.
The almost
constant flow of air from the Pacific toward the coast is due to a semi-
permanent high pressure center hovering over the Pacific and situated north-
west of Southern California.
-11-
-------
I
-..
N
I
.0-
N
Figure 2.2.
Source:
Air Flow Patterns - South Coast Air Basin (October 1200-1800 PST)
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
The State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving
and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards,
January 30, 1972.
-------
o
N
J::igure 2.3
Sant
;~~ ~
~::;::;~ ~
~~----~-./'
/~~ ;:»}
::::;~~--~:::-~~ =~~=--~~~~ I, 'j:.
/~ ~ - ~ ~ ~:::::::::::::::;::;::;::::::: iA
./ '--'" ...../--~--~---'--'...../~-..../"-.../"--: .,
...-----...../~'-""~--------~-../_'~'-.../~ ("
/~~~-~~~~---~~~~~~~~ ,~
~~~~:::-:::::~:::~~:::::::~ ""'11';::-
~~--~--........--~---_-.../'-----~...../...../ ~ \,.-
/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:::::::::- ~
~~~~~
~-~:::~~~~~~~---~--
'-.../"-----~~---- --~~
:-~y:::~--- ~~-~
.~~~--~~ -----"-"""-""'-~~
:~~:: --~ --
--------r-----~
~~=:~~:::~~~~~..-::;~- -'-,",-,~
,-----_-/-------v---~~----= ---...-~~--
.- ../-../'-/ -- --- ----~~-/~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~------~~~~~-./'~----
---------------~-~~~-----../~~~~-~
---------------------~~ --~---~---~----~
------------~~--~-- ----~--------------------~--
~~~~~~~~~:::~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~
: :-;:::-:::::'::::::::::::::~::::~~:::::::--~::~~~~~-
/_---------/__-./"-.../"~~~~------.--.r ~~~
,--~-----------~-----~------------ ~~-./'--
--"""'-------'-------'-""---_-./--~----------"";~-~---~~
".,. "......... - -- ------------~--~~_-./'~--------- ~_.
/--------------------~---~-./'_--'-./'~~-../.~---
'.-r-./'- -~~ --"'---...../~
----~~~_-./'~~
. -- ----",~-./~~~-----~~~--.r
'-'--~--~--~~- -'" -~..---.-""-./..------./'
,--~-- -~--.r~"--
~--.r--.r-..-----
~
/
~~
~~
W
I
~~~
-----~-.../-
Air Flo\'1 Patterns -
South Coast Air Basin
-~~-.--
(October 0000-0700 PST)
----'-
......~~
Source:
The
The
of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board
of California Implementation Plan for Achieving and
Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, January 30,
State
State
1972 .
-------
------
-----
Table 2.2 California Population Projections - 1970 to 1980
(11i 11 ions)
1970 1975 19771 1980
Los Angeles 7.034 7.255 7.425 7.681
Orange 1.430 1.688 1.789 1.940
Riverside .461 .499 .529 .573
San Bernardino .689 .750 .790 .851
Ventura .380 .451 .501 .575
South Coast Air B . 2 9.994 10.643 11 .034 11 .620
aSln
California 20.003 21 .517 22.330 23.549
South Coast Basin
as % of State 50.0 49.5 49.4 49.3
1 Linear extrapolation of assumed 1975 - 1980 growth rate.
2 The South Coast Air Basin as defined by the State "consists of a 11 of
Orange and Ventura Counties and the most populated portions of Los Angeles»
Riverside» San Bernardino» and Santa Barbara Counties;" however» due to
problems of data availability for anything disaggregated beyond the County»
it is assumed throughout most of this report that the South Coast Air Basin
is comprised of the five counties listed above.
Source:
Population Research Unit» Department of Finance» Provisional
Projections of California Counties to 2000» September 15» 1971
(1623 - lOth Street - Sacramento» California)
The physical features which make up and surround the South Coast Air
Basin result in a very unique atmospheric environment.
In fact» the geo-
graphy and meteorology characteristic of the Los Angeles metropolitan
region contribute to the severity of the air pollution and the difficulties
of its elimination.
A more detailed analysis of the meteorological factors
-14-
-------
which contribute to the air pollution in the Basin is presented in Section
2.2.2.
2.2
Problem Definition and Description
2.2. 1
Air Quality in the South Coast Air Basin
Air quality measurements taken in the South Coast Air Basin show the
air pollution to be a severe problem.
The severity of the air pollution
can be shown by at least three indices:
(1) the extensive geographical
area which experiences the problems (2) the number of days per year that
various established standards are violated, and (3) the number of pollu-
tants which contribute to the problem.
Unlike areas which experience localized pollution from a limited
number of point sourcess the air pollution characteristic of Los Angeles
is truly regional.
The areal nature of the problem is the result of
severa 1 factors.
First, the major source of contaminants in the Basin
is the automobiles which means the primary pollutants* are emitted from
millions of spread out mobile sources (Figure 2.4).
The low density of
the region contributes to this by having thousands of miles of streets and
freeways cutting around and through the 8000 or so square miles of the
Basin.
Finally, since the principal air pollution problem is photochemical
oxidantss the primary pollutants are given the chance to diffuse before
becoming involved in the photochemical reactlons which ultimately generate
ozone (03)'
The geographical extent and severity of the problem is partially
illustrated by Figure 2.5, which shows the levels of air pollution encoun-
* Primary pollutants are those pollutants which are emitted directly into
the atmosphere, e.g.s CO, He, NO; secondary pollutants are those which have
resulted from a transformation process involving primary pollutantss e.g.
N02' 03'
-15-
-------
I
.......
0'\
I
Motor
Vehicles
ORGANIC GASES
3200 TPD
Motor Vehicles
Other
Organic Solvent
Users
NITROGEN OXIDES
1570 TPD
CARBON MONOXIDE
11300 TPD
Combustion
of Fuels
Motor
Veh~cles
Figure 2.4. Percentage of Emissions From Major Sources
in the South Coast Air Basin - 1970
Source: State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
California Emission Inventory - 1970, July 1972, .p. 45.
-------
- -
- -
- -
WSF\' = =
Eye I rr. on 661 01 days- E ESF\' ~
b d - ~
= Eye I rr. on 8'" of daysS ~
0) .)7 .27 .1) .06 = d ~
NO. .61 .17 .28 . 11 ~ 0) . )9 .21 . 11 . 06 ~
CO 2) 16 11 7 :: NO. .75 .59 .10 .20 ~. IISGV
502 .04 .0) .02 .01 = CO 26 18 12 7 :: Eye In. on 891 of days. ~
- - SO
:: S02 .07 .01 .0) .02 :: bed. ~ S
111111111 = = 0) .5) .)0 .11 .08 ~ ~
'"IIIIIIIIII'IIII"I"III'''I1!!1"'IIIIIIIIIII'''''I'''lfJ"''''' ~ NO. .57 .)2 .25 .11 ~ ~
NIIC ~ "'",~ CO 2) 13 10 6 ~ ;:::
a~ ~ ~ ;:::
Ey. I". on 181 of days ~ ~S02 .08 .05 .01 .02~ ;::: p
~ ~ ~ ESGV "" IIV
bed . ~ ~ ~ [Y8 In. on 91' of days8 ;$Eye tn. on 1'n of daysl!l
0) .29 . 17 .08 . 01 ~ ~ ~ bed. ~ t cd.
NO. .90 .16 .)2 .12 ~ C ~ ~ 0) .62 .)2 .15 .09 ~ 0) .15 .29 .1) .07
CO 2) 12 9 5 ~ Ey. Irr. on )01 of daysa ~ $ NO. .19 .)0 .2).11 ~ NO,.68 .'2 .28 16
S02 .21 .06 .0) . 02 ~ t cd. ~ ~ CO 16 11 9 6 ~ CO 23 13 9 ~
~ ~~ ~
~ 0).)2. 18 .07 . 05 ~ S02 .12 .05 .0) . 02 ~ S02 . 08 . O. . 0) .02
~ NO. 1.02 .55 .)5 .12 ~~ ~
~ CO )6 19 11 6 ~ ~ ~
,~SO $ ~ ~
~\\, ~ 2 .10 .05 .04 .0.;:: ~ ~
,\\\~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~\\, ~ ~ ~ ~
~"'\\\\\\\\\\\~ \ I SE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,ff,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
SWC ~ ;:: Eye I n. on 55' of days-
a'~ :::
Eye I,.r. on ., of days -~/I; ;:: bed
t cd.: ~Q... ~ O. .1. .22 .09 .05
- ;11.1. " '
0) .20 .10 .05 .0) = ~I.:::: NO..9O .)5 .21 .12
NO. 1.11. .66 .)7 .1' E ~~~ CO 21 10 7
CO )5 22 1) 5 = ~~ S02 -- -- --
- ~~
02 .51 .12 06 .0): ~III.I.
= ~II"
:: SC ~lllll
= Eye I rr. on 11 of daysa ~llll
~: County of Los Angel es, Ai r :: bed. ~IIII"
Pollution Control District, :: 0) .22 .09 .05 .02 ~I
Profile of Air Pollution: NO .90 .52 .)8 .16
Control, 1971, p. 69. ~ co' 20 13 9 5
~ S02 .19 .11 .07 .0)
;:::
;::
;:::
;::
~
::::-
::::-
~
2.5. SUMMER CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATION LEVELS, PPM
(August 1969, September 1969, August 1970, September 1970)
'-I
I
STA710N AREA A8B1!EVIATIONS
C Central
WSFY West San ternando Vall e)'
[SF\, East San Fernando Valley
WSGY West San Gabriel Yalley
ESG\' East San Gabriel Y8118)'
PWV Pomona Walnut Valley
MWC Morthw.st Coastal
SWC South..st Coastal
SC South Coasta1
SE Sout heast
COIITAMIUNT CONCENTRATIONS CODE
a. ~:;~~~;i::t~~~a~5.~;~~n~fd:~:af~r s..,on 0" .hleh eye Irritation ..s noted
b. Average {ppmJ of the. highest daily lIIaxi",a for this season (Ii value.'.
c. Average (ppm) of the" highest consecutive 8-hour periods '32 ....1ua,).
d. Mean hou r1 y avera"e {pp.) of .. highest days baaed on 2.18----hol.lr .yera"e
tapproxi,..taly 96 ...alues}.
e. He.n "ourly a...arage (PPfI;) for t"15 ,.a50n (approxilMtel)' 2900 ...a1uel5).
-------
tered in various sections of Los Angeles County during the summer months
of 1970.
It should be pointed out that many of the worst air pollution
levels were experienced in Riverside County, an area generally downwind
of Los Angeles County.
The number of days on which different air quality standards is viola-
ted varies as a function of pollutant and time of year.
High photochemi-
cal oxidant levels occur predominantly during the summer months whereas
the CO levels are generally highest during the winter months.
The season-
al variation of selected pollutants is seen by examining data compiled for
the west San Fernando Valley (Figure 2.6).
This valley experiences neither
the best nor worst air in the Basin, and consequently, can be viewed as
"typical. II
A more extensive breakdown of violations, which takes into
account all of Los Angeles County (see Appendix B, Section I) illustrates
again the regional nature of the problem.
Another index for air pollution severity is the number of contaminants
which violate established standards.
Nearly all national ambient air
quality standards were violated during 1970. Sulfur dioxide (S02)' which
presently is of relatively minor concern, did not violate the primary
standard (based on public health), but did exceed the secondary standard
(bast;~
n public welfare).
2.2.2 Contributing Factors to the Problem
There are a variety of reasons why air pollution has grown to be such
a problem in the South Coast Air Basin.
Hopefully. by understanding the
evolution of the problem, strategies can be developed which will attack
the root of the problem.
This brief synopsis of several critical contri-
buting factors is presented only to serve as a foundation on which to
better understand the rationale behind the development of various control
-18-
-------
- 050 r .
a:
\oJ
...
~ ." i fJ \ r~ \ j \ I\! \ A i \
~ 0.10 r' \1 ~ Vi \~ \)V \
g 0 ~E[)ERt.L~T'D -.O.O:M - M~=M CI,'E.HOUR COI.CENTRATION
'65 'CIj '67 '66 '69 '/0
~
50 r
- 40
wZ
02
_. -'
x-'
0-. 30
z:i
~I!:
....,
Z'"
o V) 20
CD f-
a:C:
q:«:
u!:
n ~Aeeo"~ONO"" ! f\ ~,
HDERr'L~T'" "'\1'\"~'~'T"'rT
1 \ . vJ \ j \ " i
,...-1 V,J \ I L./ \r\ .I
\.\! ~/' V
10
o
'65
'66
--L.....
'67
------"'----- --
'68
'69
'70
2.0
1,6
z - 1.6 -
wZ
g 2 1,4
H::. ~ A t
n~~t~\~I\)\V \J ~L
C/,LI~ ST D - 0.25 PPM N02 - MAXIMUM ONE.HOUR CONCENTRATION
o I I ....L...----~---.....L.-- ~--
'65 '66 '67 '68 '69 '7J
r-.:OTE: THE FEDERAL STANDARD 150.05 PPM N02
ANNUAL ARITHMETIC MEAN
OXIDES OF NlTflOGEN
Figure 2.6.
Major Air Pollutants - Monthly Maximum Hourly Averages
West San Fernando Valley (Monitored in Reseda) 1965- 1970.
Source:
Branch, M. C., and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research !nvesti9a!j~-
Air Pollution and City Planning, Environmental Science and
Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles. 1972, p. 6.
-19-
-------
strategies.
Although discussed separatelYt each contributing factor is
directly related and inter-related to the other factors.
It is the com-
bination of all of these factors and others which has led us to the prob-
lem.
Growth in Populationt Motor Vehiclest and Gasoline Consumption
One of the most obvious reasons for increased air pollution is
physical growth; in the time period since World War lIt Southern California
has sustained a rapid growth rate in people and their accompanying motor
vehicles.
Even more important has been the more rapid increase in fossil
fuel consumption for motor vehicles.
to the generation of air pollution.
This latter fact is most critical
The California State Department of Finance periodically updates its
forecasts for population growth trends within the State.
Its most recent
provisional forecast for the South Coast Air Basin (Table 2.2) reflect
several changes which have resulted recently:
Q
A rapid decline in women's fertility rates in all agest
especially from 1963-1968.
A decreasing net migration which in 1970-71 was 10% of
that experienced during 1964-65.
.
As a result of these phenomenat both findings of the 1970 censust all
population forecasts have been revised downward.
IdeallYt this latest
data should be used for projecting motor vehicles and gasoline consumption.
In some cases this has been donet in others it has not.
Projections of motor vehicle registration by county and vehicle type
are made by the State Department of Motor Vehicles using population esti-
mates provided by the Department of Finance. UnfortunatelYt their most
recent projection report(70) was made in Marcht 1970 using pre-1970 census
-20-
-------
information; consequently, the numbers in the report are likely to be high.
The Department of Motor Vehicles is currently updating its motor
vehicle registration forecasts utilizing the more recent population figures.
However, their results were incomplete and unavailable to us for this study.
In an attempt to estimate air pollution emissions, several groups
have made projections of gasoline consumption.
Information on the volume
of gasoline sold statewide is available from the State Controller's Office,
which collects a gas tax of 7 cents per gallon for gasoline sold within
the State.
Both the California Air Resources Board (Figures 2.7 and 2.8)
and the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District have made pro-
jections of gasoline consumed to 1990.
The techniques used by both organ-
izations are very similar; essentially, the projections are made by linear
correleation of "past performance."
Using the population estimates or
population and motor vehicle data, gasoline consumption is projected by a
linear correlation procedure.
The projections made by these two groups
is somewhat questionable for two reasons:
1) the population estimates used for their most recent projections
was pre-1970 census data; as discussed previously, these figures are
higher than more recent forecasts.
2) the projections assume that population and/or motor vehicle regis-
trations are the only independent variables which account for gasoline
consumption; there is strong indication that other variables need to
be considered.
Recently, a study conducted at UCLA incorporated the latest population
estimates for California, to project both motor vehicles and gasoline con-
sumption (Figure 2.9 and 2.10). The methodology used was a time series,
multiple regression technique.
In their report, a number of independent
variables were tested to determine their contribution to explaining vehicle
-21-
-------
40
V1
z:
o
:; 20
-I
::E:
35
30
25
15
10
I
I
s
,
"
."
¥'
,
I
I
/
,
,
I
I
I
/
I
I
/
I
I
,
,
,
,
~
,
,
,
,¥
'"
'"
~'
I
I
---'
r-
I
I
I
I
.-
,
--'
,
,
,,-
,
,..Jf
~...,
..
,,-
.'
~.
~
,
,
,
,
,
~
. . POPULATION
-.-- GASOLINE (gallons/day)
. - -- ..... MOTOR IJEH I CLES
o
L.()
q
m
I
I
;;
/
,
I
,I
I
/
Figure 2.7
Source:
o
L.()
m
L.()
\0
m
YEAR
Population, Motor Vehicles, Daily Gasoline
Consumption - State of California
California Air Resources Board,
Memo dated March 16, 1972.
-22-
-------
V)
:z:
a
.....
-I
-I
.....
::E:
~
,
jJt , ,
...
,
,
"k'
,
"
...
,...
,jIf'"
,..
.JC''''
,
,
",'
,Jt.
..
,
,
,
,Jt'
, ~/"
"
,
,
k'
14
12
10
8
6
4
I
I
2
~
,
,
/
,
,
I
,
,
/
,
",'
I
/
I
I
I
,
/
,
,
. . POPULATION
1t----iI GASOLINE (gallons/day)
..----A ~{)TOR VEHICLES
LO
V
0'1
a
LO
0'1
YEAR
Population, Motor Vehicles, and Daily Gasoline
Consumption - Los Angeles County
California Air Resources Board,
Memo dated March 16, 1972.
o
Figure 2.8
Source:
r-
r-
r-
r-
-23-
-------
50
40
30
VJ
z
a
.......
....J
--J
.......
:E:
20
10
o
Source:
,/
....
,.,."
./.
./'
8'"
.,/'
/'
,
"
/'
,"
/'
"
,/
,
"...'
...",-'
..,,~
... .,,'" ." "
--
--
-
...--
--
....-
--_...k--
--
a
........
0'1
L(')
........
0'1
. . POPULATION
...---... t()TOR VEHICLES (EXCLUDING MOBILE HOMES)
11----11 DAILY GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
a
co
0'1
L(')
co
0'1
a
0'1
0'1
2.9 State of California Projections for Population, Motor
Vehicles, and Gasoline Consumption (1970 - 1990)
Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research Investigation -
Air Pollution and City Planning, Environmental Science and
Engineering, UCLA, 1972, Appendix G.
Figure
-24-
-------
15
V')
z
0
......
-I
.....J
......
~
10
25
J'~
20
,/
,/'
/'
,.
,,/
-
,."
,...-
,.,.'
,,"'-
,..,.
,,,,,,
./.
.....'
.
-- ---- ------_..t.
_k""
--
",.-
...- "
-"
--
.....-- --
5
. . POPULATION
..---.. MOTOR VEHICLES (EXCLUDING t-DBILE HOMES)
~---8 DAILY GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
00
......
0"1
r-
LO
......
0"1
o
co
0"1
LO
co
0"1
r-
o
0"1
0'\
r-
YEAR
Fi 9 u re 2. 10
Source:
South Coast Air Basin Projections for Population, Motor
Vehicles, and Gasoline Consumption (1970 - 1990)
Adapted from Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research
Investigation - Air Pollution and City Planning, Environmental
Science and Engineering, UCLA, 1972, Appendix G.
-25-
-------
registrations and gasoline consumption.
The variables tested included
total state population, personal income in current dollars, price adjusted
personal income, miles of freeway completed and simple time correlation.
Of the variables tested, total population and price-adjusted income were
the most significant terms for projections of motor vehicles and gasoline
consumption.
Figure 2.10 shows the results of such a projection for
the South Coast Air Basin.
It is recommended that groups making forecasts
of gasoline consumption or motor vehicles use the procedure developed by the
UCLA study team or a similar one which incorporates economic variables
into the analysis.
The UCLA projections were made for total motor vehicles only (exclud-
ing mobile homes).
An approximate breakdown by specific type of vehicles
can be made by adjusting the 1970 projections by the Department of Motor
Vehicles and assuming the same relative proportion of vehicle types given
in their report. (70)
Since the rate of growth in gasoline consumption is the most rapid of
the growth rates discussed here and since air pollution is most directly
related to its consumption, any control strategies which are likely to
have a significant impact must address the issue of growth.
This is
especially true for long range solutions, but very important in the short
run as well.
Concurrent with the increased use of gasoline comes signifi-
cantly higher vehicle miles traveled and hence, more air pollution within
the Basin.
This growth will be discussed later in the analysis of the
transportation data base.
-26-
-------
Meteorological Factors
As alluded to briefly, the meteorological and geographical character-
istics of the South Coast Basin contribute to the air pollution situation.
Various scientists have referred to the Basin as a "huge smog chamber. II
The range of mountains, low inversions and wind speeds, and intense sunlight
are all factors which contribute directly to the formation of photochemical
smog.
The lack of appreciable amounts of precipitation, especially during
the summer months when oxidants are most intense, helps to perpetuate the
problem.
An examination of meteorological data compiled by the LAAPCD shows
the air pollution "potential" of the Basin (Table 2.3).
In an attempt to correlate high ozone concentration values to various
meteorological parameters, Trijonis(83) found that the variables which
correlated highest to ozone concentrations were solar radiation intensity.
temperature, maximum mixing height, and temperature gradient.
These factors
have to be carefully considered in the development of control strategies
which alter the temporal distribution of pollutants, e.g., staggered work
hours.
Partial correlation coefficients derived from his multiple regres-
sion analysis are presented in Table 2.4.
Transportation Systems
The rapid growth in motor vehicles has been accompanied by a high
growth rate in freeways and surface streets.
Agencies which plan for
transportation have improved service and flow facilitating more indi-
vidual travel and increased vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
With the emer-
gence of life styles more dependent on private automobiles for personal
mobility and with more leisure time for travel, VMT figures have steadily
risen.
Figure 2.11 illustrates the extremely rapid growth in freeway miles
within the South Coast Basin.
-27-
-------
Table 2.3. SU~1ARY OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA - LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Average
{l950-1970) 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
I. Number of Days Inversion Base
Height in the Following Ranges
(feet 3bove mean sea level)
Surface 134 138 134 141 136 142 134 120
Less than 1500 feet 204 212 197 210 204 207 197 211
Less than 2500 feet 261 269 241 274 265 260 252 271
II. Number of Days with Maximum
t<1i xi ng Hei ght ~ 3500 feet 192 194 171 205 191 184 198 205
I I I 1. Number of Days Average 0600 -
N
(» 1200 PST Wind Speed ~ 5.0 MPH 237 230 258 299 273 300 275 273
,
IV. Number of Days Inversion Base
Height ~ 1500 feet, Maximum Inversion
Hei ght ~ 3S00 feet and Average 0600-1200
PST Wino Speed ~ 5.0 MPH 91 97 84 106 94 103 83 108
V. Precipitation
Tota 1 for year (inches) 14.68 12.91 23.66 7.58 26.32 16.54
Number of days with more than a trace 36 19 36 32 40 31
VI. ~~ind (MPH) -
Mean Hourly Wi nd 6.2 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.3 5.4
Speed Average
0600-1200 PST
Wind Speed 5.1 4.5 4.5 4.3 5.1 4.6
SOURCE: County of Los Angeles, Air Pollution Control District, Data Processing and Meteorology Section - Technical
Services Division, Annual Summary - Meteorology, Air Pollution Effects and Contaminant Maxima - Calendar Years 1966-1970.
-------
Table 2.4. Ozone Related Weather Factors
Weather Variable
Typical Partial
Correlation Coefficient
Average solar radiation intensity in
downtown L.A. from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Civic Time (Langleys per hour)
0.7
Maximum daily temperature in downtown
L.A. (oF)
0.7
Maximum mixing height in L.A. as calculated
by the APCD from temperature readings (feet)
Average 9:00-12:00 PST wind speed
(miles per hour) ----
0.6
0.2
Minimum hourly relative humidity in
downtown L.A. (percent)
0.2
Inversion strength, difference in temperature
at base and top of inversion at 7:00 PST (OF)
0.4
7:00 PST pr.essure gradient between L.A.
International Airport and Palmdale (millibars)
0.2
Daily change in pressure gradient between L.A.
International Airport and Palmdale (millibars)
7:00 PST inversion base height (feet)
0.1
0.1
Source:
Trijonis, J. C., An Economic Air Pollution Control Model
Application: Photochemical Smog in Los Angeles County
in 1975, Ph.D. Thesis, California Institute of Technology.
Pasadena, California, 1972, pp. 166-167.
-29-
-------
400
V1
Q)
r-
.....
::E
300
700
600
500
200
100
o
1950
1955
1965
1970
1975
1960
Year
Miles of Freeway, Five-County Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
(Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino).
Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research Investigation -
Air Pollution and City Planning, Environmental Science and
Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, 1972, p. G-12.
Figure 2.11.
Source:
-30-
-------
The addition of each mile of freeway has resulted in higher VMT.
First,
from motorists travelling extra distances to use the freeways, realizing the
quickest route is not necessarily a straight line.
Then also, by the many
additional and longer trips which probably would not have been made without
the improved access made possible because of the extensive freeway system.
Economic Growth
Directly responsible for much of the growth in number of motor vehicles
and gasoline consumption has been the steady economic growth experienced in the
Los Angeles region.
With increased personal incomes and a lower percentage
of income being devoted to transportation needs. private automobile travel
has become relatively inexpensive.
Currently, the fraction of personal income devoted to transportation is
9 percent. as shown in Figure 2.12.
Over the past two decades, the percent-
age of one's personal income necessary to purchase an automobile has slowly
but steadily decreased.
This has resulted in private automobile travel
becoming accessible to virtually all but the very poor.
Affluence and
prestige have prompted the purchase of many autos; however. it is the existing
land use patterns and inadequacy of public transit services which have
promoted the almost complete dependence on automobiles for travel in the
South Coast Air Basin.
The introduction of safety features and more advanced pollution control
devices will increase the cost of automobiles.
However, this increase is
not likely to substantially affect the number of vehicles purchased or the
amount of fuel consumed.
-31-
-------
FOOD AND
TABACCO
17.8%
CLOTHING
AND
PERSONAL
CARE
9.0%
SAVINGS
6.7%
TAXES
14.4%
AUTO~BILE
9.0%
OTHER
CONSUMER
EXPENDITURES
10.8%
MEDICAL
AND
PERSONAL
BUSINESS
10.3%
HOUSING
AND
HOUSEHOLD
OPERATION
22.0%
Source:
Figure 2.12. Personal Income Expenditures
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers of the U.S., Inc.,
1972 Automobile Facts and Figures, 1972, p. 68.
-32-
-------
The relatively small percentage of personal income now devoted to
transportation is one of the reasons pricing schemes to discourage driving
are not very effective.
Similarly, the percentage of income devoted to
gasoline purchases is only a fraction of the total transportation costs
which are incurred.
Therefore, strategies such as doubling the price of
gasoline or applying some form of "emissions tax" cannot be expected to
significantly reduce travel.
A more thorough examination of pricing
schemes and their probable impacts is presented later.
Along with increased affluence, an increase in leisure time has become
available to many people.
This extra available time has resulted in extra
recreational and shopping trips, which in turn, have contributed to the
increased VMT figures.
Economic growth for the Basin residents is directly correlated to
economic activity in the industrial and business sectors.
In fact, in one
study it was felt economic activity could be used to assist in forecasting
pollution emissions. (57) Economic projections were made with the following
assumptions:
1 )
Pollutant emissions are related to the amount of economic
activity generated in an area and this relationship can
be measured and projected;
Economic activity in appropriate detail can be projected
more confidently than can the pollutant emission quantities
themselves;
2)
3)
The product of the projected relationships and economic
activity yields an approximation of the pollutant emissions;
and
4)
A projection of the economy of each region in the appropriate
industrial detail will yield an economic framework within
which the impact of proposed pollution control measures on
the economic future of the area can be calculated and
evaluated.
-33-
-------
A summary of the economic growth projections for the Los Angeles region
as well as other parts of the country are given in Appendix C.
Also pre-
sented in this appendix is some data showing recent economic growth
trends within the region.
This growth would probably correlate very well
with the growth in air pollution problems.
Land Use Practices
Growth in population, transportation networks and economic indices are
all related to and often major determinants of land use practices.
On the
other hand, it is these land use practices dictated by economic forces,
which contribute to the many miles driven within the Basin.
It has lonq
been realized that long range solutions to the air pollution problem must
rely on better land use planning.
In spite of an early recognition to the
land use problem, action on the State level has been very slow.
The continued trend toward low density development with marked separa-
tions of land uses by specific categories has helped promote the need for
divergent travel requirements.
Present development patterns in many of the
areas around the Basin are following the same patterns.
Bedroom communities
continue to be developed in portions of the San Fernando Valley, Ventura
County, the undeveloped portions of Los Angeles and Orange Counties.
Little
if any thought is given to where the residents will work and/or how long
the commute trip will be.
2.3 The Prospects of Achieving the Federal Ambient Air Quality
Standards in the South Coast Air Basin
The severity of photochemical smog in the South Coast Air Basin has
resulted in numerous studies of the problem.
In fact, much of our knowledge
concerning modern air pollution is the result of studies originating in the
Los Angeles region.
Every aspect of the problem, whether it be technical,
-34-
-------
economic, political, or social in nature, has been the subject of a detailed
analysis.
This section attempts to review very briefly a few of the groups
who have assessed the Los Angeles air pollution situation and commented on
the prospects of attaining the promulgated air quality standards, especially
the 0.08 ppm photochemical oxidant standard.
The Technical Advisory Committee of the California Air Resources Board
.."because of such factors as mass of population and numbers
of sources, some of the standards can be reached only by
major changes in the mode of life. ..it is the reduction of
emissions into the atmosphere which ameliorates air pollution,
not the simple act of legislating a strict air quality stan-
dard... It is probable that an oxidant standard of 0.1 ppm
(California's air quality standard for oxidants is 0.1 ppm)
will not be reached in Los Angeles by implementing programs
designed solely to limit emissions from sources, now antici-
pated on the basis of existing growth patterns...the maximum
hourly average oxidant values in Los Angeles will probably
not be below 0.3 ppm by 1980, will not be below 0.2 ppm by
1985, and cannot be expected to reach 0.1 (9)."
September 1970
Environmental Quality Laboratory - California Institute of Technology
"We recognize that the South Coast Air Basin in California
/is faced with a uniquely difficult air pollution control
problem. Because of its special meteorology and topography,
and the enormous rate of consumption of fossil fuels, even
the best technology likely to be available in this decade
would not reduce the average number of days per year on
which State air quality standards on photochemical oxidants
are violated below a lower bound of 10-15 days (46)."
Fall, 1972
-35-
-------
Environmental Science and Engineering Program -
University of California, Los Angeles
"Even if automobile emissions are reduced as required by the
Clean Air Act of 1970, but present trends in the use of fossil
fuels continue, the ambient air pollution levels...will not
be reached by 1985 and most probably not by 1990.'1(93)
Spri ng ,1972
A. P. Altshuller, et al, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research & Monitoring Office
"Complete control of automotive emissions, other combustion
sources, and organic solvents in the Los Angeles basin still
is not likely to reduce hydrocarbons to the level of air
quality for hydrocarbons de~ired... If all other hydrocar-
bons except ethane and propane were completely eliminated
and nitrogen oxides reduced by 90%, background ozone levels
mi g ht be formed. II (2)
October, 1971
A. P. Carlina and G. E. Kocher, The Rand Corporation
"If, for example, the NOx standards required by the Clean
Air Amendments of 1970 are imposed in 1975 on 1976 model
vehicles, and if this were the last tightening required to
meet the air quality standards, these standards would be
met about 1985. Given that used vehicle controls may be
forthcoming, but that the requirements of the Clean Air
Amendments may not prove sufficient, the mid-1980's are
probably a safe lower bound for achievement. ..of the air
quality standards... (Given) more costly or politically
difficult actions (are required, the standards).. .may not
be reached until well into the 1990's, or even later.II(21)
May. 1971
aCurrently Director of Implementation Research Division, Environmental
Protection Agency.
-36-
-------
3.0 CONTROL STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
This chapter reviews much of the air pollution control activity being
carried out in the South Coast Air Basin (and California).
It 1 is ts the
control strategies which were evaluated during the study and presents the
rationale for the proposed control strategy.
The California Air Resources Board has long been engaged in air
pollution control.
Attempts were made to follow the results of many of
their ongoing programs and to develop a control strategy which would, as
much as possible, be consistent with their goals and objectives.
As s~en from the previous chapter, the most severe problem experi-
enced within the Basin is photochemicai oxidants.
The levels experienced
occasionally exceed the promulgated standard of 0.08 ppm oxidant by
600-700 percent.
Controlling oxidants implies controlling the sources
of reactive hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen.
Any control strategy which would reduce the oxidant to 0.08 ppm
would easily allow for the attainment of the CO and N02 air quality
standards as well.
Due to the regional nature of the problem, it is
inconceivable in the foreseeable future, that oxidants would not be the
limiting constraint for achieving the air quality standards.
3. 1
California State Implementation Plan Review
The implementation plan proposed by the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) for achieving the federal ambient air quality standards was
probably the most severe set of strategies proposed nationally.
For
several of the key elements in their proposal, the CARB would need to
-37-
-------
obtain additional legislation.
Neverthelesst assuming full implementation
of the submitted plant several portions of California, including the South
Coast Air Basint fall substantially short of the air quality goals set
fo rth .
In essence, the Statel s position is lithe achievement of all of the
national air quality standards will be very difficultt if not impossible.../I
(79) .
California has pioneered much of the work in air pollution control.
Through the 1974 model year carst California has a more stringent motor
vehicle emission control program than the Federal government.
Due to the
severity of the air pollution problem, however, all currently planned or
projected programs are inadequate to reduce the automotive e~issions to
the required levels.
This section briefly reviews the California strategy
for attempting to achieve the national ambient air quality standards.
Primary emphasis is placed on emissions from mobile source categories
since they presently account for the largest share of the problem.
The largest reductions in emissions to be gained in California over
the next five years will come from continuation and extension of their
"current motor vehicle control programs."
Under the ARB's current programs
are requirements for both new and used motor vehicles.
The key elements of California IS control program for new motor
vehicles include:
.
Crankcase emission control requirement for all new
gasoline-powered vehicles.
.
Exhaust emission standards for all vehicles, both diesel
and gasoline powered, becoming increasingly stringent
through the 1975 model car.
-38-
-------
.
Evaporative fuel emission standards for all post-1969
gasoline-powered light-duty vehicles and post-1972 heavy-
duty vehicles.
. Assembly line testing of light-duty vehicles destined for
the California market to show compliance with the
established standards. Testing is to cover 25 percent of
the 1972 models, 50 percent of the 1973 models sold prior
to January 1, 1973 and 100 percent thereafter.
program are summarized below:
The elements which make up California's used motor vehicle control
.
Installation of crankcase emission control devices in the
most populous counties upon change of ownership.
.
Installation of exhaust control devices on 1955-65 light
duty vehicles upon change of ownership or initial
registration in California. This program was initiated
in the South Coast Air Basin on September 1, 1972 and
will be extended to the San Francisco area on March 1,
1973.
.
Installation of an exhaust control system which signi-
ficantly reduces the oxides of nitrogen in 1966-1970
model vehicles upon change of ownership or initial regis-
tration in California. This program will be initiated in
Riverside County on February 1, 1973 and in the other
portions of the South Coast Air Basin on April 1, 1973.
Starting on July 1, 1973, all other subject vehicles, unless
already fitted or exempted shall be fitted.
In addition to the motor vehicle control programs, the State is
engaged in a variety of other activities which are also aimed at reducing
Other components of their ongoing control
motor vehicle emissions.
program are:
.
Limitation of the degree of unsaturation of gasoline sold
in the South Coast Air Basin, and regulation of the
volatility of gasoline sold thorughout the State.
.
A tax exemption for gaseous fuels from the fuel tax when
such fuels are used in motor vehicles equipped with
approved conversion systems.
.
Provision of funds to support public transportation through
a gasoline sales tax.
-39-
-------
. Testing of incentive programs to encourage more extensive
use of public transportation and car pools by commuters.
. Evaluation of the air quality impact from traffic flow
improvements on the freeways.
. Continuation of an air pollution research program.
Review of the effectiveness of the States' motor vehicle
emission control program by:
.
Exhaust emission testing of motor vehicles at two
Los Angeles sites.
Requiring a Certificate of Compliance from authorized
inspection stations upon transfer of ownership for
used cars.
Enforcement of the California Vehicle Code which
prohibits the emission of excessive smoke in vehicle
exhaust.
Conducting random roadside checks of 1966 and later
vehicles for exhaust emission abnormalities.
Effective implementation and enforcement of the many phases of the
State's ongoing motor vehicle control program will result in a substantial
decrease in automotive emissions.
The impact of these programs on the
number of days per year various air quality standards are exceeded should
be significant.
However, there will still be many days per year the
standards will be violated.
In an attempt to further reduce the automotive
emissions, California proposed in their Implementation Plan to investigate
the feasibility of additional control strategies.
Especially in areas of
severe air pollution, such as Los Angeles, the following measures were and
are being considered:
.
Controlling vehicular emissions from sources currently
exempt, e.g., motorcycles.
. Mandatory motor vehicle inspection and maintenance.
-40-
-------
.
Retrofitting 1966 through 1969 vehicles with evaporative
emission control devices.
.
Minimizing and controlling gasoline spillages and vapor
losses from service station fueling operations.
Decreasing motor vehicle usage.
.
. Converting portions of the automobile population to the
use of gaseous fuels.
.
Requiring local planning agencies to develop land use
plans which include measures to minimize or prevent air
poll uti on.
. Requiring the use of low-lead or unleaded gasoline.
The more rapid attainment of air quality objectives depend largely on
the success or failure of implementing the above mentioned programs.
The
'degree of improvement obtainable from any of these programs is a function
1)
the number of motor vehicles affected, 2) the
of several variables:
extent to which emissions are improved and/or auto usage decreased, and
finally. 3) the extent to which the reduction in emissions affects ambient
ai r qual ity.
Specifically, the Air Resources Board proposed five key strategies
oriented at controlling automotive emissions beyond the current motor
vehicle control program:
1 )
A program of periodic vehicle inspection and mandatory
maintenance.
2)
A program to require retrofit contro~ of the fuel
evaporative emissions from 1966 through 1969 model
vehicles.
3)
A program to convert one-third of the gasoline powered
vehicles to use gaseous fuels.
Measures to reduce motor vehicle usage through car pooling
and work schedule changes. A goal of reducing traffic by
20 percent was set.
4)
5)
Steps to significantly reduce the evaporative losses from
gasoline marketing operations.
-41-
-------
Despite proposing several strategies which would have a significant
impact on the life styles of the Basin1s residents, the plan was unable to
reach the goal established.
The plan projected that by 1977, the maximum
oxidant level would still be 0.15 ppm or almost two times the promulgated
standard.
Figures 3.1 through 3.3 summarize the critical strategies proposed in
the California Implementation Plan.
It will be shown later that the
prospect of implementing these critical strategies in the near future,
when they are both needed most and most effective, is low.
A variety of
implementation obstacles impedes progress toward achieving the standards.
A review of the reductions claimed by the ARB shows several of them
to be highly optimistic.
Table 3.1 lists the reductions attributable to a
periodic inspection and maintenance program.
It appears the high reductions
claimed by the ARB were the result of several factors:
1) assuming the
initial reductions attainable from inspection and maintenance programs
(see Section 4.1 for details of several State studies on the subject), and
2) the lack of Federal guidelines during the plan preparation for what
reductions should have been claimed.
On this latter point, the most recent
EPA guidelines for reductions from inspection and maintenance are presented
in Table 3.2.
In general, the lower results are attributable to correcting
for deterioration throughout the year between inspection and tune-ups.
-42-
-------
12
10
(1) CURRENT MOTOR VEHICLE PROGRAM
(2) PERIODIC VEHICLE INSPECTION
(3) CONVERSION TO 1/3 GASEOUS FUEL
(4) 20% TRAFFIC REDUCTION
(5) ALL OTHER PROGRAMS
8
V)
a
z
ex::
V)
=>
<:)
:I:
I-
......
6
>-
ex::
a
........
V)
~
<:)
I-
4
2
ALLOWABLE
--------
EMISSIONS (2481 TONS/DAY)
o
<:)
.......
'"
.-
N
.......
'"
c:::t
.......
'"
co
.......
'"
.-
o
co
CJ"\
I.D
.......
'"
Figure 3.1.
YEAR
Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy
Carbon Monoxide Emission Controls (1970 1980).
California Air Resources Board, February. 1972.
Source:
-43-
-------
18
15
12
V')
a
L.U
0:::
a
z
:::::>
::I:
9
ALLOWABLE
----------
EMISSIONS (835 TONS/DAY)
- - (1 )
(2)
(3)
>-
N
"
CT'>
.-
<:T
"
CT'>
.-
~
"
CT'>
.-
ex:>
"
CT'>
.-
o
ex:>
CT'>
.-
YEAR
Figure 3.2. Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy
Nitrogen Oxides Emission Controls (1970 - 1980).
Source:
California Air Resources Board, February 1972.
-44-
-------
V')
C
l1J
0:::
C
:z:
:::::>
:I:
>-
ct:
c
.........
V')
:z:
a
I-
18
15
(1) CURRENT MOTOR VEHICLE PROGRAM
(2) PERIODIC VEHICLE INSPECTION
(3) RETROFIT EVAPORATION CONTROL
(4) CONVERSION TO 1/3 GASEOUS FUEL
(5) 20% TRAFFIC REDUCTION
12
9
6
2)
)
(5)
3
ALLOWABLE
-------
EMISSIONS (213 TONS/DAY)
----------
o
o::t"
,.....,
0'1
co
,.....
0'1
a
co
0'1
~
a
,.....,
0'1
N
,.....,
0'1
~
YEAR
\.0
,.....,
0'1
~
Figure 3.3.
Proposed California Air Resources Board Strategy
Photochemical Oxidant Emission Controls*
*(Based on Controlling Reactive Hydrocarbons).
California Air Resources Board, February, 1972.
Source:
-45-
-------
Table 3.1
CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
REDUCTIONS FROM PERIODIC VEHICLE INSPECTION
(Tons/Dav )
CO NOX RHC
1975 -1600(-27%) +45(+5%) -75(-11%)
1977 -1120(-26%) +60(+9%) -45(-7%)
Assumptions:
1) Projected growth (CARB)
2) Current motor vehicle programs
Table 3.2 DRAFT OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO EPA TITLE 40 (40 CFR-PART 51)
OCTOBER, 1972-REDUCTIOtJS FRO~1 INSPECTION/MAHJTENA[JCE
HC-12%
CO-10%
NOX-O%
Program Requirements:
.
Mandatory inspection/maintenance using a loaded
emissions test.
.
Establishment of failure criteria consistent
with claimed reductions.
.
Insurance that failed vehicles receive necessary
maintenance.
i
Enforcement program to discourage and insure
against intentional readjustments or modifi-
cations after inspection.
-46-
-------
The major discrepancy in emission reductions likely to result from an
inspection and maintenance program is the CO reduction taken by the ARB.
Modification of this reduction claim alone results in the State being over
the CO air quality standard in 1975 and requiring a two year extension to
meet the standard by 1977.
The reductions claimed by the State for a massive conversion to
gaseous fuels are also high.
Initial estimates seem high both with regard
to the percentage emission reductions possible and the number of vehicles
which could conceivably be converted.
Section 4.3 of the report discusses
the issue of gaseous fuel conversion in the South Coast Air Basin.
On November 21, 1972 at the Air Resources Board's monthly meeting,
several revisions were made to reductions resulting from various options.
The principal changes (see Tables 3.3 and 3.4) confirmed the results of
our analysis.
Revision of both claims for inspection and maintenance and
gaseous fuel conversion programs reflected a significantly lower impact
than originally calculated.
-47-
-------
Table 3.3
ESTIMATED EFFECT ON TOTAL EMISSIONS
FROM VEHICLE EMISSION CONTROL OPTIONS
IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN - 1975
(Tons/Day )
Sources Carbon Oxides oi'
Monoxide Oxidantl Ni trogen
Stationary Sources 65 140 357
with Controls
Mobile Sources 11930 1690 1290
before Control
Projected Totals 11995 1830 1650
Projected Reduction 8625 (9510)2 1305 (1325) 660 (780)
from Mobile Sources
Remaining Controllable 3370 (2485) 525 (505) 990 (870)
Emissions
Allowable Emissions 2481 213 835
%Reduction from 1970 70 (80) 70 (70) 40 (50)
Emissions
lBased on emissions of highly reactive organic gases.
2(
) Estimates shown in Implementation Plan.
Source:
Presented at the Air Resources Board Monthly Meeting, San Francisco,
California, November 21, 1972.
-48-
-------
Table 3.4
ESTIMATED EMISSION REDUCTIONS DUE TO
VEHICLE EMISSION CONTROL OPTIONS FOR
THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN - 1975
(Tons/Day)
Carbon Oxides of
Option Monoxide Oxidant1 Nitrogen
.-
Current Program 2 6030 (6030)3 1000 (1000) 450 (450)
1955-1965 Catalytic 160 10 2
Converter Retrofit
1966-1970 Catalytic 660 50 8
Converter Hetrofit
Periodic Vehic le 210 (1600) 25 (70) -
Inspection
Evaporative Control 160 (160) -
Retrofi t4
Gasc ::;-.;..: :'-.;..::' 1015 (1330) 40 (75) 70 (200)
Conversion
200/0 Traffic 550 (550) 85 (85) 130 (130)
Reduction
Tota ls 8625 (9510) 1370 (1390) 660 (780)
lBased on control of emissions of highly reactive organic gases.
2Includes the reductions resulting from installation of ARB approved
devices for 1955-65 and 1966-70 vehicles.
3(
) Estimates shown in Implementation Plan.
4Includes control on gasoline marketing operations and retrofitting
1966-69 vehicles with evaporative control.
Source:
Presented at the Air Resources Board Monthly Meeting, San Francisco,
California, November 21, 1972.
-49-
-------
3.2 Tile Caltech Environmental Quality Laboratory Plan
Since its inception in 1970, the Environmental Quality Laboratory
(EQL) at the California Institute of Technology has been actively engaged
in working on environmental problems.
Towards the end of 1972, they
published a plan for attacking the photochemical smog problem in Los Angeles
(46) .
The EQL plan is a comprehensive set of strategies developed by a
team of engineers, lawyers, social scientists and students.
Certain aspects of the EQL plan are strategies proposed by the ARB in
its Implementation Plan; other control measures have been proposed e1se-
whe re.
However, despite the massive impact the EQL strategies would have
on the Basin's residents, the plan does not meet the federal air quality
standards.
It was a deli bera te deci si on of the EQL study team to "cons i der
only those air pollution control strategies that comply with the spirit
(if not the letter) of the Clean Air Act of 1970".
Their assessment of the
requirements of the Clean Air Act of 1970 and the State's proposed Imple-
mentation Plan is summarized as follows (46):
"The California strategy, on one hand, and the federal
requirements, on the other, seem to represent two extremes.
One was so slow that the time when economic growth and
population growth would overtake control measures could be
readily predicted.
This would happen sometime in the middle
of the 1980's.
The other was so rapid that only a sudden
and wrenching curtailment of transportation and economic
activity could produce the required results.
!n the latter
case, the cure might be worse than the disease."
-50-
-------
The EQL approach to this problem is the adaption of "management
standards" in which the number of days on which air quality standards are
exceeded is significantly reduced (but never reaches the one day per year
violation allowed for by the Clean Air Act).
If the "EQL Strategy #1" is
implemented, the team estimated the number of days the oxidant standard
would be exceeded would drop from 241 days in 1970 to 50 days in 1975 and
hopefully, to 25 days per year by 1977.
The key elements of the "EQL Strategy #1", as it relates to motor
vehicles are summarized below in Table 3.5.
When some recommended
stationary source control measures are added, the estimated cost of the
first phase of the "EQL Strategy #1" is approximately one billion dollars
through the end of 1975.
A summary of the impacts of the "EQL Strategy #1" on improving air
quality is given in Figures 3.4 and 3.5.
Several points of interest arE
brouqht out by the EQL analysis:
.
presently proposed control strategies do improve the
situation through at least 1980.
.
the I'EQL Strategy #1" would result in a more rapid improve-
ment of air quality, although falling short of the
national photochemical oxidant standard.
the EQL analysis suggests the goal of no more than one
violation per year for oxidants cannot be met in the
South Coast Air Basin.
.
Part of the "EQL Strategy #1" is a series of social and economic
incentives to discourage individual auto usage such as:
1) an emissions
tax based on the amount of pollutants discharged into the atmosphere,
-51-
-------
Table 3.5 EQL STRATEGY #1 FOR MOTOR VEHICLES
Estimated Cost
th ru 1975
Measure (millions) Cost Borne By
1. Mandatory conversion of $400 Loss of Federal
commercial fleet vehicles and State tax
to burn a gaseous fuel by revenues
Oecerrber 31, 1973
2. a) Mandatory installation $ 70 Consumer
on 1960-65 vehicles of
a control device to
reduce HC emissions by
60% and NO emissions by
'" 35% x
b) Mandatory installation $225 Consumer
on 1966-70 vehicles of
a control device that
reduces NOx emissions
subs tanti a lly
3. Mandatory installation of an $200 State and
evaporative control device Consumer
on 1966-69 vehicles to reduce
fuel tank evaporative emissions
by 90%
4. Mandatory vehicle emissions "Emissions tax" Consumer
inspection system for all cars revenues
5. Social and economic incentives
to discourage individual
automobile use
-52-
-------
Source:
160
140
0
w
0
w
w 120
u
x
w
~
a:
::J 100
0
:x:
a:
0
u.
~ 80
Q..
a..
~
S
0
a: 60
- Auto Use-
(/)
>-
-------
250
o
UJ
0
UJ
UJ
u 200
x
UJ
~
cr:
::>
0
I PRESENT STRATEGY (1971)
cr: 150 ~
o
u.
~
0..
0..
~
£
0
cr:
en 50
>
-------
2) exclusive freeway lanes for buses and carpools, 3) extended ramp
metering to control access onto the freeways, 4) free or subsidized
parking for carpoolers, 5) a subsidy for improving public transit services
and as a last resort, 6) either increased gasoline taxes or a ceiling
placed on the volume of gasoline consumed within the Los Angeles Basin.
The EQL study team estimated these socio-economic measures would result
in a 20% reduction in vehicular emissions after their other measures were
instituted (Note:
the CARB also proposed a 20% reduction in auto usage
through incentive type measures).
To date it has been extremely difficult to estimate quantitatively
the probable impact of these incentive type measures.
Va ri ous peop 1 e
have labelled such endeavors as "social engineering", an area in which
comparatively little is known.
Using a demand elasticity model developed for the transportation
planning agencies in the Los Angeles region, we have attempted to perform
some "social engineering" analyses.
These results, presented in sections
7.2 thru 7.10 are a first order approximation of the probable impact of a
host of incentive type measures.
The results will show that due to a
variety of situations which presently exist in the Basin, the probable
impact of a host of incentive type control strategies would be less than
a 10% VMT reduction and probably not much more than a 5-8% reduction.
3.3 Emission Inventory Revision
During the course of the study, it became necessary for the EPA to
develop a strategy to meet the air quality standards by January 15, 1973.
As a result of this activity, personnel from both the EPA and the ARB
-55-
-------
re-evaluated portions of the California emission inventory.
S pe cia 1
emphasis was placed on updating and revising the mobile source emission
inventory in the South Coast Air Basin.
A summary of portions of the
revised motor vehicle emission contributions for the Los Angeles region
is presented in Appendix N.
Again, a variety of control strategies were examined and a "plan"
developed.
Table 3.6 presents a preliminary set of controls with the
accompanying reductions associated with each.
The key element to the
plan is a massive VMT reduction accomplished through gasoline rationing.
Due to time constraints it was impossible to carry out a detailed eval-
uation of either the modified emission inventory or the impact of all the
strategies proposed.
In fact, some of the proposed strategies were
clearly beyond the scope of the present analysis, e.g., additional
stationary source controls.
The revised emission inventory has been
accepted as given for this report.
Based on the revi sed inventory" the
maximum allowable emissions for reactive hydrocarbons was set at approx-
imately 161 tons/day.
3.4 Control Strategy Options
The previous sections have discussed various control strategies
which have been evaluated by various groups and agencies.
During the
course of this study, a wide array of control strategy options were like-
wise evaluated, including specific measures which have not previously
been analyzed.
Table 3.7 summarized the control measures evaluated.
The control measures basically fall into two classes:
motor vehicle
oriented strategies and traffic (or VMT) oriented strategies.
The
traffic oriented strategies can be divided further into traffic flow
strategies and VMT reduction strategies.
-56-
-------
Table 3.6 COMPILATION OF CONTROL STRATEGY AFFECTS
ON JUNE 30, 1977 Tons/Day
Allowable Emissions + 161
Stationary source emissions
considering no additional + 215
controls since 1970
Stationary Control Strategy
Reductions
a. Gas rationing - 62
b. Gasoline marketing - 11
c. Dry cleaning vapor control - 6
d. Degreaser substitution - 25
e. Rule 66 strengthening (50%) - 45
Stationary Emissions Remaining + 66
Mobile source emissions from
aircraft, on-highway light and +477
heavy duty vehicles, and motor-
cycles
Mobile Control Strategy Reductions
a. Aircraft emission reductions - 11
b. VSAD and PCV State retrofit - 19
c. Inspection and maintenance - 39
d. Vehicle evaporative control
retrofit - 26
e. Gaseous fuel conversion - 12
f. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit - 84
g. VMT reduction by gasoline
rationing - 191
Mobile Emissions Remaining + 95
Total Mobile and Stationary + 161
Emissions Remaining
Note: The reductions claimed from these strategies are a function
of the order in which they were applied; therefore, the re-
ductions claimed from one strategy should not be directly
compared wi th those from others. -
Source: Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, December, 1972
-57-
-------
I
U'1
(X)
I
Table 3.7 CONTROL STRATEGY OPTIONS
Traffic (or VMT) Oriented
Motor Vehicle Oriented Traffic Flow Strategies VMT Reduction Strategies
8 Inspection/Maintenance 8 Traffic Improvement Programs 8 Improved Public Transit
8 Retrofit Devices 8 Ramp Metering 8 Incentives to Discourage
Auto Use
8 Gaseous Fuel Conversion 8 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit , Auto Free Zones
8 Evaporative Loss Control 8 Staggered Work Hours 8 Increased Parking Fees
8 Four Day Work Week
8 Exclusive Bus and Carpool
Lanes
8 Li mited Registration
8 Gasoline Rationing
-------
Chapter 4 discusses the motor vehicle oriented programs.
Appendices
Land M contain an expanded discussion of evaporative loss controls and
gaseous fuel conversion programs, respectively.
Chapters 6-8 present a fairly detailed analysis of the traffic
oriented strategies.
Again, several appendices have been included as
relevant support materials (Appendices E, F, G, H, I).
3.5
Interim Control Measures
The air quality data clearly show the photochemical oxidant problem
to be seasonal iil nature.
Oxidants occur more frequently and severely
during the s~nmer months when the temperatures are highest and the photo-
chemical activity greatest.
To date, all calculations which have analyzed the air pollution
problem have assumed implicitly that pollutant emissions are discharged
at a relatively uniform rate (e.g., 500 tons per day of CO).
The difference
in emission levels which occur on weekends is again assumed to be minor.
These assumptions may, in fact, be very misleading.
Figure 3.6 presents data on the monthly volumes of gasoline sold
within California.
Besides the steady growth rate ("-"4 percent/year), a
significant variation occurs in the amount of gasoline consumed monthly.
There is approximately a 25 percent variation between the maximum to
minimum monthly gasoline consumption figures within any given year.
To test the significance of this fact, several correlations were
run.
The percentage of annual gasoline consumed per month was correlated
with the percentage of days within a month which exceeded various California
air quality standards.
Figures 3.7 and 3.8 present the results for the
-59-
-------
(/)
z
a
--J
--J
c:(
<.!J 700
LL.
a
(/)
z
a
......
--J
--J
......
~ 600
800
----- - AVERAGE MONTHLY GASOLINE
CONSUMPTION FOR GIVEN YEAR
500
co
1.0
~
.-
a
,.....
~
.-
~
1.0
~
.-
.-
,.....
~
N
,.....
~
Figure 3.6.
State of California - Monthly Gasoline Consumption
(1968 - 1972).
Source:
Division of Accounting, Controller of the
State of California. The Data are Based on
Revenues Collected from the 7~ Per Gallon
Gas Tax.
-60-
-------
(r = +0.39, p < 0.025)
100 - .. .
. .
.
.
.
CI
LLJ .. . . .
LLJ
U 80 - .
x 0
LLJ a::: .
c:t:
:J: o . .
u z:
...... c:t:
:J: I- .
3 (/')
:J: >- .
I- I- 60 .
z: .......
~ ...J .
c:t:
::J .
z: a
.......
a:::
(/') .......
>- c:t: .
c:t: .
0 c:t:
....... 40
LL. z: . .
0 a:::
0
LLJ LL.
~ .......
c:t: ...J
I- c:t:
z: U
LLJ .
U . .
a:::
LLJ
a.. 20
.
.
.
7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL GASOLINE CONSUMED PER MONTH
Figure 3.7.
Correlatipn of Monthly Gasoline Consumption with
Oxidant Air Quality Violations.
-61-
-------
o
w
w
<..>
><
W 0
~
::I: c:(
<..> 0
....... :z::
::I: c:(
:3 r-
VI
::I:
r- >-
:z:: r-
o .......
:E: -.J
c:(
:z:: =>
....... a
VI ~
>- .......
c:( c:(
Q
c:(
LJ... .......
o :z::
~
W 0
c.!) LJ...
c:( .......
r- -.J
:z:: c:(
W <..>
<..>
~
W
c..
(r = +0.56, p < 0.025)
100
80
.
60
. ..
.
.
. . .
. .
40 . .
. .
. .
. . .
. . .
.
.
20 . . .
. .
. .
. . .
.
7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0
PERCENTAGE OF ANNUAL GASOLINE CONSUMED PER MONTH
Fig u re 3.8.
Correlation of Monthly Gasoline Consumption With
Nitrogen Dioxide Air Quality Violations.
-62-
-------
three most recent years air quality standards violations by month were
available (1968-1970).
While the correlation coefficients were not
extremely high, they did prove to be significant.
In all likelihood,
meteorological parameters such as those discussed previously (Section
2.2.2) are the main determinants of air quality violations.
However, it
does appear that increased gasoline consumption during the summer months
is a significant variable in causing air quality standards to be violated.
A more detailed statistical analysis, which incorporated the various
meteorological parameters, would be necessary to evaluate more definitely
what the various contributions were to the total number of violations
(e.g., use of stepwise multiple regression techniques).
In view of the above analysis. evaluation of control strategies
which could be instituted on an interim basis deserve consideration.
Interim controls have been defined in this report as those measures which
could be applied for a specific seasonal problem.
It should not be
construed to mean measures such as those used duri ng "epi sode'l conditi ons,
e.g., shutting down power plants and/or closing off all the freeways to
traffi c.
Controls used for trying to avoid a one-day-per-year violation
of 0.08 ppm oxidant are completely different from those which try to
avoid two-to-three-day "stagnation" periods of 0.50 ppm peak oxidant.
In the latter, one has a reasonable lead time to implement and enforce an
emergency episode plan.
These options are not available for trying to
avoid a 0.08 ppm oxidant standard (one-hour average).
-63-
-------
Certain strategies can easily be applied on an interim basis whereas
other measures must be considered fixed once implemented.
Due to the
procedures used for compiling emission inventories, it is all but impossible
to know accurately what the monthly or weekly fluctuations are in pollutant
emissions discharged.
Consequently, one is unable to quantitatively
assess the probable impact on air quality improvements from interim
controls which attempt to explicitly consider such variations.
Table 3.8 gives a number of examples of possible interim controls
which might be implemented.
Several of these measures have been evaluated
in the report.
The definite seasonal nature of the ozone problem would
suggest a more detailed analysis of these types of control strategies is
warranted.
-64-
-------
Table 3.8
EVALUATION OF SOME INTERIM CONTROL STRATEGIESa
Relative Adapt- Relative Effec-
Control abil ity for tiveness as an Example
Strateqy Interim Control Interim Control
Gaseous Fueled Medium Medium Dual fuel systems
Vehicles which burn gaseous
fuels during the
summer, regular
gasoline during the
winter
Retrofit Devices Very low - - - - -
55 M.P.H. Speed High Low Speed limit changes
Limit in summer and/or
daytime
L imi ted Very low - - - - -
Registration
Pri ci ng Schemes Low-Medi um - - - - -
Gasoline High High Rationing from May-
Rationing October
aAssuming no difficulty in implementing the control measure.
-65-
-------
4.0 MOTOR VEHICLE ORIENTED STRATEGIES
Motor vehicle oriented controls fall into several categories, each
designed ultimately at reducing the average vehicular emissions discharged.
The specific controls evaluated were listed in Table 3.7.
briefly summarizes the intent of each control strategy.
The following
.
Inspection/Maintenance - designed to reduce emission through
a program of inspection followed by the required tuning,
repairs, etc.~ necessary to allow each car to operate at
its minimum emission potential.
.
Retrofit Devices - generally aimed at cleaning up the
emissions after they are generated, usually through more
complete combustion.
.
Gaseous Fuel Conversion - designed to reduce emissions
through the use of "cleaner" burning f'jels, e.g.,
compressed natural gas or liquified petroleum gas.
.
Evaporative Loss Controls - aimed at controlling the loss
of hydrocarbons from evaporation, generally by recirculation~
trapping mechanisms~ or condensation processes.
4. 1
Inspection/Maintenance Measures
Inspection/maintenance approaches reduce emissions from in-use motor
vehicles by insuring that the auto population is maintained in a manner
sufficient to keep emission at a minimum.
This approach is generally
implemented by requiring regular mandatory maintenance~ or maintenance
based on the results of periodic inspection results; usually this involves
either an engine diagnostic or exhaust emission test.
It has been
demonstrated that significant emission reduction can be achieved by the
proper servicing of the vehicle population.
In addition~ inspection
becomes a necessary enforcement tool if new or retrofit emission control
devices are required.
-66-
-------
The State of California has required emission control devices to be
installed on automobiles for a number of years.
To ensure compliance,
the State initiated and continues to operate several inspection programs
including the Certificate of Compliance and roadside inspection.
A new
owner of a used car must obtain a Certificate of Compliance from a Class A
station (a private garage or service station licensed by the State) before
having his car registered.
In order for the certificate to be issued, the
car is tested for proper functioning of its emission control system.
Regulations specify that engine operations be verified with diagnostic
test equipment and the idle speed, air/fuel ratio, and ignition timing
reset to manufacturer's specifications if necessary.
The California Highway Patrol administers the roadside inpection
program, through which about 15 percent of the cars registered in
California are inspected each year.
In addition to a safety inspection,
vehicles have their emissions checked at idle; those failing the emission
test are required to have adjustments made at a Class A station.
Results from the above inspections and other test programs indicated
that it was not unusual to find cars which discharge contaminants several
times the average emission and that most of these cars could be restored
to a reasonable level of emission by a simple tune-up.
In light of the
potential emission reductions obtainable by identifying autos that require
servicing, the increasing complexity of new car emission controls, and the
growing probabilities that additional retrofit devices would be required
for in-use vehicles, considerable interest developed for a mandatory
inspection program.
As a result, the 1970 California Legislature
-67-
-------
directed the Air Resources Board to undertake a study to determine the
reductions in automotive emissions that could be achieved from vehicle
emission inspection programs.
They were also asked to determine the cost
of carrying out such programs on a permanent basis.
4.1.1 The Northrop StUdy(55, 56)
The ARB responded to this legislative directive by issuing a contract
to The Northrop Corporation, in association with Olson Laboratories, to
determine the feasibility of implementing a mandatory periodic inspection
program.
The effectiveness and cost of five alternate inspection test
regimes were analyzed to determine which (if any) would be optimum for
a mandatory program.
These regimes were certificate of compliance, idle
test, key mode test, diagnostic test, and an annual adjustment and
maintenance procedure (AAMP).
The Certificate of Compliance procedure investigated was similar to
the program already in operation and described above.
It includes a
sequence of operations which involves inspection and servicing of crankcase
devices and exhaust emission control systems.
The procedures for inspection
and adjustment are specified in a handbook issued by the Department of
Consumer Affairs. and the actual work is performed by garages licensed
by the Department of Consumer Affairs.
The Idle Inspection is performed by operating the vehicle to be tested
at idle and analyzing a sample of the exhaust to determine pollutant
emission levels.
If a vehicle does not pass the established emission
limits, it is then required to receive corrective maintenance.
This
method is effective for isolating high emitters and is well suited for
inspection by private garages.
-68-
-------
The Diagnostic Inspection studied is a sophisticated test concept
involving the utilization of a skilled diagnostician, a chassis dynamometer
and engine analysis equipment.
The vehicle is operated on a chassis
dynamometer at various engine load modes.
During each of the operating
modes, the exhaust gas is analyzed for pollutant emissions.
The vehicles
exceeding the established limits are diagnosed by the diagnostician and
then repaired.
This method is very effective in pinpointing defective
components; however, it is time consuming and requires high levels of
training.
The Annual Adjustment and Maintenance Procedure (AAMP) is a mandatory
maintenance program in which the vehicle is repaired and adjusted to
prescribed specifications without a prior emission test; adjustments
are made according to a specified procedure.
This procedure requires
annual maintenance regardless of need and is generally effective in
reducing emissions.
The Key Mode Inspection tests the vehicle operation on a simple
chassis dynamometer at specified vehicle speed and load modes which expose
engine faults.
The operating modes that most reliably expose these faults
are labeled "key" modes.
The modes which have been identified and used
are high cruise, low cruise, and idle.
A sample of the exhaust gas is
collected and analyzed for pollutant emissions.
Limits are established
for each mode.
If the limits are exceeded, the vehicle requires corrective
maintenance.
By referring to a diagram termed a "truth chart", the most
probable engine malfunctions are noted as an aid to the mechanic who then
does the repair work.
-69-
-------
The Northrop study concluded that mandatory periodic vehicle inspection
is feasible and highly desirable in terms of emission reductions, program
costs, vehicle owner costs, and public opinion.
The study found that to
be most cost effective, inspections should be performed by the State with
repairs performed by private enterprise.
Table 4.1 compares costs for
implementing the four proposed inspection methods Statewide.
Table 4.2
compares the average emission changes that were experienced by a test fleet
comprised of over 1,000 passenger vehicles.
The vehicles chosen were
statistically representative of the California vehicle population.
Table 4.1
COMPARISON OF COSTS FOR FOUR PROPOSED INSPECTION METHODS
(1972 State-Owned and Operated Facilities)
Certifi cate
Cost Element Key Mode Idle Diagnostic of
Compliance
1. Capital Investment $19,830,000 $12,084,000 $88,776,000 $30,263,000
Costs
2. Annual Operating 10,476,000 9,576,000 30,688,000 23,110,000
Cos ts *
3. Vehicle Owner Out
of Pocket Costs**
(per vehicle per
year)
Inspection Fee $ 1.05 $ 0.96 $ 3.07 $ 2.31
Maintenance Costs 28.24 37.02 47.48 8.31
~The cost is defrayed by inspection fee.
**Inspection and maintenance, in most cases, would obviate the need for the
normal annual tune-up and may produce fuel savings.
Source: State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
"A Report to the Legislature on Vehicle Emission Inspection,"
July 1, 1971, p. 10.
-70-
-------
Table 4.2
EMISSION PROFILE CHANGES FOR TOTAL FLEET
NOTE:
Total fleet includes vehicles that were serviced combined with
those that did not require service.
Tes t Regime HC (% ) CO ( % ) NOx ( % )
: :
Cer t i f i ca t e 0 f Cornp 1 i anc e : : :
: : :
: : :
: : : :
Cont ro 1 led Veh i 1 21 8 -5 6 : 4 6 8
c es - . . : : : : :
: : : : :
: : : :
Uncon 1 led Veh i 1 -9 6 : : : : :
t ro c e s . -5 . 5 3 : : : : 3 7 2 :
: : :
: : : : :
: :
Idle : : : : : :
: :
: : : : : :
: :
: : : : : : :
: : : :
Cont ro 1 led Veh i c 1 e s -1 7 0 -2 6 0 : : : : : : 4 4 5
. . i::
: : : : :
Uncont I Ie d Veh c1 : : :
ro i e s -29 0 -20 8 : : 5 65
. . : : : :
: : : : : : : :
: : : : : : : :
Key-Hod : : : : : : :
e :
Cont ro lle d Vehic Ie s -2 7 . 8 -3 3 . 4
Uncon trol Ie d Veh ic I e s -30 . 0 -3 6 . 6
Diagnos t ie
Cont rolled Vehi e Ie s -16 . 4 - 2 3 . 0
Uncontro I Ie d Veh i c Ie s -36 . 6 -2 4 . 9
AAMP
Controlled Vehie Ie s -2 3 . 6 - 12 . 5
Uncon tro lled Veh i e I e '" -33 . 5 -Ig . 9
......--..................
:[(I[~I::::}:){':~t:'~'~::::~;~:~:~:~:~;~:~::\2::~:;~:~:::;:~t:~:::::~:~::~~:~:~:~X::~:b:;':::::~~:i:~:~~'~~~:'-:i:~:::~h'i~' p~'o~ ,,' " ",
}:)~:}~:~:}~:~:} gra:n Qay no~ be typical of future years.- NO..~ co~trol devices are ""';:-:<"'~'~
:~>~>:>}»( nOt-' being installed on newer vehicles and will be required en all }::,::::-:\~
}t~{))\(? future vehicles. None of the tested vehicles for this program" '''::'::i
?»»»:: had such cont!"ols. It is reasonable to expect that an inspection ?H::::«<:::> and :13intenance program ,vill ultimately be e:::fecti'Je in keeping ::\>:::"_:
.................................~~:f~'.C.;;.~.~.~.~;;~~;::::.::....:.:.:.:;:.~~.. .and. t.~.::.:b~....::h.i e~:....: e~.u:t i::: ....~.: ............i.1
Source:
Northrop Corporation with Olson Laboratories, Inc., Mandatory
Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance, Part B Final
Report, Volume V, Part 1, Summary, December 1971, p. S-4.
-71-
J
".' .~
,"..
{1
.:;.!
)~
,',
, .
: ; : ~ ~
'"
"
..",
',-:1
, "
,",-.\
',"4
..
,""
, '
'"
::)
",
,',',
" .
:;:::
, ,
~'
-------
Of the inspection regimes studied, the key mode test conducted in
State-owned facilities appeared to be the most cost effective.
The idle
test regime was nearly as cost effective as the key mode during the same
time frame.
According to the study, the certificate of compliance program
conducted by the service industry produced the least benefits in terms of
emission reduction.
The major conclusions were that an inspection program
would significantly reduce CO and HC emissions, but might increase NOx
emissions somewhat on pre-1970 vehicles; the instrumentation equipment
required was available.
It was also anticipated that there would be wide
public acceptance of a vehicle inspection program.
4.1.2 Technical Advisory Committee Report(94)
During the same time frame as the Northrop study, the Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC) to the California Air Resources Board also
examined the cost and effectiveness of various vehicle inspection schemes
(as well as retrofit systems), and concluded that some mandatory annual
inspection and maintenance system would be needed if exhaust controls
were to be required on used cars and also because of the sophisticated
new car controls expected on the 1974 and later models.
The TAC recom-
mended that a method for annual inspection be developed and that present
Class A testing stations be converted into upgraded stations.
4.1.3 California Air Resources Board Report (95)
On July 1, 1971, the California Air Resources Board reported back
to the Legislature on their findings and recommendations for Vehicle
Emission Inspection.
The following are direct excerpts from that report.
-72-
-------
SUMMARY
1.
The study by Northrop and evaluation by the Board's Technical Advisory
Committee both indicate that inspection and mandatory maintenance is
technically feasible and that it would achieve some reductions of
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide emissions from motor vehicles, but
it would increase oxides of nitrogen. The decision to undertake an
inspection program, however, should not be based on technical
feasibility alone. The expected benefits of the Drogram must be
balanced against the adverse effects of oxides of nitrogen increase,
costs, inconvenience to the motorists, the requirement of trained
and skilled personnel.
2.
On a long-term basis, regular inspection and maintenance is needed.
Allor most of the cars will be equipped with systems that involve
engine modifications, advanced control systems or combinations of
these approaches. Inspect~on and periodic maintenance are required
to ensure their continual effective~ess.
3.
Any inspection method, if it is to be suitable, must be adaptable to
future requirements, because technology of emission control is changing.
What is appropriate today may be obsolete a few years later.
It would not be prudent to embark at this time on an inspection program
which requires permanently committed installations and large capital
investments. Such a program :r.culd be amenable to easy modifications.
4.
5.
To be effective, a mandatory inspection and maintenance program must
be manned by qualified personnel and the programs must be closely
supervised.
RECOMMENDATI ONS
1.
A statewide inspection program that requires the acquisition of State
operated installations, dynamometers and testing equipment, not be
established at this time.
2.
3.
A pilot inspection program using highly qualified stations be undertaken.
The pilot program should include determinations of:
a.
The applicability of annual inspection involving mandatory diagnosis,
adjustment and repair to minimize motor vehicle emissions.
b.
The extent of upgrading service personnel needed and the means by
which upgrading can be accomplished.
c.
The advantages and the problems of this inspection and maintenance
system under actual operating conditions.
-73-
-------
4.1.4 Legislative Action(6l)
in the Analysis of the Budget Bill of the State of California for the
Fiscal Year July 1, 1972 to June 30, 1973, the California Legislative
Analyst, A. Alan Post, recommended that the Legislature add $21,929,000
to the Air Resources Board budget to institute a program in the Los
Angeles Air Basin for mandatory inspection of used cars and vacuum spark
advance disconnect.
These figures were based on the Northrop study Key
Mode Recommendation and consider the following:
(a) approximately 288
inspection lanes are required at an average cost for capital equipment
and building of facilities of $48,820 per lane for a total cost of
$14,349,000 , (b) approximately 650 inspectors are required to operate
and manage the 35 inspection stations at an annual operating cost of
$26,320 per lane for a total cost of $7,580,000.
This budget element was
"blue pencilled" out of the final budget.
At least three separate bills were introduced into the California
Legislature during the 1972 session which would have provided for vehicle
inspections.
Two were introduced in the Assembly and one in the Senate.
All remained unacted upon at the close of the Legislature and are assumed
to be dead (see Appendix J, Section 2).
4. 1.5.
Governor's Task Force on Vehicle Inspection(72)
On February 29, 1972, Governor Reagan established a task force com-
posed of representatives of the Air Resources Board, the Department of
Motor Vehicles, the Highway Patrol, the Department of Consumer Affairs,
and the Department of Finance to confirm the need for inspection and/or
maintenance for emission control and to recommend specific legislation
for completing the program.
In October of 1972, the task force reported
-74-
-------
back to the Governor with a recommended program that primarily differs
from the present program, only in the requirement that all future com-
mercial repair work relating to emissions be done in accordance to State-
prescribed regulations (with misdemeanor charges for those mechanics not
complying with procedures).
The program called for expansion of random
roadside idle emission testing and an expanded consumer affairs program.
The annual costs for such a program are shown in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3
ANNUAL COST OF GOVERNOR'S TASK FORCE RECOMMENDED PROGRAM
CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE
Toti.l1 Cost F'r.ese.lt Additional Source of
-$- Cost -$- Cost (- Funds
-,,-
Cost of Required
Repairs 72,600,000 61,500,000 11,100,000 Vehicle OwnEr
Owner's Th'Ie Cost 8,000,000 5,100,000 2,900,000 Vehicle O\-,'ner
C.H.P. ~:otor Vehicle
Inspe::tion ':ost 5,600,000 3,800,000 ], ,800,000 Fund
Consu:ncr I~ffairs Station
Supervision 3,100,000 600,000 2,500,000 License Fees
Program Evaluation 600,000 600,000 notor Vehic12
Fu;;cl
TOTf.LS
89,900,000
71,000,000
18,900,00J
The task force considered two stages of program expansion,
Both would
replace the requirement that a certificate of compliance be issued only on
a change of ownership.
The first option is an annual idle emission test
-75-
-------
at licensed stations with mandatory adjustment and mamtenanc:e'Of ve.hicres
failing the test; the second option is the key-mode test as recommended
by the Northrop study in State-owned, State-operated stations.
The task
force recommended the decision on the implementation of either expansion
option be differed pending further study of uncertainties in future system
requirements and the apparent declining benefits in the mass of emissions
controlled with time.
4.1.6 Discussion
The Sovernor's task force identified the key operation in an inspection/
maintenance system as properly performed maintenance.
However, the require-
ment that all commercial repair work relating to emissions be done accord-
ing to State prescribed procedures appears to be difficult to enforce.
The
mechanic will often come under pressure from his customer to tune for
performance instead of emissions.
As a result, regulated tune-ups would
become unenforceable unless violators were vigorously prosecuted.
present conditions, this does not appear very likely.
Under
A more workable solution would be to base the requirement for, and
success of, maintenance on a direct emission test rather than a "certi-
fi cate of compl i ance".
This action would remove the mechanic from the
difficult position of trying to meet contradictory requirements - -
those of his customer and those of the State.
A tes t resul tis lIIore
impartial and appears to provide a consistent criteria for the mechanics
to f 011 ow.
-76-
-------
Every group that has studied the problem has recognized the require-
ment for periodic inspection/maintenance.
Also recognized, is the
severity of the air pollution problem in the Los Angeles Basin.
Therefore,
it is recommended that a mandatory inspection/maintenance program be
implemented.
As a minimum, "Option II" studied by the Governor's task
force should be implemented; this program is essentially the stage 1
expansion program cited by the task force.
Such a program would require
a mandatory annual idle emissions test with those failing the test being
repaired by a State-prescribed maintenance schedule.
For maximum air
quality benefits, the second stage expansion program of the Governor's
task force report should be implemented:
"Annual key mode testing at State-owned and State-operated
inspection stations with mandatory adjustment and maintenance
of failed vehicles at licensed private garages."
Implementation of either program would result in a net reduction of
approximately 10-12% of the emitted hydrocarbons, with the second program
(key mode) resulting in a larger reduction.
4.2
Retrofit Device Measures
A retrofit measure is defined as the application of any device or
system that may be added to a motor vehicle and/or any modification or
adjustment beyond that of regular maintenance which could be made to
reduce vehicular emissions.
There are three primary emission sources in
motor vehicles WhlCh can be potentially controlled by various retrofit
measures.
For vehicles without emission controls, crankcase venting
typically contributes about 20 percent of the total hydrocarbon emissions
from the vehicle.
Another 20 percent of the total hydrocarbon emissions
-77-
-------
are evaporative losses from the carburetor and the fuel tank system.
Exhaust emissions account for all the carbon 'monoxide and oxides of nitro-
gen emissions from uncontrolled vehicles.
Crankcase emission devices were required on new cars in the State
of California be~inning in 1963.
Exhaust emissions were required on new
cars beginning in 1966 and evaporative controls were required in the 1971
model year.
Several retrofit programs have been carr~ed out or are in
progress in California.
Because photochemical smog is the biggest
problem in the Los Angeles area, the effectiveness of reducing hydrocarbons
and, to a lesser extent, oxides of nitrogen is the main requirement for
retrofit systems,
Crankcase devices are required on 1955-65 automobiles,
upon change of ownership or initial registration in California.
As of
September, 1972, oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbon exhaust emission de-
vices are required on 1955-65 automobiles in the Los Angeles Air Basin.
Cy April, 1973, oxides of nitrogen exhaust control devices, in this case,
vacuum spark advance disconnect (VSAD), will be required on 1966-70 model
year vehicles in the Los Angeles area.
1975 vehicle registration cycle.
Enforcement will begin during the
There are no retrofit devices available at present to control
evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from the fuel systems.
However, the
State has recently initiated a research and development program for just
such a system.
If a practical device is developed, it should be seriously
considered for implementation as 20 percent of the hydrocarbon emissions
from pre-1971 automobiles could be eliminated with its application.
-78-
-------
The ARB's evaluation program of the evaporative loss controls should be
completed by late 1973; if warranted, it will be followed by a certification
program.
To implement a mandatory installation program, additional
legislation will be required.
It is recommended that the entire evaluation,
testing, and certification program be accelerated.
The benefits of this
control measure are significantly diminished by a one-two year delay
because of the normal replacement of older vehicles with newer, controlled
vehicles.
Many exhaust emission control retrofit devices have been evaluated
and the results are summarized in an EPA report titled, "Control Strategies
for In-use Vehicles. II In addition, the Technical Advisory Committee to
the California Air Resources Board performed an in depth study (94) on the
emission control of used cars, covering the available options, effective-
ness, cost and feasibility of these measures.
The reader should refer to
these sources for a detailed description of the operation, performance and
effectiveness of most (if not all) retrofit devices presently available.
The more successful retrofit options are sited in a draft revision to the
implementation regulations and are listed in Table 4.4 along with their.
average pollution reduction and typical installed costs.
Table 4.5
presents a summary of the results of the Technical Advisory Committee
study.
The Air Resources Board has established testing facilities and capa-
ble personnel to objectively evaluate emission control devices.
The
Board also cooperates with various private companies in the development
testing of automobiles fitted with the latest emission control measures.
-79-
-------
As an example, 50 new G.M. cars are presently under test.
These autos
have devices (including oxidizing catalytic converters) designed to meet
the 1975 Federal new car standards.
Based on the findings summarized in Tables 4.4 and 4.5, and consider-
ing the major retrofit programs al ready underway, the only "cost effective"
exhaust retrofit device that has not yet been scheduled for implementation
in the Los Angeles area is the oxidizing catalytic converter.
The
catalytic converter is highly effective in reducing hydrocarbon and carbon
monoxide emissions and can be added to autos that have already had the
VSAD retrofit as easily as to "unmodified" autos.
The actual converter
is a device installed in the engine exhaust system between the exhaust
manifold and the muffler.
On older cars, it would require detuning to
allow the car to run on lead free gasoline.
This is because the catalyst
can be "poisoned" by leaded fuel although recent prototype tests have
shown the catalyst to be somewhat tolerant of lead-containing fuel if it
(50)
is not used more than 10 percent of the time
Several potential problems exist for any major retrofit program of
oxidizing catalytic converters.
Tests have shown one problem in these
converters is the emissions of ammonia and aldehydes in the final exhaust.
Aromatic aldehydes can lead to the formation of peroxybenzoyl nitrate
(PBZN), the aromatic analog of the more commonly known PAN (peroxyacetyl
nitrate) .
Oxidizing catalytic converters generally require the use of
lead free gasoline.
To date, the major refineries have maintained their
octane levels by substituting aromatic compounds (e.g., toluene) for the
lead removed.
PBZN, is a potent lachrymator and has caused eye irritation
-80-
-------
Table 4.4
RETROFIT CONTROL MEASURES
Retrofit Option
-----.W'-
Pre-controlled Vehicles
Lean Idle Air/Fuel Ratio
Adjustment and Vacuum Spark
Advance Disconnect
Oxidizing Catalytic Converter
and VaCUUITI Spark Advance
Disconnect
Air Bleed to Intake Manifold
Exhaust Gas Recirculation and
Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect
Controlled Vehicles
Oxidizing Catalytic Converter
Exhaust Gas Recirculation
~~t1a-I bd -....._,,.,.,.~...
Installed
Cost
$ 20
195
60
110
$175
qO
..~_.....«'t8~c:ta:~ ...
Environmental Protection Agency
Sou rce :
-81-
Average Reduction per Vehicle
HC CO ~Ox
.0-
25%
68%
21%
12~;
50;~
Oc.!
jo
-~~-
901
10
23%
63%
48%
58%
0% .
48%
31%
50%
0%
0%
40%
--IW'
- -----
-------
Table 4.5
CO~;TROL OPTION
SUMMARY OF COST AND EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATIONS
Cost
Averaged over
All Cars:
$/Car/Year
Cost Effcctiv~ness:
$ per CJr for 5 yrs
per Equiv. Reactive
Ton/Day
Average 5-Year
Eff ec t Iven~ss:
Equiv. Reactive
Ton/Day
Avera"c Reduction
of Total L1li~sions
from Used Cars in
Next 5 Yeark Advar.ce Discannect +
O:-'~ ~('In ) (~] 1 car")
9. Detunir.i :0= tnleaJec Fu~ls & Oxidation
Ca~alyst + Option 5 (all cars)
10. O;:>tion 9 : Option 7 (all cars)
ll. Option 10 + Exhaust Gas ~ecirculation
(all cars)
12.
7her~al Af~erburner (pre-1966 cars)
13. Optia" 12 (pre-1966 cars) +
Option 7 (all cars)
14. Detunir.g for UnleaJed Fuels & Oxidation-
ReJcctiJD Catalyst + Optian 5 (all cars)
15. Conversion to Natural Gas* + Option 5
'(all cars)
16. Conversioc to ~PG* + Option 5 (all cars)
17. Conversion to Methanol* + Option 5
(all cars)
* It i5 assu~e~ that the present price and tax
privileGes will continue throuch the 5-year
period.
10.75 1. 92 28 5.2
5.2<1 0.85 31 5.7
11. 21 1.81 31 5.7
1.83 3.26 2.8 0.5
5.00 1.19 21 :;.9
1. 25 1. 57 4.1 0.8
10.20 0.73 70 11
--~. -- - ------ ..---.-
8.00 0.80 50 <;.2
13.00 0.38 172 32
:3.20 0.48 O' 0 _4
--+-
40.20 1.07 1d 34
53.:0 0.74 360 66
63.20 0.70 45~ 83
14.10 1.60 .... 8.1
27.10 J.~3 216 39.7
55.80 0.62 .:. j-i S3
8.20 0.10 405 74
69.60 0.75 465 85
245,60 2.50 ~90 90
~:
California Air Resources Board, Technical Advisory Committee, Emission Control of Used Cars;
Available Options: Their Effectiveness, Cost and Feasibility, June 1971. p. 10.
10
HI
10
8
9
9
<3
6
5
5
-------- ----
o
o
o
-------
at levels as low as 5 ppb.
It is conceivable that a major retrofit
program involving oxidizing catalytic converters would substitute one
problem for another.
Oxidant levels could go down with no improvement
in the eye irritation situation.
Currently, there are at least two suppliers of this type converter;
but it is doubtful sufficient devices and adequate installation training
could be provided in the time frame required for this measure to be fully
implemented by the 1977 clean air target date.
It is recognized that
every additional emission reduction possible is required if the Clean
Air Act requirements are to be met; however, much more testing is required
before a major catalytic converter retrofit program can be unequivocally
recommended.
4.3 Gaseous Fuel Conversion
Studies have shown that the fuel, supplies, distribution systems,
and conversion equipment could become available for the conversion of
several hundred thousand fleet vehicles to gaseous fuels in the South
Coast Air Basin (32, 46).
For those vehicles converted, the use of
gaseous fuels results in a significant reduction of emissions.
Also, the
combustion products from gaseous fueled vehicles have been shown to be
less reactive than emissions from gasoline powered engines -- an important
consideration in areas such as Los Angeles where photochemical smog is
the dominant problem.
To achieve the stipulated and desired emission reductions possible
from gaseous fuel conversions, proper maintenance and tuning for minimum
emissions is a necessity.
Gaseous fueled vehicles frequently emit more
-83-
-------
pollutants than conventional gasoline powered vehicles due to improper
tuning.
Furthermore, gaseous fueled vehicles can operate without a
noticable effect on drivability even though they are quite out of tune.
It is important, therefore, that any large scale conversion program be
accompanied by a mandatory inspection and maintenance program.
This
could readily be accomplished through the recommended program discussed
in Section 4.1.
Conversion of fleet vehicles to gaseous fuels is a very cost
effective program since the capital investment can generally be recovered
in two-to-five years; this usually depends on the number of cars in the
fleet and the mileages driven.
To date, the majority of conversions have
been justified on the basis of overall cost savings; the air pollution
benefits have been an added bonus.
In general, maintenance costs and
requirements are less than for conventional gasoline powered vehicles.
Not all converted fleets have been able to register an overall cost
savings from their conversion efforts; consequently, in any massive
conversion strategy, one can expect a fraction of the fleets to experience
financial losses.
Overall, however, the number of fleets saving money
should out number the fleets losing money with a net savings from all
fleets converted.
Gaseous fueled veh'icles used in strict compliance with applicable
standards and maintained by qualified repairmen are as safe as present
gasoline operated motor vehicles.
Fleet operators have not encountered
any difficulty in insuring their gaseous fueled vehicles at normal rates
and driver acceptance to gaseous fueled vehicles is varied, but favorable
overall.
-84-
-------
A key element in this control strategy is the timing.
Presently,
the only vehicles which can obtain the gas-tax exemptions are those
vehicles which have been converted to California approved systems and
meet 1974 California emission standards.
Thus, any conversions which
are to have an impact should be pre-1975 vintage motor vehicles.
This
implies a gaseous fuel conversion program should be initiated as soon as
possible and completed no later than the end of 1974.
Since the typical lifetime of fleet vehicles is less than average
cars, a reason~ble target group of cars would be the 1970-1974 fleet
vehicles.
The conversion of pre-1970 vehicles does result in greater
percentage-wise reductions than post-1970 vehicles, but the necessity
to drive a fleet vehicle two-to-five years effectively precludes the
likelihood of converting these vehicles.
Detailed fleet vehicles statistics for California and the South
Coast region have recently become available from the Department of Motor
Vehicles.
Table 4.6 shows private fleet vehicle statistics for California
and the South Coast area.
In addition to private fleets, there were
approximately 194,000 public fleet vehicles (e.g., governmental and
post office vehicles) in California in 1970.
Assuming half of these
vehicles are located in the South Coast Air Basin suggests some 530,000
fleet vehicles reside in the region presently.
Figure 4.1 illustrates the emission reductions resulting from a
mandatory fleet conversion of 1970-1974 vehicles.
Tables 4.7 through
4.11 present the various emissions from vehicles using the different
fuel systems.
The ARB has estimated the average mileage of fleet vehicles
-85-
-------
Table 4.6
CALIFORNIA PRIVATE FLEET VEHICLE STATISTICS
~lSTRIBUTI0N BY COUNTY
Cou;rry
NUMBER OF FLEET VEHICLES1
San Bernardino
276,966
29,329
6,234
7,114
4,854
200,289
Los Angeles
Orange
Riverside
Ventura
Ou t 0 f ~; tat e
CALI FOl'-.:J I /, FHA!.
828,169
ESTIMATED SOUTH COAST
BASIN PRIVATE FLEET POPULATION 2
428,000
;) J SIIU BL:T [()1J ]\'1 11()j)EL YEAI{
YEllE
NUMBER OF FLEET VEHICLES
% FLEET VEIli CLES
19n
1971
168,726
131,569
20.37
15.89
1970
118,028
101,915
62,499
42,632
40,676
162,12Lf
14.25
12.31
1%9
If:) (Jij
7.55
5.15
1%7
1%6
4.91
19.':>8
I're - 1966
1 Ten or more \fellic1le~; regLstered under orie name.
2 I.'ivle countiv:; Ll~;ted plus <1. proportionate fraction of the out of
:-;tntc fll'let velllCll':i.
~;()LJ1{CI', :
Ul:rdrtillent of 1'1otor Vehicles, ~-;tate of California,
UctoIJl:r, 1972.
-86-
-------
~ 210 TONS/DAY CO
200
150
100
~ 16 TONS/DAY HC
50
~ 23 TONS/DAY N
4 8 12
Annual Fleet Vehicle Mileage (Thousands)
16
Figure 4.1
Emission Reductions from Gaseous Fuel Conversion
(South Coast Air Basin - 1977)
Assumptions:
1) Fleet population of. .....580,000 vehicles or approximately a 10%
growth of 1972 fleet populsion (..... 530,000).
2) Same model year distribution as State's
3) Conversion of 1970-1974 vehicles only.
4) Emission factors provided by the CARB.
5) 75% VMT using natural
25% VMT using LPG
in October 1972.
gas ~
f Proposed by Caltech EQL
-87-
-------
Table 4.7 GASOLINE POWERED VEHICLE EMISSIONS
(gm/mi)
Vehic le 1974 1975 1977 1980
Mode 1 HC CO IWx HC CO I;Ox HC CO NOx HC CO IWx
1976 0.14 1.4 0.3 .15 1.5 .34 0.16 1.6 .3J
1975 0.3 2.4 1.0 0.14 1.4 0.9 .16 1.6 1.0 0.17 1.7 1.1
1974 1.2 18.4 1.1 1.1 18.4 1.1 1.25 lS.S 1.2 1.3 19.2 1.2
I 1973 1.3 21.2 2.6 1.3 21.2 2.6 1.35 21.4 2.7 1.4 21.6 2.8
co
co
I 1972 1.5 2Jt.0 3.0 1.5 24.0 3.0 1.55 2Jt.0 3.0 1.6 24.0 3.1
1971 2.3 25.0 4.0 2.3 25.0 4.0 2.3 25.0 4.0 2.3 25.0 4.1
1970 2.8 26.0 4.1, 2.8 26.0 4.1 2.8 28.5 4.2 2.8 31.0 l~ .2
1969 3.6 36.0 4.3 3.6 36.0 4.3
1968 3.9 37.0 3.8 3.9 37.0 3.8
1967 4.4 40.0 3.q 4.4 40.0 3.6
i 1966 5.0 41.0 3.8 5.0 41.0 3.8
Source: California Air Resources Board, April 1972
-------
Table 4.8
EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES USING NG
(gm/mi)
Vehicle
f10de 1 HC CO NOx
1976 .14 1.4 .3
1975 .14 1.4 .6
1974 .35 4.0 .6
1973 .35 4.0 .6
1972 .35 4.0 .6
1971 .50 4.0 .9
1970 .50 4.0 1.3
1969 .80 6.2 1.3
and
older
Source:
California Air Resources Board, April 1972
-89-
-------
Table 4.11 DIFFERENCE IN EMISSIONS BETWEEN GASOLINE
POWERED VEHICLES AND LPG POWERED VEHICLES
(gm/mi)
Vehicle 1974 1975 1977 1980
Model
HC CO NOx HC CO NOx HC CO NOx HC CO NOx
1976 .00 .0 .0 .00 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0
1975 .00 .0 .4 .00 .0 .4 .00 .0 .5 .0 .0 .6
1974 .85 13.4 .5 .85 13.4 .5 .90 13.8 .6 .95 14.2 .6
1973 .95 16.2 2.0 .95 16.2 2.0 1.00 16.4 2.1 1.05 16.6 2.2
1972 1. 15 19.0 2.2 1. 15 19.0 2.4 1. 20 20.0 2.4 1.25 19.0 2.5
1971 1.8 20.0 3.2 1.8 20..0 3.2 1.8 20.0 3.2 1.8 21.0 3.3
1970 2.3 21. 0 3.3 2.3 21.0 3.3 2.3 23.5 3.4 2.3 26.0 3.4
1969 2.8 29.0 3.5 2.8 29.0 3.5
1968 3.1 31. 0 3.0 3.1 31. 0 3.0
1967 3.6 34.0 3.8 3.6 34.0 3.8
1966 4.2 35.0 3.0 4.2 35.0 3.0
and
older
~ote: The Air Resources Board had recently (December, 1972) revised
some of the val ues presented in Tables 4.7 through 4..11. They
should be consulted for the most recent data.
Source: California Air Resources Board, April 1972
-92-
-------
through surveys to be approximately 12,400 miles per year.
The
conversion program would affect $lightly less than 300,000 vehicles (or
approximately 5 percent of the Basin's automobile population.)
recommended that a mandatory conversion of fleet vehicles of model years
In view of the overall cost effectiveness of this strategy, it is
1970-1974 be implemented in the South Coast Air Basin as soon as possible,
and completed no later than January 1975.
are:
Additional recommendations
.
accelerate the vehicle replacement program as soon as
vehicles meet the 1975-76 emission standards, rather
than continuing the conversion program.
.
insure for the continuation of a fuel tax exemption
beyond 1975; this is necessary to maintain the cost
effectiveness of the program.
.
investigate approaches to circumvent the implementation
obstacles.
The implementation obstacles to an effective gaseous fuels conversion
program are:
1)
the present lack of legal authority for the ARB to
implement the program; Senate Bill 657 (see Appendix
J - Section II), which would have called for a
mandatory conversion of fleet vehicles to gaseous
fuels in the South Coast Air Basin, died in Committee,
November 16, 1972.
2)
public opposition to such a program by certain large
fleet operators, e.g., The Yellow Taxi Cab Association.
existing regulations dealing with the handling, storage,
and transportation of gaseous fuels.
3)
4)
enforcement problems for the large number of out-of-
state fleet vehicles which operate in the Basin or the
many cars which will change their registration to a
County outside of the Basin if such a program was
started.
-93-
-------
Appendix "M" delves into many of the critical aspects of gaseous
fuel conversion; it also summarizes some of the history of attempts in
California to get such a measure implemented.
-94-
-------
4.4.
Evaporative Losses from Service Station Fueling Operations
The handling and transfer operations associated with the sale of
gasoline contribute a substantial portion of hydrocarbon emissions through
evaporative losses.
As exhaust emission control standards for motor
vehicles become more stringent, the proportionate share of hydrocarbon
emissions coming from evaporative losses will increase.
This section attempts to review hydrocarbon losses from what are
normally the last two fuel handling operations -- the filling of under-
ground storage tanks at the service station and the filling of automobile
gasoline tanks from these storage tanks.
The combined uncontrolled
emissions from these two sources are projected to be approximately 132
tons per day in 1972 and 159 tons per day in 1977.
These projections
assume the limit on Reid vapor pressure from April through October as set
forth by the CARB.
Assuming no control methods are instituted, these
two sources become a significant air pollution source by 1977.
A variety of control options are available for reducing the evapo-
rative emissions cited.
The analysis of costs and effectiveness for a
series of available alternatives is presented in Appendix L.
A summary
of the results and recommendations are:
Implementation of a control scheme which returns the
displaced vapors from the motor vehi£le fuel tank to
the storage tank from which the gasoline is pumped.
This can be accomplished by ensuring a tight seal at the interface
.
between the fill nozzle and the fuel tank fill pipe.
The fill nozzle
must be designed so that there is a space around the nozzle through which
the displaced vapors can be directed to a vapor return line.
This line
directs the displaced vapors from the fuel tank into the underground
-95-
-------
storage tank from which the fuel is pumped.
Depending on the availability
of an effective fill nozzle, this control strategy would have an estimated
annualized cost of $3 million per year for removal of approximately
71 tons/day of gasoline vapors in 1977.
This amount of removal would take
place during the April-October peak smog period.
Somewhat less than
71 tons/day would be removed during the remaining months of the year.
Completion of a changeover to a standardized automotive fill pipe would
result in approximately a 90 tons/day reduction during the most severe
smog periods by 1985.
.
Encourage the imposition of a requirement for standardized
automotive fill pipe. This changeover would eventually be
required in any case if a national system of evaporative
controls is required.
. Implementation of further controls on the Reid vapor
pressure in the South Coast Air Basin is not recommended
at this time.
Further research on the validity of the reactivity scales as they
relate to real atmospheric phenomena is undoubtedly appropiate.
A 1 so,
a better understanding is needed of the impact of gasoline modification
on all emissions subsequent to the fuel change.
would not necessarily apply to other air basins.
This recommendation
In fact, the joint
LAAPCD, ARB, and Western Oil study on the subject specifically states
regarding its results:
liThe results of the study must be used with caution....
these estimates are applicable only to Los Angeles County
because the temperature data are not necessarily repre-
sentative of other areas .... the degree of air pollution
reduction attainable by this means in Los Angeles County
will be different from that in any other community....
because application of certain rules and controls already
in effect here have reduced emissions from stationary
sources to a greater extent than in most other communities....
attempts to apply the results of the study to any other
area or season could be(f,ffardous and misleading and are
strongly not advi sed. II
-96-
-------
5.0 THE SOUTH COAST TRANSPORTATION
AND TRAFFIC DATA BASE
The currently projected motor vehicle emissions control programs
will be inadequate by themselves to bring about sufficient reductions
to achieve the national ambient air quality standards by the 1975-77
target dates.
Additional control strategies, especially in the area
of transportation controls, are necessary for attainment of the desired
goals within the above time frame.
Of primary concern is reaching the
photochemical oxidant standard, which implies more stringent controls
on the reactive hydrocarbons emitted and to a lesser extent controls on
nitrogen oxides.
Mobile vehicle emissions are a function of many variables, some of
which are related to the driving patterns of the motorists and street
and highways conditions.
Emissions are affected by the number of starts
and stops, idling time, trip length, average speed, and individual
driving habits.
Strategies aimed at reducing photochemically reactive emissions
from motor vehicles involve either limiting the amount of gasoline
consumed (i.e., prevention at the source) or improving the emission
characteristics of the vehicles involved (i.e., cure of the source).
Limiting the volume of fuel consumed implies reduction of vehicle miles
travelled (VMT) within the Basin whereas lowering the emissions ilnplies
altering the parameters which influence the emissions (idle time, speed,
or starts and stops).
A variety of alternatives is available for
implementing either approach.
This section presents an analysis of
programs designed to reduce VMT or to modify the VMT in such a way as
-97-
-------
to lower the overall emissions.
The majority of the transportation data for Southern California
were derived from the California Division of Highways I ongoing Los Angeles
Regional Transportation Study (LARTS).
The LARTS study area includes all
of Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura Counties and the western, most
intensively developed portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties
(15).
As such the geographic boundaries do not coincide exactly with the
State's definition of the South Coast Air Basin.
However, due to problems
associated with trying to aggregate many types of data covering different
political and geographic regions, it is assumed in this analysis that
the LARTS study area is equivalent to the South Coast Air Basin.
An
analysis of the population figures for the two study areas shows them
to be very comparable.
Figure 7.10 gives a map of the LARTS study area.
Table 5.1 lists estimates for daily vehicle miles of travel for
the five counties within the LARTS study area.
Table 5.1
VMT PROJECTIONS FOR THE LARTS AREA
(millions of miles/day)
Year Freewav Non-Freewav Total vm
1967 56.694 69.253 125.947
1977a 84.769 82.861 167.630
1980 93.192 86.943 1 80. 1 35
a linear extrapolation of the 1967 to 1980 growth rate
SOURCE: Personal communication, Advanced Planning Department, District 7
Division of Highways, November, 1972.
Detailed total VMT figures disaggregated by counties were unavailable.
However, travel during the peak hour periods were projected by county
for the same time period covered in Table 5.1.
From these projections,
-98-
-------
total VMT breakdown during peak periods for 1977 (Tables 5.2 and 5.3)
were estimated.
Table 5.2
PEAK PERIOD VMTa FOR THE LARTS AREA
(millions of miles/day)
Year Freeway Non-Freeway Total
1967 13.826 17.681 31.507
1977b 30.981 29.537 60.518
1980 36. 132 30.490 66.622
a obtained by a separate assignment of home to work type tri ps to the
highway netwurk.
b 1. extrapolation of the 1967 to 1980 growth rate.
lnear
SOURCE: Personal communication, Advanced Planning Department, District 7,
Division of Highways, November 1972.
Table 5.3 PEAK PERIOD VMT BY COUNTY-LARTS AREA-1977
Countv
Percentaqe of Peak Hour VMT
Ventura
Los Angeles
Orange
Riversidea
San Bernardinoa
4
68
7
5
16
a those portions within the LARTS study area.
SOURCE:
Advanced Planning Department, District 7, Division of Highways
The 1967 and 1980 estimates were generated by the California Division
of Highways via the LARTS traffic projection model, which was calibrated
from 1967 origin-destination data.
The 1980 estimates assumed the Division
of Highway's best estimate as to which highways will be completed by 1980.
Of the assumed new freeways, sections of Routes 90, 91, 105, 118 and 210,
Route 105, the Century Freeway is the 1 eas t 1 i ke ly to become reality by
-99-
-------
1977.
Consequently, 1,370,000 freeway vehicle miles were subtracted
and 1,003,000 non-freeway vehicle miles were added to the system under
the assumption that the Century Freeway would carry an average daily
traffic of 80,000 cars and that 25 per cent of its vehicle miles would
be generated by the presence of the freeway.
The total vehicle miles travelled within the South Coast Air Basin
are the result of many trips of varying lengths and purposes.
The LARTS
1967 origin-destination study defined, for example, 5 trip-purpose
classifications.
Certain types of trips are inherently more susceptible
to controls than others; hence, an understanding of the fraction of
travel attributable to each category of trip type is necessary.
Table 5.4
presents data on trips for various purposes in the Los Angeles area.
Additional control strategies which are frequently considered relate
to specific geographical areas, such as the central business district;
others relate to the temporal distribution of traffic, e.g. staggered
work hours.
In order to assess these measures, it is necessary to know
how VMT are distributed as a function of time and space.
The low density development characteristic of the Los Angeles region,
has resulted in a relatively uniform distribution of miles travelled
throughout the urbanized areas.
This has contributed directly to the
regional nature of the air pollution problem.
Figures 5.1 and 5.2
graphically illustrate the relatively even, spread out nature of miles
travelled in the Basin.
The area illustrated is only a portion of the
LARTS study area, but accounts for a large fraction of the total VMT.
Table 5.5 presents the temporal distribution of the miles travelled
shown in Figures 5.1 and 5.2.
-100-
-------
Table 5.4 AVERAGE TRAVEL DATE (ONE WAY) ON TRIPS FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES
Tri p Travel Percentage of
Length Speed Time Freel'Jay Total a
Trip Type (miles) (mph) (minutes) (mi 1es) Vehicle Miles
Home to Work 10.5 26.3 23.0 3.8 32.4
Work to Other c 7.6 30.7 16.0 3.8 13.4
Home to Shop 3.0 22.1 8.2 0 4.3
Home to Other b 6.8 24.4
---- ---- ---
b c 6.8 25.5
Other to Other' ---- ---- ---
a derived from LARTS 1967 O-D Study - Trip Purpose Frequency
b derived from LARTS 1967 O-D Study (these trips are too varied in
to accurately predict speed, time, and freeway mileage).
c fleet vehicle travel is accounted for these two categories.
nature
SOURCE:
Adapted from A Survey of Average
Angeles Urban Area, D. H. Kearin
Systems Development Corporation,
February 28, 1969.
Drivin~ Patterns in the Los
and R. L. Lamoureux,
TM-(L)-4119/000/01,
-101-
-------
2~~=-_:_,- I . 1 ; 60 125: SO i '1'" 1/ I :'-1 I --'I-~-i-I~-I
1 2 1 ---{'. 5" '{ . 7 9 1 , :; II , :2 If" . :> I b 17 I'" I '7 2 c 2 I 2:! Z '! 1 ~ 2:t
} 5 --63-05 '~'1~5~r20~'2'1., ~2'2'~3~ ~" ~~5'~2 :~ ;_~3~ 1- 4-:T_2~ ;I"~; - -IT -0 ~ ._;-- . 4' 2 .'1."; --, 2! '~-,--; ,'~0~~~Or2~--.?I~ 2S
,0) .c 221 152i 851 66.84 73 7' --2 :-.0' "0' ..~ -. -~c-"'J 01 0 0: 0 i 2 ,0' 0 ~
2~----:-,_,-,,--:- ----"u.__.-.-J.._- ---'-.-""-'.".-- -. '--, "--:'-"r -"----.
23 137 255: 233239 266 295 251 233 54,20 27,!57 50 4 0 0 1 0; 0 0 0 0: 2 0: 0 2~
--r--~"_:_-- ------'-'. -.I-_u . -"-"'------- .----..--------.- ._--~----"-.-
2: 239 25']: 2H 250 254 414 328; 276 21221.5 4 131 58 91113 21 . 0 021
I ~ l - -- __1__~.:.--~._.~ ~_~~~_L_j
2/1~3~1:;07~;;":W ';~~';,~r-;;O ~1;:;8-;- ;;;-;';~4-'-~1-'~;;;41 212 1569157 1 66' 2' 0: 02
2~L2~~~ ,~~ ,5~ ~3_, ~~: 1~55,:~6 ;~5 2~ -~~ _19.1_--~6~.318 30_8. 2.~1_._2~, ,1,83 .__7~ .1:: ~~.~=-_. ~7--~jJO
1'.1 9' 25 i 0, 2 i 30,7~ ~2;~~O,. ~8 ;~7.5.. 2~9__1.b~ 1~~- ~9_0.23~ 227 236_.185_1~0._1~0 _1-=:_~)..:. ~~J7-'::'-~~lli
12 ~~:-~-~-9~ 283.403 549 512 572 473 n'J 217 229 235 243 250 242 114 13'] 28'] 244' 71' 10' 99.'~
f7 f' ~~-; "~4! 99--117--~3-; 5~-; -~:6'; ~~~ -4~~- ~~~ 64; --~7-; , 2~~-'1~9 1~6- ~. ~08 . ~;;' ~3-J 180 ~4~" ~~ ' -4~-- ;r~~L
I~ ~406 ~;.~ :;6~' 412 H3 ~';;'-~2~-~~~:- 1~5 -~2~ -47-~~'i-2~7 '~1'7-::~5~7-:-'5 "
i~-\o ' . ~>
I~' ~\ =~:--=-5:_~.~__~11- 47!- ~7 -~~ _2:~_73_2:~ !~~_:~5- ~._.:.:....e.:.t- _~2~!~~_~~!'
14!~ [\o6__:~~~ ~1~..3~~33.1_. 3!.= _27=~:~~.~0:~~ ~5_3_.::~._.:.3~: -=-19.;..~2 - 2::~J1_J_7---=:_5 I~
~ \ . I' , ,
13 1==::::::=:=~\~~ ~.296 -~~ ,285_, 31~_:,=,4_-;-~~5~~~ ~~=-~~~+'::':;~~ _::~~-=-0':"':':';--f9! 71::
12 ~~\89__2:5~ ~2~,~5~ 17~ _2.6~~::! _2.5~2~8- 241 23:. :~.~!. 1!4 :_62 12:~~1,"'~95...!7 .~,
. ' \. . I I I
~::~ ~~ ~). ::.:.:_::.:I:~:. ::,~ .1.::~::~-~::~:::. 2:: .1~:_.~;;~.:;:~ ::: :::,:~_:_I~:__~:;~3:'/O
". I : I' ; I I: I c;
'11'[~::;-:-:-;x 1 - _2_3~- 30~ t.9.- 17~~ :.4 ,:8~_.~~~8~. 16_~.,:=5_.~~~ :25~ L 22~ .304 ~16_9i 1~) ~.~i .:1
. - ,"- ,. , . I "I I
~ ~~~~:: ~K~O' ~:~\~~81E~ 2~4. 1:~C"T~1:.~~~6 ,3~ 1:~__7= . ~~~2~~ ~~~[-~~ ~~9-l ::~~~~I ~8l
7 :::::::+:::~:::::::::-= ::-':::::i 33 'I' 49! 28 '1421101 )~71~.2.3 175' 60 U5! 212 ~ 2CO 219 1.249 1266 . 182) 3217
~-~~~~~..:::- -'-"'" II; r -~~-' \ .' " ~
f .~~~~~ ~-'.~~--;-5-:~~ lr~ ~~'r-48 r;1~':1~5~ 1~~ -~:i~:3'T;~:rl-;~ ~ (,
./-----~-'--"- ----~- "".......... J -"-'"'-;'"r:r"".'" ", I ' I
:) ~~~~v~~....)v~,~- j' ,\. I . ~I is
~~ ~... - 5 } - -' '- . 3~ ,:,4-f 133 : ::~ 1.1~ ~?4 f_8~l- ::1' -2~i
l, -",--,,~ -t~'- ::::::-:-- - I ~~: 126; 107 2~e;215JI1~O I 29 15\~
~---~'-V""'--'-- -./"_-..............~' -J '! \ ! !
3 ~..v~---::::~ ~ I : :1' ~~TlO~ 2;~i~ i 114T~~ ._~ 3
~. ~~-h:~ """-~ - '~ - - t"~ 218 !:96 i~+-;; ._~ I
1 " -;. r" - .. L - '- - L. -.-
~~ ~~: ~-~- ~ - ~~.~-~
2.
'3
It
5
b
-,
'iJ
'J
, 0
II
12
1,3
14
':- ,,-
'7
1 ~
1'1
2 C' 2./
22
13 2.4- 2S
Fig u re 5. 1
Spatial Distribution of Non-Freeway Traffic
(thousands of miles/day)
SOURCE:
Roberts, P., P. 11. Roth, and C. L. Nelson, "Contaminant Emissions
in t:-Ie Los Angeles Basin -- Their Sources, Rates and Distribution,"
Appendix A of Development of a Simulation nodel for Estimating Ground
Level Concentrations of Photochemical Pollutants, Systems Applications,
Inc., Report 71 SAI-6, t~arch, 1971 p. A-10.
-102-
-------
25
24
23
:1.' ~661-=r=J
:2 :I '- 5' {, 7 8 'j I (' II '.2 f 3 I (, I:) 16 17 I ~ 19 U 2 I 22 i! 1 ~
~r~r.J-~--~1--9-4 -;~?~:_--1-----1-"'1--- -l~'lr----I~---[-~ -~-~~, -:~r--r--l-f-1i£ 2S
I I! 155 68: 144 I! l - ~ -- - j_.. I ---, - -'I -- u
t 1-----t--- --...1.-- ------ . ~ I I' t: t
i_I i--l~~ _._.~_1~ ~~8:1~~I-n'--r--T-~----~-- --'--roo, -- _.-- '-1-.1---;--1'-" 23
-r I I 1m ",1" '" 1,,;-:-[- T~;'---~--~I' - j----t--4I-:---J-+-' 2
I I I "+ ; , ,,'1
~C9 i 2;~ 3ll ~~~~!8)O- m-~;6l~-;4~1~~~~~~;' ~;~ --t--~- -- --i~-"I'--~--- --:--~-~ I .
" " ": I,' I 2.1
_-LLJ-_:3~~~ -i-.- ~40 27~ i 42] i ; 13 18~ 28 j : 41: 74 i 66 65: 43' 11 1 '1 20
I' ~I i !,3.5_6 -----,'._-- . i~215 lJ,~-4 ~~-;~~5r1;; .,;0-;--, .- '--I----~, -j,---:-I' -- --~I--!---',~'- -- I
: rii W 1-;-7! i - : -- -I~o~- ~~~ 620 ;.;~~\~7 -: 29-7- 3~5 !-3~~1~-54::6~~~~ 2~:;~~ ~~:1~~3 ! ~~ ,;
-'-r ul--r-'- -4~~t;4-;1 ~3-:~'2~ -J G66 79'5-~4~~: '~S~~~1; i~~4- -,~-t~~! -~-5 ~:-;r-- - -i----; --r-i--~E 17
" --r-- , 1-- u-,---- i--r--'-- ---I : , r-- -- I I -+
.,. '101 ~q5 15111 51 : 531 449,623 576 I ' 2C51 2631156 I' 70 I " I 32 , 1 Ii.
'- I , I I !.
" I" I ".' ,,': I I I I 1;-
.---c"'-' ""--'--- "'-,-~---1"-~:''- __"-'-"L_I-L'-'- "rr-+'---
: 1404: J' 36"'1' i b81129 444133: l i : : I~
-\. i--t :;;- ! -- 3~~---ju-\-;2-i-" ~2; ~~T-' --r--- - - - -1- -- 13
r-:----:--- --~__+--L-l- ---~~H- --1--
- \ --' :~1- _~2J _. 25_7- ~ - -~ ~59 }31_~-- 31: i ~~! J~-~I ---.- _.__~_l --_L- -- 11
i ;391 :3~6 217 ; 241 : I 56 353 1102: :>43,253 I 115 J i 16"
, I' :, Ii I I; 10
! ~ 625, ; 23& ; , 27B ' i 5? 83 330 251 138 108 207 85
~ -- ;---1-- ~~1 _,-343 : ~~0~0-t3~- 19~; --1 --"J n_t -- ;45'1-6'S-, ---t;~~-r-- 'J
/1 : --r-- 14-3-~ 451-;0-7-r-r-- 52~~~~~-~:3C4-1-- -~~~:~~:-i:+n 8
, ~ l-tJ"--lr!i~~~~~"J--G~:1-jll:1~'1!1~~- 1~~-1- ~\~~-r;t;~-- ~ 7
-=--~ i I ' ! - ,~....: ' 153 78 I 67 169 71 b
~-' --------~, i
- ~ "-. ~~~ 1-.. i115 1:~ 163}48 I - 911'
. . ~~,~ . ! 97 :.0-~ 59.4
+'::::::::::~I ~ - -B~i 6..- 3
'-- 18 2
'--
r
22
lJ
20
'11
10
17
1£
I:>
lit
13
12.
/I
-
,,,
~
S
~~--<
7
b
-
s
- -
-
4
3
2
-
-- -
..
~
~
2.
5
8
12. '3 ,~
,~ "
18
,0 Z-I
2. 2 23 H 25
1'1
'7
7
10
II
'1
b
~
t;.
SOURCE:
Figure 5.2 Spatial Distribution of Freeway Traffic
(thousands of miles/day)
Roberts, P., P. M. Roth, and C. L. Nelson, "Contaminant Emissions
in the Los Angeles Basin -- Their Sources, Rates, and Distribution,"
Appendix A of Development of a Simulation Model for Estimating Ground
Level Concentrations of Photochemical Pollutants, Systems Applications
Inc., Report 71 SAI-6, March, 1971. p. A-l0
-103-
-------
Table 5.5 TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFICa
Time Period
Percentage of
To ta 1 VMT
PeaK Hour vr".J
Percentage b
Freeways
12 - 5 A.M.
5 - 6 A.M.
6 - 7 A.M.
7 - 8 A.M.
8 - 9 A.M.
9 -10 A.M.
10 - 2 P.M.
2 - 3 P.M.
3 - 6 P.M.
6 - 7 P.M.
7 -12 P.M.
1. 94
0.89
2.96
3.84
3.24
2.68
9.88
2.85
11.19}
2.99
7.55
10.04
11.19
Non-Freeways
12 - 6 A.M.
6 - 7 A.M.
7 - 9 A.M.
9 -11 A.M.
11 - 4 P. M.
4 - 6 P.M.
6 - 8 P.M.
8 -12 P.M.
2.04
1. 46 }
6.51
5.02
6.22 }
8.20
5.40
6.16
7.97
9.44
a Assumes 50 percent of the total VMT attributable to freeway traffic (see
Table 2)
b Defined here as the periods from 6-9 A.M. and 3-6 P.M.
SOURCE:
Adapted from Roberts, P., P. M. Roth, and C. L. Nelson,
"Contaminant Emissions in the Los Angeles Basin -- Their
Sources, Rates, and Distribution," Appendix A of Develop-
ment of a Simulation Model for Estimating Ground Level
Concentrations of Photochemical Pollutants, Systems
Applications, Inc., Report 71 SAI-6, r~arch, 1971, p. A-10.
-104-
-------
6.0 TRAFFIC FLOW STRATEGIES
In general, traffic flow improvements are not likely to have a
significant impact on improving the ambient air quality in the South
Coast Air Basin.
Better traffic flow and services on surface streets
and highways, while an explicit goal of the agencies involved in trans-
portation planning and control, can result in an increase in air pol-
lution emissions if travel included as a result of increased accessibility
or ease of travel produces emission increases outweighing emission re-
ductions resulting from traffic movements.
Consequently, a strategy
to reduce idle time or congestion should be coupled with programs providing
negative incentives or restrictions to driving.
Combinations of traffic
flow programs and VMT reduction strategies, if successfully implemented,
offer some hope at reducing emissions.
To assess the impact on air quality from various traffic flow
measures, one needs to understand the relationship of speed on emissions.
To date, only a limited amount of work has been done in this area.
(63)
Rose, et. al
examined the impact of speed on emissions in the
early 1960.s.
Forty cars, ranging in age from 1955 to 1963 model years,
were tested in the cities of Cincinnati and Los Angeles; all the cars
studied were uncontrolled vehicles and consequently, atypical of the
majority of cars on the road today.
The results indicated that for HC
and CO, increased average speed lowered emissions; NOx emissions appeared
to be independent of speed.
More recently, the California Air Resources Board (75) studied the
speed versus emission relationship on 5 vehicles, one uncontrolled and
-105-
-------
four controlled vehicles.
Although the sample examined was very limited,
the vehicles involved were more representative of the present automobile
population.
The test results from these cars were averaged and are shown
in Figures 6.1 - 6.3.
Similar to Rose's study, CO and HC emissions de-
creased with increasing average speed.
However, NOx emissions increased
substantially at higher speeds.
This is partly due to the higher com-
pression ratios found in the majority of post-1966 controlled vehicles.
increased NOx emissions experienced from 1966 through the early 1970's
The
are largely due to attempts to significantly reduce CO and HC within the
Basin.
Given the relationships found by the CARB hold, a key consideration
for traffic flow schemes or strategies which affect the average vehicle
speeds, is that a trade-off is made between lower CO and HC emissions at
the expense of increased NOx and vice versa.
The decision of how to
improve the air quality with traffic flow measures requires a knowledge
of which pollutant(s) needs the greatest degree of control.
Wh il e i tis
generally conceded that reactive hydrocarbons must be controlled
stringently, it is also felt that controls of NOx emissions must take
place concurrently.
A continuing controversy exists in the research
community as to which control strategy will be the most effective for
improving air quality in the South Coast Air Basin.
The experience
gained from the 1966-1970 attempts of not controlling NOx' suggests that
the photochemical oxidant problem may not be significantly improved but
merely relocated (e.g., from Downtown to Riverside).
In view of the paucity of data relating speed to emissions. it is
assumed for the present analysis that the curves (Figure 6. l-6.3)
-106-
-------
40
"; 30
r-
'r-
E
.........
III
E
tU
s...
C1
III 20
c:
o
'r-
III
III
'r-
E
LLJ
10
20
40
60
70
30
50
Fi gure 6.1.
Average Speed (miles/hour)
Average Speed vs. Average Emissions (Carbon Monoxide).
Source:
California Air Resources Board, Project M - 220,
"Effect of Speed on Emissions", March, 1971.
-107-
-------
..-..
QJ
r-
'r-
E
"'"
III
E
IU
~
tn 3
III
t:
o
'r-
III
III
'r-
E
I.LI
4
2
1
20
30 40 50
Average Speed (miles/hour)
60
70
Figure 6.2. Average Speed vs. Average Emissions (Hydrocarbons)
Source:
California Air Resources Board, Project M - 220,
"Effect of Speed on Emissionh, March, 1971.
-108-
-------
,-. 12
QI
~
'r-
E
';;i 1 0
E
It!
~
01
-
VI 8
c
o
~ 6
'r-
E
UJ
14
,
,
,
4
2
20
Fi gure 6.3.
40
Speed (miles/hour)
Average Speed vs. Average Emissions (Nitric Oxide)
70
30
50
60
Source:
California Air Resources Board, Project M - 220,
"Effect of Speed on Emissions", March, 1971.
-109-
-------
generated by the CARB are valid.
It is recognized that as newer vehicles
enter the automobile population, significant changes in the effect of
speed on emissions are likely to occur.
Also, with the addition of
various retrofit devices, e.g., vacuum spark advance disconnect, the older
vehicles are likely to experience a change in their emission character-
istics, including the emission levels associated with various average
speeds.
6.1
Impact of Presently Proposed Traffic Improvement Programs
City and County governments are generally responsible for controlling
traffic on the city street system. There are 127 cities and 5 counties
contained in the LARTS study area, (15) the City of Los Angeles being
by far the largest municipal organization in the study area.
In an interview with the City Traffic Engineer of Los Angeles (91)
it was estimated that through the current 5 years capital improvement
programs and through future TOPICS programs, the average speed of travel
on city streets could be raised 2.5 miles per hour from the current
average speed of 21.2 miles per hour. (43)
The probable impact on
emissions from such a small increase in average speeds is likely to be
minor.
The intent of currently projected programs is to improve service
and flow; minimizing the vehicular emissions has not been an explicit
goal of the local traffic departments.
Two major responsibilities of the California State Division of
Highways are planning for highways and improving the present levels of
service provided by them.
A substantial effort is directed towards
minimizing the total delay experienced by users of the system.
Programs
to accomplish this goal include:
-110-
-------
1)
2)
completion of the planned freeway network,
removal of existing bottlenecks through addition of capacity
and ramp metering,
3)
freeway surveillance techniques to detect and remove unusual
incidents, and
4)
improved motorist information systems.
The impact of completing the freeway network will be an increase
in total vehicle miles of travel and a shift in the distribution towards
increased freeway travel.
This impact is already accounted for in the
1977 VMT projections.
Table 6.1 shows the growth of freeways in the
Basin since 1950.
This growth has resulted in the steady increase in
freeway VMT.
The removal of existing bottlenecks and ramp metering is part of a
la-year program presently underway by District 7 and will be approximately
70 percent complete by 1977. (18) All of the first stage improvements
which will be coordinated with ramp controls, will be completed by 1977.
The stated aim of this project is to maintain traffic flow at or
above 50 miles per hour during the peak hours.
In a 1971 study of freeway
travel time from the Los Angeles central business district, the average
speed during the most congested time periods. was 36 M.P.H. with an
18-50 M.P.H. range. (14) Since the fraction of VMT on freeways at
speeds less than 50 M.P.H. account
for a small percentage of VMT in the
Basin (see Impact of a 55 mph Speed Limit...), the impact of traffic
flow improvements will be a slight decrease in HC and CO emissions with an
accompanying increase in NO emissions.
x
quality is expected to be very minor.
The impact on overall air
-111-
-------
Miles of Freeways, Five-County Los Angeles
Metropolitan Area (Los Angeles, Orange,
Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino)
Tab 1 e 6. 1 .
Source:
Year rIi 1cs
1950 49.8
1951 63.3
1952 91.2
1953 105.5
1954 130.8
1955 161. 9
1956 179.1
1957 20U.O
1958 230. 0
1959 282.5
1960 301.4
19(,1 329.9
1%2 33(,.8
1963 ~)74. 9
]964 431.~
1%5 456.2
196() SOiJ.()
1%7 S40. 7
19G8 579.0
1%9 (,23.5
1970 645.2
1971 695.1 .
Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research
Investigation - Air Pollution and City Plannin~,
Environmental Science and Engineering, University
of California, Los Angeles, 1972, p. G-12.
-112-
-------
6.2
The Impact of R~I!1Q__ti~teri ng of ~he Freeway Sys tem on the VMT
in the Bas in - - -- .- - .----
As alluded to previously, the Division of Highways is presently
engaged in expanding its ramp metering program.
Currently, a select
number of sites are metered;
this is done primarily during the rush
hour in an attempt to regulate flow and minimize congestion.
One might
expect a diversion of traffic from the freeways onto the city streets
due to ramp metering; this effect has been negligible on the Harbor
Freeway, (53) where instead, it was found that the motorists actually
entered the freeway upstream of the metering, thus increasing the free-
way VMT.
It is difficult to generalize from the limited experience of the
present metering projects.
However, from surveys of users of the con-
trolled ramps, it seems likely that a temporal dispersion of peak hour
traffic will occur first, rather than diversion to city streets. (88)
An additional impact of ramp metering will be the increase in
idle times while waiting on the ramps.
Present wait time on metered
ramps average 8 minutes during the most congested traffic periods .(53)
Presently, buses are given priority for entrance onto the freeway
at controlled ramps during peak hours by means of a bus bypass lane.
This effectively gives the bus an eight minute travel time reduction
relative to the automobile travel time.
Thus far, this slight advantage
has had little effect in diverting the commuters from their automobiles.
The initial experience of motorists' attempts to circumvent the
Division of Highway ramp meters by alternate routes or modified entering
times would imply any expanded versions of the metering program are
likely to induce an alteration of temporal and spatial distribution of
-113-
-------
the VMT, rather than a significant reduction in travel.
The initiation
of a direct regulatory program such as controlling every access point
onto the freeway system through ramp metering is very likely to induce
the following responses:
1 )
increase the idle time of motorists willing to wait
to get onto the freeway; this will be induced by the guarantee
of a relatively rapid flowing, congestion free ride once onto
the freeway,
2)
adjustment of work schedules, i.e., voluntary staggering
of work hours, in an attempt to avoid travel in the peak congestion
time periods,
3)
diversion to surface streets, primarily along side of,
and paralleling many of the existing freeways.
With regard to the last item, given severe enough restrictions for
access onto the freeways, the present excess capacity on major surface
streets is likely to be used.
In conversations with the city traffic
personnel, it was estimated that on the average, as much as 30 percent
more traffic could be handled on major arteries paralleling freeways
durinn reak traffic periods.
Table 6.2 presents volumes and capacities
for a number of surface streets paralleling the freeways; for the streets
listed, anywhere from 19 to 50 percent more traffic capacity was avail-
able during the peak traffic flow.
With extensive ramp metering, one can expect commuters will find the
path of least resistance in order to get to work.
Only if they encounter
significant restrictions in the alternative routes are they likely to
opt for an alternative mode of transportation, such as the bus.
A more
-114-
-------
,
-"
-"
UI
,
Location~
Washington Blvd. @ Western Ave.
Figueroa St. @ Slausen Ave.
Ventura Blvd. @ Van Nuys Blvd.
Sunset Blvd. @ Alvarado St.
TABLE 6.2
CURRENT VOLUMES AND CAPACITIES ON
SELECTED ARTERIALS IN THE LOS ANGELES AREA
Morning Peak Hour Volume
(vehicles per hour)
Capacityb
(vehicles per hour)
933
1527
1200
1800.
1006
1197
1200
1800
a -- sites selected are all major arterials which parallel existing freeways.
b -- based on an estimated capacity of 600 vehicles per lane per hour for urban arterials.
Excessc
Capacity
29%
19%
20%
50%
c -- computed as the difference between observed volumes and capacity as a percentage of observed
demand.
Source:
City of Los Angeles Traffic Department, 1972 Traffic Counts
-------
detailed analysis of demand elasticities for the critical travel variables
will be examined later in the report.
6.3 The Impact of a 55 M.P.H. Speed Limit in the South Coast Air Basin
Currently, travel on the freeways accounts for approximately 50
percent of the Basinwide VMT.
A large fraction of the miles travelled
on freeways is at or near the maximum speed limit, i.e., 65-mph.
light of the high emissions of nitrogen oxides at these speeds an
In
examination was made of the trade-off in emissions which would result
from a program which would lower the Basinwide speed limit to 55 M.P.H.
The Freeway Operations Division of the District 7 office of the
of the State Division of Highways is involved in a series of programs on
a 42-mile loop of freeways in Los Angeles.
On Thursday, October 12,
1972, the Freeway Operations Division compiled, speed and volume counts
at six sites over a fourteen hour period (5a.m. to Sp.m.).
Figure 6.4
shows the freeways involved and notes where the monitors were located.
All lanes at the six sites were monitored.
Two stations were used on
each of the three freeways involved in making up the 42-mile loop.
From
an examination of the freeway operating characteristics reported in the
Inventory of Freeway Geometric Bottleneck Congestion First Interim Report,
it was concluded that each station was representative of approximately
one-half the length of the freeway segment. Consequently, vehicle miles
were computed by multiplying the volumes at the station times one-half
the freeway length.
The volumes not covered by the survey were obtained from 1971
traffic counts taken by the State.(13) The volumes for the surveyed hours
were subtracted from the average annual ADT.
It was assumed that the
-116-
-------
1:)
> aJ
>
Co... «
'" r--
C N
0"1 >-
'~ N aJ aJ ::;::
C .;.J VJ
aJ If)
::>: aJ
VJ u 3: I
'"
-J
I r:
-
SANTA MONICA FREEW;'\Y
I
H 26
Vernon ;'\,ve
>-
«
3:
w
w
cr::
LL
1
>-
«
3:
w
w
ex
LL
Cl::
o
co
Cl::
«
::r:
N
('entury 81 vd
I
I
I
I
I
I
SO .l2.....- II
I
\
\
o
(!J
w
o
z
«
VJ
-
.,.H8
...
Rosecrans Ave
Note:
Arrows indicate the
location of monitoring
stations
~e,
~
d)
~o
~e,
",0,
~
Fiqure 6.4
Division of Highways
"42-Mi le Loop"
Source: California State Division of Highways
---
-117-
-------
Table 6.3
Vehicle Miles Travelled - "42-Mile Loop"
(October 12, 1972)
Monitoring Station
San Diego Freeway
Station #16
Station #27
Santa Monica Freeway
Station #12
Station #27
Harbor Freeway
Station #8
Station #24
Total
V~1T
1,365,850
1 ,549,575
1,137,482
1,076,573
871 ,535
1 ,234, 190
7,234,205
Note:
The total VMT on the 42-mile loop represents
approximately 10 per cent of the total freeway VMT
for the Basin
Source:
Calculated from volume and average speed data provided by
Freeway Operations Division, District 7, Division of Highways
In calculating the impact of a change in freeway speed to 55 mph
the following assumptions were made:
1 )
the fraction of VMT at 65 mph or greater would all become
55 mph or greater,
2)
the fraction of VMT at 60-65 mph would allocate equally to
the 55 mph or greater and 50-55 mph categories,
the fraction of VMT at 55-60 mph would all become 50-55 mph
3)
-118-
-------
average speed for these hours was 65 M.P.H.
It was further assumed that
through the course of a day, the daily VMT in opposing directions were
equal.
Figures 6.5 - 6.10 give a detailed breakdown of the fraction of VMT
travelling within a given speed range.
By incorporating the actual VMT
figures for each freeway leg of the 42-mile loop (Table 6.3), one obtains
the number of miles travelled through the day as a function of speed.
Applying the emission factors derived by the CARB allows one to calculate
directly the emissions released.
Of primary interest is the relative trade-offs associated with such
a program.
Since the fraction of total VMT which occurs on freeways is
approximately 50 per cent, one can directly calculate the Basinwide
emission impact from motor vehicles.
This assumes, of course, that the
freeway VMT on the 42-mile loop are representative of the freeway VMT
throughout the rest of the Basin.
Conversations with personnel from
the Freeway Operations Division indicate that this is, in fact, a very
reasonable assumption.
Implementation of this strategy does not appear to be a major pro-
blem; the key issue to be resolved is whether an 8 per cent reduction
in NO emissions accompanied by a 2.5 per cent increase in hydrocarbons
x
is a reasonable trade off. The establishment of speed limits on the
freeways is a responsibility of the Division of Highways; enforcement
falls under the jurisdiction of the California Highway Patrol.
Should
the program be implemented, one can initially expect frequent violations
because of current driver habits.
Rigorous enforcement of the new speed
limit would very likely be necessary.
-119-
-------
100
Fig u re 6. 5
CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF FREEWAY SPEEDS
(Monitoring Station SD 27)
75
f-
Z
~
U
~
~
a...
~
;:: 50
f-
e::(
-I
=>
::E
=>
U
25
N- BOU.llD - - -
.....---- -
- - - - - - - - -- -- 5-
0 --
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 >65
SPEED (M.P.H.)
100
Figure 6.6 CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF FREEWAY SPEEDS
(Monitoring Station SD 16)
75 l
I
f- I
z I
~
u
~ I
w 50
a...
w I
:>
f- I
e::( I
-I
=>
::E I
=> I
u 25
/
/
/
S- "
"
- - - - - ~BOUND - - - - - - - - /
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 45 55 60 65
SPEED (M.P.H.)
-120-
-------
100
Figure 6.7
r,()M1JLATI\J~ cqFnllEfJCY OF FREEI'IAY SPEEDS
(Monitorinn ~tation H 8)
\:: 75
UJ
u
a:
UJ
a..
~
>
......
I- 50
.::( I
-!
:::J I
:<.
L"' I
I
25 I
I
.... '"
...
-....
\' - \:fi\J~\)- - --
- -
---
0
~ 5 10 15 30 50 55 60 65 >65
SPEED (M. P.H.)
100
Figure 6.8 CUMULAT I'JE cpEnUENCY OF FREE~AY SPEEDS
(Monitor;nq Station H 24)
75
~
UJ
u
a:
UJ
a. 50
w
::--
......
I-
«
....J
:::J
::;:
::::>
u
25
/
S-'OO\.l~D /
/
II - B.Q.\Jtl.D- - - -
0 -- - - -
C' 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 >65
SPEED (M.P.H.)
-121-
-------
75
I-
w
u
a:::
w
0.
w
:> "(\
J.
I-
<:(
--'
~
::E:
~
u
25
75
~-
w
,-'
0'
W
0.
W
::> 5f")
I-
<1
--'
~
~
u
25
F'e
:1
100
()
Figure 6.9 CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF FREEI'IAY SPEEDS
(Monitoring Station SM 12)
I
I
I
~\\\) I
\j\,65
Ijf)
20
30
35
45
5r
65
40
15
25
SPEEO U1.P.H)
Fig u re 6. 1 0
CUMULATI'/E FREQUENCY OF FREEt'IAY SPEEDS
(Monitoring Station SM 27)
l
I
I
I
I
I
, .
,
..,,"'"
"'"
I
I
I
I
- - - --- - - ---- -- - - - --[:.BOUND
()
1C
>65
r
J
20
45
15
40
25
5f)
55
60
65
30
35
SPEED (M.P. H)
-122-
-------
Table 6.4
Relative Emission "Trade-Offs"
A~sociated with a 55 MPH Speed Limit
HC CO NO
- - -x
Freeway VMT +5.0% +4.7% -16%
Basinwide VMT +2.5% +2.4% -8%
Assumptions:
1) CARB emission rates as reported in Project M-220 "Effect of
Speed on Emissions", March, 1971
2) 42-mile loop of freeways is representative of Basinwide
freeway travel
3) 50% of total VMT in the Basin is on freeways
In view of the nature of the photochemical oxidant problem, two
variations of the 55 M.P.H. speed limit control should be examined in
more detail:
1 )
institution of a 55 M.P.H. limit only during the peak smog
season, i.e., April through October; a close analogy would be
the LAAPCD rule governing fuels to be used during specific
seaons according to their air pollution potential.
2)
institution of 55 M.P.H. limit during the daylight hours
(e.g. 6 A.M. to 6 P.M.) to lower the reactive emissions
available for photochemical transformations.
A variant of
this would be to apply this during the high smog months
mentioned above.
- 123-
-------
Both strategies are an attempt to attack the interim nature of the
problem and to minimize the lifestyle disruption element.
6.4
The Impact of Staggered Work Hours
The intent of staggered work hours is to disperse peak traffic
periods and temporally redistribute the VMT.
No VMT reduction can be
expected from such a program; if anything, the improved traffic flow
may induce additional travel.
The perception of freer flowing traffic
and real changes in accessibility could activate latent travel demand,
although such activation normally results from major accessibility shifts
produced by new facilities rather than from marginal changes associated
with various forms of flow improvements.
Even if the potential for induced VMT increases is discounted,
staggered work hours appear to have little value as a control strategy
for the Los Angeles Basin.
Staggered work hours can be effective in dispersing peaking if
the employment concentration is reasonably representative of a point
source loading traffic onto a set of routes radiating from it.
However,
in the Los Angeles area employment activity is highly dispersed and
could be best characterized as line sources 10ading traffic at continuous
points along the major travel arteries.
With such an employment activity
configuration, peak commute traffic is automatically temporally and
spatially dispersed over the street and highway system without the aid
of staggering attempts.
In fact, under such conditions staggering could
result in increased peaks of traffic demand at some points on the system.
If flow improvements were achieved as a result of staggered work
hours, only marginal gains in terms of emission reductions could be
-124-
-------
anticipated.
Most of the increased speeds which would result would be
in speed ranges above the below 20 M.P.H. high leverage area for achieving
emission reductions through speed increases (see Figures 6.1 and 6.2).
Moreover, the emission reductions in CO and HC achieved through
higher speed operations are gained essentially in a trade-off with
increased NOx emissions at the higher speeds.
The impact of temporal and spatial redistribution of work-trip
related vehicular emissions is difficult to assess.
Ideally, one would
have an analytical model which incorporated the temporal and spatial
emission patterns with the meteorological parameters and the photo-
chemical reaction processes.
In the absence of such a simulation model,
attention must be given to factors which result in rhotochemica1 smog
and how they are affected by a time change.
The tonnage of automative emissions remains essentially unchanged in
a staggered work hours situation.
However, since the extent of photo-
chemical activity is a function of solar intensity and the concentration
of reactive precursors, a chan~e in where and when maximum air pollution
levels will occur is likely.
Figure 6.11 shows an examp1p. of the different
times at which maximum oxidant levels occur in various parts of the Basin.
The question of how and where pollutants are transported within the
region is a subject of continual controversy.
examined the transport of pollutants by winds.
Several studies have
Most meteorological
data confirm the prevailing wind patterns coming from the west and
blowing eastward during the peak smog periods.
Fi~ure 6.11 strongly
suggests oxidants are transported eastward during the course of a day.
Therefore, depending on how work hours were staggered, one might expect
-125-
-------
Figure 6.11
Note:
Source:
West Los
Azusa is
30 mil es
.. "~~.-r [--,-,-,-,r T--'U]
0.1; Wf~T ,-..... -
LOS AI< C;t-U'S/ '
:.:; - :-l:J_~:'J ~L_L__L2i_--L~r =
UD ,"T-r-l,,~rr--
r D.''o -- DOWNTO\'1t1 I \ -
~ D.,7-LOSANGIU:S/ \
~ O.D~ - , ,
~.~ 0.0.1 - / ,--
~ ----
;2 0 . L..:.i...-.-..L I I I L - L-.l
~-
z
UJ
U
Z
"
U
z
...
I"
:!;
D'7D[1I I I I I h-r---r f
O.IC, AZUSA ,/ '. -
0.'; I \
0.0[1 -- , \
O.DG / ,--
- -...,.- --- ......... -_..
oLL...L':LJ- ., I I I.-L_I-
:::~ :,,:,,~ ~ ;/\']
0.00 ,
0.04 _. / '.-
- -.. ./
o __L_C'1.~.LLL--L-1__I__L-
17. 2 " (; n 10 17. 2 " 6 0 10 12
~_O.h'..- . -----~I~ --. p.m.- - ---..1
II(jUf~ 01: PAY, I'~ r
Diurnal Variation of Mean l-Hour Average Oxidant
Concentration at Selected California Sites, October, 1965
Angeles is approximately 10 miles west of Downtown L.A.
roughly 20 miles east of Downtown and Riverside is about
east of Azusa.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health
Service, Environmental Health Service, Air Quality Criteria
for Photochemical Oxidants, AP-63, March 1970.
-126-
-------
an earlier or later oxidant peak.
For example~ if the present 6-9 A.M.
period was spread out over a 6-11 A.M. period~ one might expect a higher
oxidant value to occur at the same time or the maximum oxidant peak to
occur slightly later in the day than normal.
might result from two factors:
The increased oxidant value
1.
More intensive photochemical activity due to increased solar
radiation later in the morning (Figure 6.12).
2.
Increased tonnage of reactive pollutants from increased VMT.
In summary~ staggered work hours seems to be an unpredictable control
strategy which could result in a more severe photochemical oxidant pro-
blem.
Under the appropriate meteorological conditions~ one could expect
either a spatial or temporal shift in the presently experienced oxidant
levels.
Equally important~ staggered work hours tends to discourage car
pooling since there are fewer commuters with common work schedules.
-127-
-------
N
~ 500
J
£
Q 400
.....
-<
£5
: 300
Q:
-<
..J
o 200
'"
Figure 6.12
Average Solar Radiation Measured with
Pyranometer for l-Hour Intervals in L.A.
800
700
600
100
OOCT.6 M-H
A OCT. 12 L-M
x OCT. 16 N
~ OCT. 18 LI
c OCT. 20 L2
TRUE SOLAR TIME, hour
I I
1200 1300 1400 1500 1600
1700 1800
o
0600 0700 0800 0900
I
1000 1100
Nader, J.S. (ed.), Pilot Study of Ultraviolet
Radiation in Los Angeles-October, 1965, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, 1967, p. 89.
Source:
-128-
-------
7.0 VMT REDUCTION PROGRAMS
This section deals with control strategies aimed at reducing the
total VMT in the South Coast Air Basin.
As such, they are proqrams which
attack the source of the problem directly.
Any reductions in VMT will
result in lowered emissions and a corresponding improvement in air quality.
Basically, strategies should be aimed at increasing the number of person
trips per vehicle through incentives for car pooling and public transit,
restricting automobile usage, reducing the number of daily person trips,
and minimizing the distances of typical trips.
Currently. the level of public transit ridership in the South Coast
Basin is low.
An examination of the percentage of workers who use public
transportation in a number of large metropolitan areas shows Los Angeles
ranking very near the bottom (Table 7.1).
Existing land use patterns,
typically low density with highly dispersed employment activity and no
real focal concentrations, engender travel patterns which cannot be well
served by conventional bus or existing forms of rapid transit.
This has
precluded development of efficient, economic public transportation systems
capable of serving divergent travel demands-of Basin residents on a large
scale.
Consequently, when residents of the Basin are questioned about
transit, their responses citing unavailability of service, inconveniently
located routes and stops, and slow travel speed (see Appendix F), reveal
their perception of the problem which results from the area's dispersed
land use and travel patterns.
-129-
-------
Table 7.1.
Per Cent of Workers Using Public Transportation, 1960
(Bus and Rapid Rail Transit)
Area
Los Angeles, CA
New York, N.Y.
Chicago, Ill.
Philadelphia, PA
San Francisco~ CA
Boston, Mass.
Washington, D.C.
Dallas, TX
San Diego, CA
Urban Fringe
4
22
18
17
9
18
13
3
3
Total Area
8
45
31
31
19
24
24
12
7
Source:
~{ilbur Smith and Associates, Transportation and Parking for
Tomorrow's Cities, The American Automobile Association, 1966.
Figure 7.1 presents transit percentages of total person travel
corresponding to percent reductions in daily VMT.
Derivation of the
curves is detailed in Appendix E, Sample Calculation #1.
Table 7.2
presents percent transit mode split (either total daily or total
commute) required to achieve specified total daily VMT reduction goals.
-130-
-------
100
20
{,,'b-
~
(.;.'<.,
{"e
v{"
c;
80
"'y'Q.
:z: ~
a e{"
..... "'y?>
I- {"
u ~'\-
::>
CI 'b-
UJ e{"
0: 60
I- \5~
:E:
>
I-
:z:
UJ
u
0:
UJ
a.. 40
o
20
40
60
80
100
TRANSIT PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PERSON TRIPS
Figure 7.1
VMT Reduction vs. Transit Ridership
- 1 31-
-------
Table 7.2.
Fraction of Transit Ridership Required
to Obtain Various % VMT Reductions
% Overa 11 % Commute
Transit Ridership Transit Ridership % VMT Reduction
2.2 (current) 8 (current) 0
13 38 10
24 66 20
35 98 30
46 -- 40
Assumptions:
1) No change in level of carpooling
2) No change in trip demand: reduced auto-person travel replaced
by transit travel on 1 to 1 basis.
7. 1
The Impact of Presently Planned Programs
The following summarizes ongoing public transit programs in the
South Coast Air Basin.
7.1.1
Public Transportation Organizations
In the South Coast Air Basin the principal planning organization
and operator of public transportation is the Southern California Rapid
Transit District (SCRTD).
However, by 1977 the newly formed Orange
County Transit District (OCTO) will also have a significant role in
providing and planning for public transportation in the Basin.
A third
major public transportation organization in the Basin is the Yellow
Cab Company of Los Angeles.
-132-
-------
7.1.2
Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD)
Presently. SCRTD has two major projects that are likely to have an
impact on emissions in the Basin.
These are the SCRTO Mini-bus Project
and the San Bernardino Busway Project.
In addition, feasibility studies
are underway by SCRTD with OCTO for park and ride facilities along the
Santa Ana Freeway.
SCRTO has not as yet defined directions for
utilization of the $43 million in Mills-Alquist-Oeddeh Act (SB325) funds
earmarked for it.
The Mini-bus Project currently uses 19-CNG-propelled buses, each
having a capacity of 20 persons.
Current operation is between the hours of
9 A.M. to 4 P.M. in the 6 square mile downtown area.
A few buses are used
during the peak hours to provide a shuttle service for peripheral parking
to the Los Angeles Convention Center Parking Lot.
The stated intent of the Mini-bus Project is to reduce private auto
use in the downtown area.
According to an SCRTO official (89) the Mini-
buses have not been successful.
Most of the daytime passengers who have
taken advantage of the service have been diverted from the pedestrian
mode rather than the automotive mode; the peripheral parking scheme has
apparently leveled off to a point where only 600 vehicles per day park at
the Convention Center.
Presently there are no plans to extend the Mini-
bus operation to other areas of the city; however, there is talk about
studying the feasibility of peripheral parking in Dodger Stadium.
This
would have negligible emissions impact as will be discussed later (see
Impact of Auto Free Zones).
Under the most optimistic projections, one
would still reduce VMT by less than 0.1 per cent (Appendix E, Sample
Calculation #3).
-133-
-------
The San Bernardino Freeway Express Busway will be an 11 mile long
exclusive bus lane built in the median of the San Bernardino Freeway
from El Monte to central Los Angeles.
The Busway. expected to be operation-
al by 1974. will have park-and-ride facilities in El Monte and at a mid-
point station.
At least two on-line stations will also be serving Califor-
nia State University at Los Angeles and the Los Anqeles County-USC Medical
Center.
In the downtown area~ the bus will travel on city streets serving
the Greyhound Bus Terminal ~ the CBD~ and the Wilshire corridor to
Western
Boulevard.
The buses will have exclusive rights ~ on the 8usway and
will compete with other traffic on the surface streets.
Preliminary estimates of patronage project 17~000 daily passengers
in
1974 (68).
According to an SCRTD official (89) approximately 50 per
cent of the 1974 riders will be new; the remainaer would be existing
transit riders diverted from surface bus routes to the freeway express
service.
Projecting the 1977 ridership is very speculative at this point
because
the attractiveness of systems of this type in the Los Angeles
travel context is unknown.
Public transit ridership on surface routes in
the Busway corridor has not grown for five years(89).
Therefore, public
acceptability, which normally is a function of the auto/bus travel time
ratio, will be the prime determinant of the growth rate.
The buses'
exclusive lane travel advantage does not extend all the way to
downtown L. A.
The Busway terminates two miles from the downtown area,
and as currently planned, buses will travel this final segment in mixed
traffic.
SCRTD is currently negotiating with the City of Los Angeles
for exclusive lanes on surface streets~ but the outcome at this time is
uncertain.
If plans for improved bus flow on the surface street segment of
-134-
-------
the route can be developed, the San Bernardino Busway Project may possibly
be as effective as Shirley Highway Busway project which serves Washington,
D. C. commuters.
Growth on that system during the first two years of
operation has been a function of supply rather than demand (54).
During
the period from September 1971 to September 1972, demand on the Shirley
Highway Busway increased by 50 percent.
Assuming a 50 percent annual growth rate for the San Bernardino
Busway project, ridership would be 57,800 passengers per day in 1977
for a reduction of 635,000 daily vehicle miles of travel; this amounts to
approximately 0.4 percent of the total VMT (See Appendix E, Sample
Calculation #4).
However, caution must be exercised in projecting effective-
ness of transportation systems for Los Angeles on the basis of experience
in other areas.
Heretofore, experience with Busways has been in linking
low-density residential areas to intense CBD activity concentrations.
Despite the fact that one end of the San Bernardino Busway will be in the
Los Angeles CBD, the situation there is one of linking low-density
residential areas to a small, .relatively low density CBD.
As a result of the San Bernardino Busway, the California Division of
Highways has recently adopted a statewide policy to acquire at least one
right of way for public transportation on all new urban freeway systems.
This policy has little potential impact for the target year of 1977 because
the new freeway segments that will be in by then serve corridors of very
limited transit potential; consequently,none are currently planned.
-135-
-------
7.1.3 Orange County Transit District (OCTD)
The newly formed Orange County Transit District (OCTD) is presently
planning future transit services in Orange County; currently service to
meet basic need of transit dependent groups is the only service provided.
Impact of the existing nine bus-operation on air quality and emissions
is too small to quantify.
By 1975, the District plans to be operating a significantly expanded
system with 215 buses in service.(90) Expansion plans beyond the 1975
target level are undefined at this time. Assuming that patronage on the
buses will be comparable to the SCRTD average of 415 passengers per bus
per day (67) and that 20 per cent of the passengers are diverted from
automobile trips, (90) one can expect 96,000 vehicle miles reduced based
(15 )
on the LARTS 1967 average automobile occupancy of 1.4 persons per
vehicle and an average trip length of 7.6 miles per trip.(46) This
reduction amounts to less than 0.1 per cent of the projected 1977 areawide
daily VMT.
OCTD also plans to implement a dia1-a-bus system soon in the City of
LaHabra.
The scope of the project will be the operation of 5 small buses,
with less than 20 percent of the projected riders expected to use the
system instead of automobiles.
The VMT reduction which can be expected
from this project is negligible.
As mentioned earlier, OCTD is also studying the feasibility of
coordinating with SCRTD on a park-and-ride express bus service along the
Santa Ana Freeway.
The potential impact of this project was estimated
using modal split curves developed for SCRTD and the State Division of
Highways (see Appendix E, Sample Calculation #5) which predicted 30 per
cent transit ridership and 8 per cent transit ridership during the peak and
-136-
-------
off peak hours respectively for an estimated 836,000 vehicle mile reduction
or 0.5 per cent of the total areawide daily VMT.
7.1.4 Los Angeles Yellow Cab Company
Present travel by taxi in the Basin represents a very small proportion
of the total travel.
In 1967, it was estimated 0.1 per cent of all trips
were made by taxi in the LARTS study area (15).
Due to the limited amount
of VMT, it is unlikely that even a much improved taxi service could be
expected to significantly reduce VMT.
At most, only a fraction of one
per cent of the VMT could be affected by the taxis
Calculation #6).
(Appendix E, Sample
The Yellow Cab Company, the largest taxi operation in the Basin,
has been planning many programs to improve their operation.
The most
significant is a current proposal for a dia1-a-bus demonstration project
making use of their new computer dispatching capabilities.
The scope of
the program has not yet been specified; however.even if it is doubled the
taxi-cab patronage in the Basin, the resultant reduction in vehicle miles
of travel would be negligible.
7.1.5 Summary of The Impact of Presently Planned Programs
Despite planning by many organizations and agencies, it appears
doubtful that the presently planned programs will have a significant
impact on reducing VMT in the South Coast Air Basin.
Many of the
calculations in the present analysis have used highly optimistic assumptions
The reasoning behind this approach is to emphasize the relatively small
impact of the programs.
Table 7.3 summarizes the VMT reductions from
presently planned programs.
-137-
-------
Table 7.3. The Impact of Presently Planned Programs
Program
% Reduction in Total VMT
SCRTO Mini-Bus
SCRTO San Bernardino Busway
OCTO Expanded Bus Service
OCTO Oial-a-Bus
SCRTO-OCTO Park-and-Ride
Los Angeles Yellow Cab Co.
Expanded Service
(including dial-a-ride)
< 0.1
0.4a
< 0.1
Negligible
a.Sa
< 0.2
< 1.3
aoptimistic assumptions used
-138-
-------
7.2
Elasticity of Demand for Public Transit and the Los Anoe1es Mode
Choice Model (86) -
Tables 7.1 and 7.9 clearly illustrate the almost total dependence of
Basin residents for private automobiles as the dominant mode of trans-
portation.
Strategies aimed at significant VMT reductions must somehow
de-emphasize this firmly established dependence.
Such strategies will
take the approach of either encouraging car pooling and transit ridership
(for example by making them more "attractive"),or discouraging the private
use of the auto (for example by economic or time penalties).
Another
approach is that of direct regulations; this type of scheme will be
discussed later.
To evaluate the relative effectiveness of various V~1T reduction
strategies, it is necessary to have an analytical methodology which can
predict the potential transit ridership of average automobile occupancy
rates for a set of critical variables.
Unfortunately, it is very difficult
to quantitate the factors people use to rate the attractiveness of car
pools relative to driving alone or riding in a bus.
Research on this
topic has been limited up to the present.
Alan M. Voorhees and Associates
are currently conducting studies to determine behavioral characteristics of
motorists and car poo1ers on the Hollywood Freeway in Los Angeles which,
hopefully. will result in a more complete understanding of carpool modal
sp 1 it.
The parameters affecting transit ridership are better understood
and models have been developed which can reasonably estimate the proportion
of total trips between two geographical locations that will be made via
mass trans it.
Both SCRTD and LARTS are presently using a model developed
-139-
-------
by Alan M. Voorhees and Associates for use in the Los Angeles area! a
model which has been utilized in these analyses as well.
Basically! the Voorhees Model works as follows.
Fi rst! a "marginal
utility" function is calculated for a typical trip between the two sub-
areas between which projections are being made.
"Marginal utility" is
defined essentially as a measure of the advantages of the private auto-
mobile over public transit; therefore, higher marginal utilities will
result in lower levels of transit ridership and vice versa.
Figure 7.2
shows the diversion curves developed empirically for the Los Angeles area,
which specifically relate transit ridership to mar9inal utility.
The
second step in using the model is to use these diversion curves to predict
the expected transit ridership for any calculated marginal utility.
It
is important to remember that the utility curves were derived empirically!
and hence subject to uncertainties.
It would be a mistake to view the
model as an absolute predictor.
Since the model has inherent uncertainties,
any values calculated in this report have the same uncertainties plus the
additional uncertainties associated with various assumptions made.
There are a number of variables which can be used to measure the
relative advantage the private auto has over public transit.
Voorhees
related marginal utility to nine variables! which, essentially fall into
two classes -- time and money.
-140-
-------
+>
.,....
VI
~ 60
~
l-
+>
c
(1)
u 40
~
(1)
0..
100
80
"'---..Jligh
"
'''''''''''
Medium ...
--------..... "
--............... "
-.... ,
Low " "
......'
- - -[ ----- - - - ......~" ~ Boundary
-",
....."
Patronage Level @f Fo~e~
of Defined Region
20
Level
o
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
Marginal Utility (U + 200)
Fi gure 7.2.
Per Cent Transit vs. Marginal Utility
Source:
Alan M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc., Los Angeles Mode
Choice Model Development Study, February, 1972.
Within the group of nine variables used to formulate the marginal
utility function (Equation 1), certain variables are more susceptible
to change than others.
Variables which are susceptible to change in the
direction of decreasing marginal utility are the ones which hold most
potential for decreasing VMT.
Table 7.4 summarizes some implications
associ ated with changi ng the margi na 1 util ity parameters.
-141-
-------
Marginal utility = U = 2.5 (Ta + Tw) + Tr-(2.5 At + Ar) + F-(Ao + Ap)
0.251
(1)
where:
Ta = transit access time in minutes (i .e. the time to walk to
the bus stop)
Tw = transit wait time in minutes
Tr = transit riding time in minutes
At = automobile parking access time in minutes (i .e., the time
necessary to find parking and walk to destination)
Ar = automobile riding time in minutes
F = transit fare in cents
Ao = automobile operating'costs in cents (excludin9 depreciation
and insurance)
Ap = automobile parkinq cost in cents (averaged over the round
trip)
1 = mean income of the home based zoned in cents per minute
Theoretically, some or all of the nine parameters can be modified
in hopes of affecting increases in transit ridership.
The effect of a
program designed to alter these variables in various combinations will be
examined in the next section.
Figure 7.2 illustrates that demand for public transit will ~ncrease
if the marginal utility of the automobile is decreased.
Transit rider-
ship estimates for marginal utilities less than minus 80 are extrapolated.
They reflect three levels of optimism for what transit ridership might
become under rather ideal conditions.
The Voorhees report recommends
using the low patronage level of forecast in the Basin which implies
the upper limit of transit demand is approximately a 60 per cent ridershipl
-142-
-------
TABLE 7.4
Marginal Utiljty Potential
Pa rcometer for Control
Ta Low
Tw Medium
Tr Medium
At Low
Ar High
F Hiqh
Ao High
Ap Medium
I Very low
a - see
Equation 1
Control of Marginal Utility Parameters
Example(s) of Control Aimed
at Decreasing Marginal Utility
More bus stops and/or routes
Improved frequency of service
Exclusive busways for freeway lanes
Peripheral parking, auto free zones
Ramp metering
Lowered fares
Gasoline tax, "smog" tax, tolls
Increased parking costs
Lower personal income levels
Within the 'defined region I , the Voorhees curves are drawn for three
different levels of income.
Various income groups will exhibit dif-
ferent responses to, or perceive differing marginal utility changes to
a uniform change in actual conditions.
Essentially. this results from
the differing values placed on time and money within each economic class.
Low income drivers will probably divert to public transit more rapidly
than middle income drivers in the event a substantially increased cost
penalty is associated with driving.
However, since more low income people
ride on transit now, the percentage increase in transit ridership within
each income level could be about the same.
Percentage of daily VMT stratified by income group can only be
inferred from relative trip generation rates, as average trip lengths have
-143-
-------
not been stratified by income categories.
Average trip performance is
generally reflected in the behavior of the middle income group and for
purposes of these analyses, the mode split curves corresponding to this
group have been used to characterize areawide average response to changes
in marginal utility of the auto versus transit.
Appendix H presents an
illustration of the expected changes in transit ridership for various
parameters as a function of three income levels.
In order to predict the effect of various strategies on transit
ridership, it is necessary to have information on the nine variables which
influence marginal utility (Equation 1).
Table 7.5 lists typical values
assumed for each parameter needed to simulate current conditions
experienced during a commute type trip.
When these assumed values are
input to the Voorhees Model, an eight percent transit ridership is pre-
dicted (which corresponds to the current commute transit ridership
(Table 7.1).
In order to simplify the analysis, certain logical combinations of
variables were grouped; this lowered the effective number of variables
to consider in control strategies to six.
The six variables which will
be analyzed in depth are given in Table 7.6.
Using the assumed values listed in Table 7.5 and the six variables
in Table 7.6, curves were generated for estimating the percent transit
ridership as a function of each of the six variables (Figures 7.3-7.8).
Marginal utility was determined by holding five of the variables constant
as the sixth was allowed to change.
-144-
-------
TABLE 7.5
ASSUMED VALUES OF MARGINAL UTILITY PARAMETERS
FOR A TYPICAL COMMUTE TRIP
Assumed Value
Variable
Trip Length
Ta
10.5 mil es
5 minutes
Tw
7 minutes
Tr
48 minutes
F
38 cents
Ao
50 cents
Ap
2.5 cen ts
I
At
8.3 cents/minute
2 minutes
Ar
23 minutes
Source
Table 5.4
Generally accepted value
15 minute headway, no transfer
LARTS, 1971 Travel Time Study
30~ basic fare + 8~ for one additional
zone
4.8~ per mile - assumed by Voorhees
90~ per day for estimated 5.8 per-
cent who pay See Table 7.7.
$10,000 per year
Table 5.4
A. M. Voorhees & Associates
TABLE 7.6
MARGINAL UTILITY PARAMETER COMBINATIONS
Marginal Utility Variables
Transit fare (one way)
Transit access and waiting time
Transit riding time
Auto operating and parking
cost (one way)
Auto riding time
Auto terminal time
Symbol
F
Ta+Tw
Tr
A +A
a p
Ar
At
Potential
for Control
Relative
Effectiveness
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
High
High
Medium
Low
Low
Low
NOTE:
Income is considered a constant throughout, primarily because
it is virtually impossible to control.
-145-
-------
40
a.
.,....
~ 30
~
Q)
~
.,....
0::::
.+-J
.,....
\I)
c:
~ 20
I-
.+-J
c:
Q)
u
~
Q)
a..
10
I
I
~Currently .38
o
.60 .90
F - Do 11 a rs
Figure 7.3. Transit Fare (One Way) vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership.
Source: Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice Model.
o
.30
1.20
1.50
-146-
-------
20.0
17 .5
15
.~ 12.5
..c:.
1/1
~
QJ
"U
.,...
a:::
+oJ 10
.,...
1/1
C
IU
~
I-
+oJ
C
QJ
U
~
QJ
0..
Figure 7.4.
7.5
5
2.5
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I~ Currently 12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.5
15
17.5
20
5
10 12.5
Ta + Tw - Minutes
Transit Access and Waiting Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership.
Source: Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan
Area Mode Choice Model.
-147-
-------
20
18
16
c..
~ 14
VI
S-
Q)
-0
'r-
c:: 12
+-'
6
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
I
VI
C
~ 10
I-
.....
c
~ 8
S-
Q)
a..
4
2
o
o
40
60
Tr - Minutes
80
100
Figure 7.5.
Transit Riding Time vs. Per Cent Transit Rioership.
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice Model.
-148-
-------
40
0..
.~
.L:
1/1
~
QJ
-0
.~
0:::
+J
.~ 30
1/1
C
lIS
~
t-
+J
C
QJ
U
~ 20
QJ -
0..
10
Source:
I
~
I
I
I
Currently .52
o
1.00
2.00
2.50
1.50
.50
A + A - Dollars
o p
Figure 7.6. Automobile Operating and Parking Cost
(One Way) vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership.
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice
t-'1ode 1 .
-14,9-
-------
a.
.....
..c:
V1
S- 30
Q)
-0
.....
a::
of->
.....
V1
c::
IU
S-
I- 20
.....
c::
Q)
u
S-
Q)
a...
40
10
o
10
Fi gure 7.7.
Source:
,
~ Currently 23
I
I
30
90
110
50 70
Ar - Mi nutes
Automobile Riding Time V5. Per Cent Transit Ridership.
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice Model
-150-
-------
Figure 7.8.
Source:
a.
......
~ 30
'-
QJ
"0
......
a::
+J
......
en
c
f 20
.-
+J
C
QJ
U
'-
QJ
a..
40
10
o
I~ Currently 2
I
I
I
o
10
20
AT - Minutes
30
40
Automobile Terminal Parking Time vs. Per Cent Transit Ridership.
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area Mode Choice Model.
-151-
-------
Figures 7.3-7.5 all relate to changes affecting transit variables.
No pena1ities on use of the private auto are assumed.
Figures 7.6-7.8 show
the effect of penalizing the automobile while not attempting to improve
public transit.
In general, the latter approach is more effective in
increasing the transit ridership.
This implies strategies directed at con-
trolling automobile usage will result in a higher VMT reduction than
strategies aimed solely at improving mass transit.
An examination of the transit oriented variables shows them all being
relatively inelastic with regards to increased transit ridership.
This
implies that making bus service more frequent, quicker, and cheaper will
not induce much more additional patronage.
The most effective parameter, transit ride time, can only attract
15 per cent ridership under the most optimistic improvement.
A free
transit would probably attract less than 10 percent ridership.
If one
compares the two variables, time turns out to be more important than money.
This turned out to be a fairly consistent finding -- the private auto
user was more affected by inconvenience and time loss than by monetary
considerations.
7.3
The Impact of Improved Public Transit
Using very optimistic assumptions which would make transit service
free and as fast as the private auto, one might be able to achieve an
overall 10 per cent VMT reduction (Appendix E, Sample Calculation #6a).
However, by making more reasonable assumptions for an improved bus system
which could be developed, one achieves only a 3 per cent VMT reduction
overall in the Basin (Appendix E, Sample Calculation #6b).
-152-
-------
7.4 The Impact of Incentives to Discourage Auto Use
In comparison to transit variables, controls aimed at penalizing the
automobile, are more effective.
Theoretically, if the penalty placed on
the auto is severe ~nough, high transit ridership and therefore, large VMT
reductions can be achieved.
The measures necessary to achieve large VMT
reductions have to be very drastic though.
The problem with severe economic penalties for private auto use is
they become very inequitable affecting the lower income classes the most.
For example, assuming no transit operation improvement, the combined
vehicle operating and parking cost would have to be raised to approximately
$4.00 per day ($2.00 per trip), an increase of 14 cents per mile in order
to get to the saddle-point of the curve that separates the flat portion
from the steeper, more responsive section (Figure 7.6).
Simil a rly, if
varied alone, the automobile travel time would have to be lengthened to
more than 80 minutes (an average speed of approximately eight miles per
hour) or the parking terminal time lengthened to 30 minutes to reach the
same saddle point (Present commute time is 23 minutes).
The Impact of Improved Transit Service and Incentives to Discourage
Auto Use
7.5
Figure 7.9 shows the demand elasticity for public transit in terms
of improvements in transit riding time and increasing auto operating
and parking costs.
From the previous analysis these two parameters
appeared to be the most elastic of the transit improvement and automobile
deterrent measures respectively; yet, when they are applied as a pair fairly
substantial actions must still be made in both to reach the most elastic
portions of the curve.
For example, if the transit riding time was made
comparable to the automobile riding time, 23 minutes, and an additional
-153-
-------
C-
or-
..c.
III
~
Q)
-c
or-
o:::
+J 30
or-
III
t:
ItS
~
I-
+J
t:
Q)
u 20
~
Q)
0...
50
Transit Ride Time (minutes)
1~ ~i }O ~O 4~ ~
, r / '
/ ~ / / / Sin
// / / ')'
/ / / / ,
/ /
/.1.1 / / /
/ / / / / /
.I /: / / / ,/
/ .I~ ,/
40
10
o
1.00
3.00
2.00
Auto Operating & Parking Costs (Dollars) Per Trip
Figure 7.9.
Effect of Automobil~ Operating Cost,
Parking Cost, and Transit Riding Time
on Transit Ridership.
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan
Area Mode Choicp. Model
-154-
-------
tax on either parking and/or travel of approximately 75 cents per trip
(to make the combined costs equal to $1.25 per trip) would be necessary
to reach the elastic portion of the curve.
This part of the curve occurs at roughly 20 Der cent transit demands.
If a 20 per cent ridership were achievable during the commute periods. one
would only get a 4 per cent VMT reduction in the Basin.
It is important to note that the curves in Fi9ures 7.3 to 7.9 are
drawn for a typical commute trip.
It is expected that the demand
elasticities for non-commute trips will be even flatter necessitating even
more stringent controls to achieve the same levels of riderships.
7.6
The Impact of Auto Free Zones
Prohibiting the use of automobiles in certain areas of the city
could produce some reduction in daily VMT.
Emissions from automobiles
traveling within the area would be eliminated, and additional reductions
would result from a diversion to mass transit by those who may find
peripheral parking too inconvenient.
These might be counterweighed to
some extent by VMT increases due to thru traffic being diverted around
the vehicle free zone.
This strategy must be applied to extremely dense activity centers to
achieve significant reductions.
The character of land use in the Los
Angeles Basin is such that few such activity concentrations are identifi-
able.
Figures 5.1 and 5.2 for example, illustrate the relatively uniform
distribution of travel over the Basin and Figure 7.10 shows locations
and densities of employment centers in the Basin.
The biggest employment center is the Los Angeles downtown control
Business District (CBO). which is bounded by four freeways which serve
both CBO-bound traffic and bypassing traffic.
If the CBO were established
-155-
-------
F i (IU re 7. 1 0 .
~.
.1
1
.......
<.T1
0)
1
-,--
=, ',-:"R ~~
SIIb-COIII'It)'
B~IId..,. LJu
. h LARTS Study Area
1 n t e
L
'.y-
-1
.".;.; ::':::/~1~) ~.-.;
';;;~~7C.\P\~
:;:;:::::. -',
.,j'/ '~'"
,:.,..n....' .....:.'
';:::;" :):;<;:
:\\
.:",. .
EMPLOYMENT acre)
mployed/gross
(persons e t
Employmen
Governments,
'on of
Associatl
Cal Hornia
Southern
Source:
Projections.
-------
as a vehicle free zone, no increase in vehicle miles associated with
through traffic would be expected because freeway access to the CBD could
be controlled and VMT reductions associated with CBD-bound traffic would
range from 104,000 to 1,027,000 vehicle miles depending upon what diversion
to alternative modes of travel can be expected.
(See Appendix E, Sample
Calculation #7).
The most optimistic figure of 1,027,000 vehicle miles reduced repre-
sents less than 1 percent of the daily Basin total of 168,000,000 vehicle
mil es .
In fact, over 30 centers comparable to the Los Angeles Downtown
CBD would have to be pinpointed and closed off to achieve a 20 per cent
reduction in vehicle miles in the Basin.
The likelihood of ever achieving
a sizeable VMT reduction through the creation of auto free zones is small.
The land areas which would be affected must become quite substantial in
order to get a significant travel reduction.
In addition, most of the
present land use patterns, especially with respect to parking, need to be
changed before this strategy could even be seriously considered.
7.7
The Impact of Increased Parking Costs
Table 7.7 presents data on the type of parking associated with the
work tri p.
Overall, more than 91 per cent of the commuters use free
parking facilities of one kind or another.
This value varies as a func-
tion of geographical area; workers driving into the CSD were more likely
to pay for parking.
In fact, only 46 per cent of those driving into the
CBD were able to park in free lots.
In general, land use practices which
have established and encouraged automobile use through provisions for
free parking, make increased parking costs a relatively poor control
strategy.
Essentially. very low VMT reductions could be expected because:
-157-
-------
Source:
TABLE 7.7
TYPE OF PARKING - FIRST TRIP TO I~()RK
(Average Weekday)
Type of Pa rk i ng Number Per Cent
Lot free 1 ,720,000 82.6
Street free 177,200 8.6
Garage free 12,800 0.6
Lot paid
107,000
15,200
5. 1
0.7
Garage paid
Street meter
4,900
0.2
Resident property 27,800 1.3
Not parked 15,400 0.7
Service or repairs 1 ,600 0.1
Total 2,082,500 100.0
LARTS 1967 Origin-Destination Survey, December, 1971
-_.
-158-
-------
1 )
parking costs (from Figure 7.6) are relatively inelastic until
very high charges are made
2)
too many parking lots are currently free and in private ownership
making it difficult to institute a massive pricing policy which
would be uniformly equitable and yet effective enough to cover a
large number of lots
3)
raising the price of parking in congested areas such as the CSD
affects only a small segment of the population and if the penalties
4)
are severe enough~ they tend to be discriminatory
a massive program would have to be undertaken to substantially
increase the percentage of drivers now paying for parking --
approximately six per cent of the commuters.
7.8
The Impact of the Four Day Work Week
As shown in Table 5.4~ approximately 32 per cent of total vehicle
miles in the South Coast Basin are attributable to commuting trips between
work and home.
A large proportion of workers in the Los Angeles area
typically commute to work five days a week on the conventional 40 hour
week schedule.
For certain types of jobs~ a shift to a 4 day - 40 hour week would
be feasib1e~ thus resulting in the elimination of one round trip to work
per week for each employee affected.
However~ comparison of total average
Saturday to average weekday traffic volumes indicates that increased
recreational and other travel is likely to cancel the VMT reductions due
to reduced work trip requirements.
Studies documenting current daily
travel patterns in the Los Angeles area indicate~ as illustrated in
Table 7.8~ that if 70 per cent of the 1980 work force~ as determined by
the Southern California Association of Government (SCAG)(66) ~ switched
-159-
-------
Table 7.8
Trip Frequency by Trip Type and Day of Week
Home to Home to Home to ~~ork to Other to Wo rk to
~ Work Other Shop Other Other Shoo Totals
Monday tri ps 212 89 147 58 132 61
vehicle miles 2226 605 441 394 897 464 5027
Tuesday trips 195 124 125 81 125 84
vehicle miles 2047 843 375 551 850 638 5304
Wednesday trips 214 90 117 99 123 69
vehicle miles 2247 612 351 673 836 524 5243
I
-'
0'\ Thursday trips 198 131 97 68 138 70
a
I vehicle miles 2079 891 291 462 938 532 5193
Friday trips 218 99 133 93 164 79
vehicle miles 2289 673 399 632 1115 600 5708
Sa tu rday t ri ps 35 178 235 8 238 8
vehi cl e mil es 3367 1210 705 54 1618 61 4015
Sunday trips 20 200 145 5 177 1
vehicle miles 210 1360 435 34 1204 8 3251
Total 33,741
*Note: trip frequencies are averages from a population of 199 survey cars
Source: Kearin, D. H. and R. L. Lamoureux, A Survey of Average Driving Patterns in the Los Angeles
Urban Area, Systems Development Corporation, Santa Monica, California, February 28, 1969
-------
to a four day work week less than a one percent reduction in total daily
vehicle miles would occur (Appendix E, Sample Calculation #8).
7.9
The Impact of Increased Car Pool
The current level of car poolin~ in the Basin is also very low.
In a
recent survey taken in the greater Los Angeles area (Appendix F), only
4.3 per cent of the persons polled indicated that they travel to work in
a car pool.
An indicator of car pooling activity is the automobile
occupancy rate, which is computed as the average number of persons carried
per automobil e.
Table 7.9 presents current average occupancy rates for
various categories of trips in the South Coast Basin.
Note that the work
related trips have the lowest occupancy rates.
A closer examination of
the work trips made on the freeway shows greater than ninety per cent of
the drivers commuting alone (Figure 7.11).
Table 7.9
Current Automobile Occupancy Rates in the
South Coast Basin
Home Other- Work- Home- Home-
Average Other Other Other Work Shop Total
Weekend Day 2.0 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.5 1.8
Weekday 1.7 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.4
Source:
LARTS-1967 Origin Destination Survey, December, 1971, p. 71
-161-
-------
Occupants in VehiclE
(Including Driver) PERCENT OF TOTAL FIRST TRIPS TO WORK
1 [[[ ::::: :::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:.:.:.:.: '~~f Q
'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.','.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.','.'.'.'.'.'.'.','.'.'.'.','.'.'.'.'.':':':':':':': 9 3 . 5 %
',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',
2 ill 4.8%
3 or more ~ 1.7%
Figure 7.11.
Distribution of Weekday Driver Trips
to Work Via Freeway by Number in Vehicles
Sou rce:
LARTS - 1967 Origin-Destination Study, December, 1971, p. 71
Since the auto occupancy rate is so low, significant VMT reductions
can be achieved through increased car pool activity.
Figure 7.2 presents
curves indicating the total Basinwide VMT reductions associated with
increased automobile occupancy.
Derivation of these curves is explained
in Appendix E, Sample Calculation #2.
Table 7.10 lists occupancy rates
corresponding to a few specified VMT reduction goals.
Mandatory carpooling on freeways during peak traffic periods has
been proposed as a control measure.
However, even if all freeway
commute travel was in carpools, a 20 per cent VMT reduction could not be
achieved.
Commute travel by freeway users accounts for less than 25
per cent of total daily VMT (including both freeway and non-freeway
travel segments (43)). If all such commuters were in car pools of 3 and
no additional VMT were generated by car pool assembly and dispersal, the
-------
50
o
S: 40
>-
>-,
r-
''-
It!
0
It!
+.)
0 30
~
s::
',-
s::
0
I ',-
-' +.)
0"1 U
IN ='
I "'0
OJ 20
a:::
+.)
s::
OJ
u
~
OJ
0...
10
2
3
4
5
Average Automobile Occupancy Rate (persons per vehicle)
Figure 7.12. VMT Reduction vs. Automobile Occupancy,
-------
Table 7.10
Average Automobile Occupancies Required to Obtain
Various VMT Reductions
Overall Auto Commuting Auto Freeway Commuting % Reduction
Occupancy Occupancy Auto Occupancy in Total VMT
1.4 (current) 1.1 (current) 1.1 (current) 0
1.7 1.7 2.1 10
1.9 3.2 20
2.2 6.2 30
2.6 40
Assumptions:
1) No change in transit ridership
2) No change in trip demand
-164-
-------
7.10 The Impact of Exclusive Bus and Carpool Lanes on the Freeway
Reserving freeway lanes for high occupancy vehicles has been facili-
tated through Assembly Bill No.1, which was enacted into California Law
in November 1970.
Use of this law in the South Coast Basin could poten-
tially affect a VMT reduction via increased transit ridership and carpooling
activity.
As shown in Figures 7.5 and 7.9, giving mass transit a travel time
advantage will result in increased transit ridership; this has already been
observed on the Shirley Highway in Virginia (54).
expected of carpools.
Similar results can be
Reserving a lane on freeways during peak travel times presumably would
have a two fold effect.
The reserved lane would be free of congestion and
any congestion already existent on the freeway would be aggravated with the
removal of capacity.
It is difficult to estimate the magnitude of the VMT reduction poten-
tia1
of this program because other alternatives are open to automobile
drivers.
In addition to increased transit ridership, it is possible and
probable that further voluntary staggering of commuter times and shifts of
travel from the freeways onto surface streets might result.
Hence, to
maximize the impact of exclusive carpool and bus lanes, the alternatives
should be made less attractive.
Levels of carpooling are limited by difficulties in arranging the
carpools which, in turn, are the result of the diverse travel patterns in
th e Ba sin.
In a survey conducted on Los Angeles residents, over three-
fifths of the commuters said it would be "extremely difficult" or "very
difficult" to arrange a car pool if they had to (see Appendix F).
This
might be alleviated by establishing carpool pickup points near on-ramps
-165-
-------
to the freeways.
To get carpoolers to the pickup point, a local public
transit feeder system could be utilized.
Since the maximum potential for
this strategy exists in the low density residential suburbs, the feeder
system should probably be comprised of dial-a-ride buses, subscription
buses, and jitneys (presently illegal in Los Angeles).
Another alternative would be park-and-ride facilities similar to the
one proposed for the Santa Ana Freeway.
This would allow transit riders or
carpoolers an opportunity to quickly make the parking lot-to-home trip or
home-to-parking lot trips on a flexible time schedule.
The VMT reduction potential of park-and-ride facilities is not as great
as that of public transit feeders because of the VMT by individuals getting
to the parking lot,and because of a resistance to leave the automobile once
inside it.
Kiss-and-ride activity would be similar in terms of the VMT
reduction.
Nevertheless, where public feeders cannot be provided, park-and-
ride facilities should be provided.
Exclusive lanes for carpools and buses presumably only affect the
commuter travel on freeways.
During the off-peak hours, the travel time
advantage of such a program could not be maintained easily and therefore
would be virtually ineffective for additional VMT reductions.
Commuters who normally do not use the freeways have many options in
terms of alternate routes.
These drivers will be untouched by a control
program geared to the freeway system.
In Appendix E, Sample Calculation #9, the impact of an exclusive bus-
carpool lane on the freeway is estimated.
Initially, the potential diversion
of auto-person trips to mass transit was estimated for a hypothetical busway
system on the freeways with extensive park-and-ride facilities.
Hence,
vehicle mileage reductions are not expected from the drive to the freeway.
166-
-------
By generously assuming that a 20 minute travel time advantage over automo-
bile travel could be maintained by the transit vehicles, a 15 percent
ridership could be assumed yielding a 2.5 percent reduction in the Basin-
wide daily VMT.
In the Caltech Environmental Quality Laboratory Plan (see Section 3.2),
a graduated "emissions" tax was proposed which peaked at 2.25 cents per
mile for pre-1965 cars.
In comparison, the estimated average current cost
of gasoline in the Basin is approximately three cents per mile of travel (46).
Hence, in response to the Caltech proposal and to simulate the effect of
doubling the price of gasoline, a further analysis was performed with a
three cents per mile increase in the automobile operating cost.
The esti-
mated effect is a potential further reduction of 0.7 percent; hence, the
effect of passenger diversions onto freeway buses when a three cents per
mile tax is applied to automobiles is a 3.2 percent reduction in daily VMT.
As stated previously, little is known about the factors which affect
the level of carpooling between two geographic locations.
It is expected
that a carpool lane, which would give carpool automobiles travel time
advantages over other automobiles on the freeway would be a strong incentive
for carpooling, but it cannot presently be stated how effective such an
incentive will be in raising the level of carpooling.
Numerous organizations have pointed to the goal of achieving an average
vehicle occupancy of 1.5 persons per vehicle on the Los Angeles freeway
system during the commute hours.
One report claimed that this goal could
be attained by 1975 through incentives for carpooling (3).
In response to
this it will be assumed that the level of carpooling in the proposed bus-
carpool lane is enough to attain this goal.
Appendix E, Sample Calculation
#9 shows that if 24 percent of the freeway traffic, or 38 percent of the
-167-
-------
people using the freeway switched to three-man carpools.
The goal can be
achieved and the resultant VMT reduction would be approximately 4.4 percent
of the daily Basin-wide VMT.
An additional complication in the analysis is the possibility that a
portion of the potential new transit riders, estimated in the initial part
of the analysis, may elect to form a carpool instead of taking a bus.
Con-
sequently, VMT reductions estimated by an independent determination of new
carpooling activity might affect the VMT reductions attributable to new
transit ridership.
It would be extremely optimistic to simply add the two
affects to estimate the total reduction because of this overlap.
The com-
bined VMT reduction potential of this program is probably no more than
five to six percent of the total daily VMT.
Analysis of Results for Incentive Type VMT Reduction Strategies
It appears from the previous analyses that incentive type measures are
not very effective at significantly reducing VMT.
No strategy or combin-
ation of strategies was able to even approach the 20 percent VMT reduction
goal of the Air Resources Board.
In fact, it does not seem possible to
achieve even a 10 percent VMT reduction by 1977.
A realistic goal for the
South Coast Air Basin using these measures would be to reduce VMT 5-8 per-
cent by the year 1977.
To achieve even this goal will require a consider-
able effort -- public transit will have to be substantially improved and
concurrently. private automobile use will have to be explicitly discour-
aged through either time or monetary penalties.
The fundamental reason for why every strategy examined gave such in-
significant results goes back to Figure 7.2.
Very simply. the marginal
utility of the automobile is not easily changed.
Using the Voorhee's
model, developed from present perceptions of public transit in Los Angeles,
-168-
-------
one faces a near impossible task of diverting auto commuters into public
trans it.
Every "reasonable" incentive type strategy ended in only a small
decrease in marginal utility.
Consequently, significantly higher transit
riderships can only be hoped for if a change in the marginal utility curves
occurs.
This implies greatly improving the transit service relative to the
automobile so that the public's perception and attitudes towards public
transit become more favorable.
Herein lies the dilemma many transit author-
ities face; namely, how to improve service at higher operating costs and
attract enough ridership to pay for the additional expenses.
Recently, in
an attempt to save money and cut costs, many transit authorities have been
doing the opposite.
Servi ce h.as been lowered in the hope that the money
saved from the austerity programs was more than the revenues lost from
decreased ridership.
This is usually done on the theory that most of the
present ridership consists of "captive riders" with no alternative mode of
travel, e.g. the young, old, and poor.
The question than becomes how can a public trans.it authority justify
improving its level of service without the guarantee of additional rider-
ship or conversely, how can the individual commuters be expected to divert
to a public transit system it feels is grossly inferior to the private auto-
mobil e?
The answer, if there is one, seems to be a simultaneous attempt
must be made to make the transit service more attractive in itself and to
provide strong disincentives to private use of the auto.
In light of the slow nature of change, improving transit service
initially will probably result in lowered profits.
Therefore, the transit
system may have to be subsidized.
Eventually it is hoped, the penalties
on auto use will be effective enough to move the commuters into improved
transit service.
It is only after this that the shape of the marginal
-169-
-------
utility curves may have to be reevaluated.
When they become more favorable
for transit ridership, the chance for obtaining a significant VMT reduction
from incentive measures will be at hand.
Table 7.11 summarizes the impacts
of the strategies discussed in this section.
Tab 1 e 7. 11 .
Summary of Impacts for Various Control Strategies
Strategy Description
Approximate %
VMT Reduction
Much Improved Public Transit
Improved Transit and Tax on Auto Use
::3
~4
Auto Free Zone (e.g., l.A. C.B.D.)
~0.6
Increased Parking Costs
Negligible
Four Day Work Week
Exclusive Bus and Carpool lane
Exclusive Bus and Carpool land with
~ 0.6
:: 2.5
~ 3.2
3~/mi 1 e tax
Increased Commuter Carpools to Achieve
an Average Automobile Occupancy of
1.5 on Freeways
~4.4
-170-
-------
8.0 REGULATORY PROGRAMS
The previous chapters have examined a variety of incentive type
measures (the "carrot" apDroach) to reduce VMT in the Rasin.
The measures
were basically ineffective at achieving significant VMT reductions.
This
chapter explores a set of direct regulatory controls (the "stick" approach).
As a rule, it is generally easier to estimate the impact of direct controls.
This is not always the case, however, as will be shown for the case of
limiting auto registrations.
Direct regulatory controls are authoritarian in nature and character-
ized by an agency essentially establishing a mandatory policy, rule, or
regulation to be followed.
To be effective, the penalties for violating
the policy or regulation must be set high enough to discourage any
violation.
One such program is gas rationing where a large fine is placed
for any violations of the administrative rules established to run the
program.
Those regulated by the program have few decisions to make; they
are simDly told to abide by the "rules of the game. II
Indirect regulatory controls leave more room for individual decision
.
making; consequently, it is less authoritarian, and in general, less
predictable.
An example of this type of control would be an "emissions
tax," as proposed by the EQL team and others (29, 34, 46).
The individual
under this control decides for himself whether he should reduce his driving
in order to save money or whether he should cnntinue driving and pay the
tax.
In addition to being more difficult to assess, indirect controls
usually take longer to assess.
For example, pricing schemes typically
show both short term and long term demand elasticities.
In other words,
-171-
-------
in the case of an "emissions tax," it is very likely the first year many
motorists will simply pay the tax and continue driving; in the second year,
some motorists will reconsider the savings possible from driving less and
may join a carpool or ride the bus to work.
The costs associated with either direct or indirect controls can be
equally high as shown in Figure 8.1.
In general, lithe more indirect the
control, the greater will be information costs for it to be satisfactorily
implemented or even comoared with other controls in terms of efficiency...
enforcement and monitoring costs for rigid direct controls may be exceed-
ingly high.
If the perceived level of control is overly oppressive to
the individual or organization beina regulated, non-legal or questionably
moral devices or political pressure may be attempted to thwart or neutralize
the impact of the control (28)."
8 .1
Limitation of Second, Third, ... Car Ownership
Analysis of the survey presented in Appendix F of this report
indicates that the vehicle mileage attributable to family cars designated
by respondents as car #2, #3, #4, etc., account for nearly 42 percent of
total annual vehicle mileage (see Sample Calculation #10 in Appendix E).
Conceivably a program which restricts the use of second and third family
cars might result in significant reductions in VMT.
Quantification of the impact of such a program is very difficult for
several reasons.
It is not presently known how many trips by these "extra"
cars are unnecessary.
One would expect that the necessary trips would be
shifted to the principal family car but vehicle mile reductions would
result from the elimination of some unnecessary trips and the shift of
some trips to alternate modes of travel.
via the primary family car is difficult.
Estimating the increase in travel
In addition, it is not presently
- 172-
-------
Source:
Figure 8.1.
Relative Costs for Varying Degrees of Controls
-J
C>
a:::
I-
z
C>
U
I..L.
C>
l-
V')
C>
U
POLICING COSTS
PREDOMINATE
-J
c:r:
I-
C>
I-
INDIRECTNESS OF CONTROLS*
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
INFORMATION COSTS
PREDOMINATE
~
*Different controls are assumed along the horizontal axis with
the most direct to the left and the most indirect to the right
D'Arge, R.C., "Economic Policies, Environmental Problems,
and Land Use: A Discussion of Some Issues and Strategies
in Research," presented at NSF Conference on Research Needs
in Planning our Physical Environment, Boulder, Colorado
July 25- Aug. 5, 1972.
-173-
-------
known how many of the designated second or third cars arp. indeed subsidiary
in importance to the primary car (e.~., husband and wife must both work,
but in opposite directions from home, therefore, both need a car).
Many
of the above uncertainties are a function of the availability of alternative
modes of transportation.
Presumably, implementation of a pro~ram restricting multiple-car
ownership would be accomplished through the present vehicle registration
program.
For example, a graduated registration fee increasinq with the
number of family vehicles registered might be implemented.
However, it
appears that many options would be open to circumvent such a restriction.
Automobiles cannot be attributable to a family by surname because presently
a housewife, for example, may use her maiden name in registering a car.
Similarly, the address of the owner cannot be used as the business address
of the owner may be substituted on the registration.
Unrelated roommates
with the same surname would also be unduly penalized by such a system.
Consequently, restrictions placed specifically on second or third cars
will be difficult to implement under current registration procedures.
A
restriction on all cars would be easier to implement and would lower second
or third car usage indirectly.
8.2 Limitation of Auto Registrations
Figure 2.10 shows the growth in automobile registrations in the Basin.
A program which would slow down this growth might result in significant
automobile emission reductions.
Each car that is brought into thp. Basin
will be adding to the total vehicle miles driven and if an older car
could be exported, a correspondinq drop in vehicle miles miqht be expected.
Since emissions from older cars are generally greater than those from
newer cars, a resultant drop in emissions would occur.
-174-
-------
The effect of such a program cannot be quantified principally because
of the following.
Although it can be assumed that there is a basic average
level of travel, experience has shown that newer cars are utilized more.
Thus, there would probably be a tradeoff -- as the vehicle population
becomes newer, while being held at essentially a constant level, the
average number of miles traveled per car may go up.
Reaching a zero growth level in itself would be difficult in the short
run because it would be difficult to control the re9istration of vehicles
brought into the area by new residents.
As long as the relevant planning
organizations do nothing to discourage qrowth in the Basinwide population,
one should expect these new residents to come.
Although the population
growth is slowing down, a net emigration from the Basin cannot be expected
by 1977.
The only other source of control would be on the purchase of new autos.
One could conceive of a program which required the exportation or junking
of a car before a new car could be purchased.
Trading of cars presently
in the Basin would be exempt, but before a dealer could sell a car that
was previously not registered in the Basin he would be required to demolish
or export a car that was registered.
There are several possible implications of such a program.
For example,
the used c~~ supply in the Basin would probably go down.
The emissions
impact would be positive, but as with most pricing schemes there is the risk
of undue discrimination against the financially disadvantaged people of the
Basin, who would find it increasingly difficult to own cars.
In addition, such a measure could create an artificial market for
junkers to be exported, resulting in higher prices for new autos.
Initially,
one might expect a reduction in second car ownerships as the "extra"
-175-
-------
family cars were exported, but after that supply has been diminished, it is
possible that families will keep their primary cars longer.
Before such a
program is implemented, a closer look should be made of the microeconomic
implications.
Possibly some governmental subsidy would be required to
accelerate the shift to a newer vehicle population, in which case, it is
not at all clear the benefits would exceed the costs.
8.3 Limitation of Gasoline Consumed (Gas Rationing)
Since air pollution is most directly related to the consumption of
gasoline, an obvious control strategy is to restrict or regulate its use.
Gasoline rationing was implemented during World War II as a conservation
measure (see Appendix I for history of gasoline rationing during the War).
Many who were involved in the program viewed it as a necessary evil, and
although the rationing system had many shortcomings, it was effective in
conserving gasoline and significantly reducing VMT.
As seen in Figure 8.2,
it was also a very effective measure in increasing transit patronage.
Gas rationing during the war, although a severe measure, appears to be the
only measure implemented during the last 50 years which has been able to
effect reduced auto use and induce increased transit ridership.
In view of the massive pollutant reductions required to achieve the
air quality standards, it appears that rationing gasoline is the only
alternative which would accomplish the task.
Such a program has serious
implications for the present life styles of the Rasin's residents and
needs a more detailed evaluation before it can be advocated.
As a control strategy, gasoline rationing does have some features
which make it attractive:
.
Interim control strategy - of the measures considered, it has
a relatively high adaptability for use as a seasonal control
strategy.
-176-
-------
Figure 8.2.
25
,.... 20
~
0
..-I
~
~
..-I
.J:J
d
..-I 1:,
.......
'"
ill
..-I
I-<
I-<
<\I
U
en
I-< 10
ill
00
d
ill
en
en
<\I
Po<
5
en
I-< 600
<\I
U
,....
I-< en
ill ill
OO~
d..-l
ill E1
en I
en I-<
<\I <\I 400
Po< ()
>. d
.J:J 0
..-I
~~
iII~
>..-1
<\I.J:J
I-<
1-< d
..-I 200
~.......
<\I
...
0
1-<
1910
Source:
Trends in Public Transit Patronage in the United States
URBAN AND RURAL AUTOMOB ILE TRAVEL
IN UNITED STATES
1920
1930
1950
1960
1940
Haase, R. H., Are We Willing to Pay for Congestion-Free
Transportation?, Rand Corporation, P-2813, January, 1964.
-177-
-------
.
Not irreversible - properly desiqned and administered, rationing
could be very flexible; unlike strategies such as retrofit devices,
this control can be easily and quickly lifted.
.
Mid-course corrections possible - the degree of control necessary
can be changed easily to adjust for changing conditions and
circumstances.
.
Not technology dependent - does not rely on non-existent or
unproven technology (e.g., catalytic converters).
Cost effective - the consumer is inconvenienced but should save
money.
.
.
Induces other programs effectively, e.g., car pooling and increased
public transit.
Conservation oriented - aimed at prevention rather than cure; fuel
economy likely to be increased rather than decreased (e.g., some
retrofit devices).
.
.
Precedent and experience available - the proqram has been
instituted before; hopefully, the pitfalls of the World War II
experience can be anticipated and minimized.
Relatively rapid response - the time lag for experiencinq air
quality improvements is less than most programs, e.q., pricing
schemes.
.
Despite the features of a gas rationing program as a control strateqy,
there are at least an equal number of real obstacles and problems which can
be anticipated should any attempts be made to implement and enforce such
a program.
It is these issues which must be adequately addressed and
studied before a gas rationing program can be recommended.
difficulties to be encountered are:
Among the
.
Administrative problems - the World War II program appears to
have encountered signficiant administrative prohlems.
Institutional constraints - it is unlikely many institutions
will support a massive rationing program.
.
.
Enforcement problems - black markets, bootlegging and counter-
feiting of coupons were all widespread practices during the War;
these problems would probably pose even more of a problem today.
-178-
-------
.
Micro-economic implications - any massive rationing program will
significantly affect the economy of the region affected; these
effects are difficult to assess accurately but they would be major.
.
Lack of alternative modes of travel - it has yet to be determined
how much additional travel can be handled either by the present
transit system or by a projected increase in levels of transit
service.
.
Public acceptability - it is doubtful much public support could
be mustered for a gasoline rationing program.
.
Legal status - it is unclear if the legal authority to implement
such a program exists.
If the implementation obstacles for establishin9 a gasoline rationing
program can b~ dealt with adequately, Figure 8.3 illustrates schematically
how such a program could be monitored.
The key questions which must be
addressed are presented in the diamonds; responses and program monitoring
elements are given in the rectangles.
Actually, any interim VMT reduction
strategy could be set up to be monitored in this fashion since the same
questions have to be answered.
The chart in Figure 8.3 shows an ongoing feedback and control network.
To start the program a target VMT must be specified lower than the present
VMT and which would result in a significant air quality improvement.
The
goal is to iterate through the cycle several times until a VMTo can be
reached which will allow attainment of the standard and yet provide for
all essential travel through provisions for increased carpooling, transit
services, etc. The goal of attaining VMTo must be superseded, however,
by the qualification that there is a minimum level of travel below which
the economy and normal functions of the Los Angeles region cannot function,
i.e., the program should proceed only as close to the goal as possible
without killing Los Angeles.
-179-
-------
Figure 8.3
Gas Rationing
Monitoring Network
Sf i r I:' ~
RA T I r:~j L £ '/{ i
I
--'
','(J
--------- -,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L______- ----
- - - - - - - - ---
00
a
I
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
liKPEASE
NO TE S :
1) VMTo is level of VMT to meet standard
2) Measure means measure VMT, Auto occupancy, Transit PiderS~l~, Essentlal Trips, etc.
3) _u is an optional oath.
4) $ means make gas rationing less stringent
5) e means make gas rationing more stringent
-------
The target VMTo can be modified at any time to take account of tech-
nological breakthroughs, changing vehicle age distributions, new land use
patterns, or simrly a change in the rigidity of the air quality standard.
Conceivably, the program could be ongoing, running through two six month
cycles per year -- the summer VMTo would be more stringent than the winter
VMT , due to the seasonal nature of the oxidant problem. Durinq the winter
o
cycle, the previous summer results could be evaluated and decisions made
for the appropriate VMT goal for the forthcoming summer season.
The optional path drawn on the diagram is to constantly look for a
chance to relieve the system of the gas rationing element.
The program
places a priority on trying to achieve higher transit and carpooling levels
before attempting to dictate the number of trips allowed and leaves as a
last resort a relaxation of the standard.
On the other hand, it recognizes
that it takes a finite lead time to implement an increase in transit
ridership.
Indirect controls such as pricing schemes could be monitored in the
same manner.
In this case, one would simply replace the gas rationing
level with an "emissions tax" or "smog tax."
These controls have several
disadvantages although they are probably much more acceptable to the public.
First, the length of a typical cycle would be longer because of short term
and long term demand elasticities.
This also makes it much more difficult
to monitor.
To fully assess the potential impact of a pricing scheme would
probably require at least two years, i.e., to complete one iteration or
cyc 1 e .
Also, after the completion of a cycle, it is difficult to accurately
determine the appropriate level of control necessary for a desired change
because the responses to indirect controls are likely to be non-linear.
-181-
-------
In other words, doubling the tax is not likely to result in twice the VMT
reduction experienced from the first tax.
The response from direct controls
tends to be much more linear and therefore, more predictable.
-182-
-------
9.0 SUPPLY OF ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORATION
It must be assumed that there is a level of trip making in the
South Coast Basin which is viewed by the residents as necessary for
economic and social well being.
Governmental jurisdictions (Federal,
State, County. local) have enabled this mobility by funding, constructing,
and maintaining facilities for personal transportation and through the
provision of public transit either directly or through franchised, possi-
bly subsidized, operations.
This minimum level of mobility is not well
defined through present data sources; to date the objective in transporta-
tion planning has been to satisfy travel demand and maximize mobility.
Only recently has the need for some limitation on mobility in the larger
urban areas been recognized.
The ramp metering project conducted by the
California Division of Highways, which was described previously, is a
prime example of current techniques which involve restriction of certain
individuals' mobility.
Various strategies discussed in this report attempt to affect
automobile emissions reductions through reductions in vehicle miles of
travel which would result in one of the following:
diversion of trips
from automobile trips to other modes of travel (bus, car pool, bicycle.
walking, new "pollution-free" vehicle) or an elimination of the trip.
If the alternative modes of transportation are deficient in supply, it
is possible that the level of trip making will reach the previously
mentioned minimum point before the desired VMT reduction can be realized.
Further VMT reductions will only be possible if increased capabilities
for alternative modes of travel are provided.
the minimum trip making level must be defined.
Hence, it is clear that
-183-
-------
It is also necessary to know what the supply or potential supply of
alternative modes of transportation are before
embarking on any large-
scale VMT reduction program.
Table 9.1 presents the current supply of
buses in the South Coast Basin.
It is estimated that on short notice the
current bus supply could be raised to approximately 2000 buses (see Sample
Calculation #11 in Appendix E); however, many more buses will be necessary
to meet the increased demands for transit that will result from the pro-
posed VMT reductions.
Table 9.1.
Current Supply of Buses in South Coast Basin
Transit Organization
SCRTD
Number of Buses
1511
9a
Orange County Transit District
Long Beach Municipal
Santa Monica Municipal
Montebello Municipal
Torrance Municipal
Culver City Municipal
123
105
19
50
21
-
Total
~ OCTO will have 250 buses by 1975
1838
SOURCE:
From most recent financial statements of each
organization.
Based on meeting the commute period travel demands the required bus
supply was calculated in Sample Calculation #11 (Appendix E) for various
levels of commute transit riderships.
The results are displayed pictori-
ally in Figure 9.1.
To achieve a 20 per cent transit ridership during
commute times, approximately 5000 buses or 3000 more than the estimated
supply will be required, resulting in a 4 per cent total VMT reduction
(plus any ridership changes that could be achieved during off peak hours).
-184-
-------
........
~
-- 80
Cl.
.c
V1
S-
Q)
-0
~ 60
~
.,...
V1
s::
ro
S-
I- 40
Q)
~
~
~
o
u
100
20
Estimated Supply - "" 2200 Buses
I
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Required Number of Buses (thousands)
Assumptions:
1 )
2)
3)
1977 trip distribution
Average occupancy of 40 persons per bus
Each bus makes three round trips during
each commute period
Fig u re 9. 1
Bus Requirements for Commute Transit Riderships
-185-
-------
The present cost of conventinnAl urh~n huses is nn the order of
$40,000 per bus.
If 3000 more buses were required, as discussed in the
previous example, a capital outlay of $120 million would he required for
bus purchases alone, not to mention requirements for the hiring of new
employees, planning, etc.
It should be recognized that fixed costs
(capital costs, etc.) normally account for only about 20 to 30 per cent
of the cost of providing conventional transit services.
In comparisont
SCRTD's initial estimates for the cost of a fixed rail rapid transit
system was $1.2 billion in 1968.
Through present sources of funds (see Appendix D) it will not be
possible to make an acquisition of that large a fleet.
SCRTD, for example in
1972, has been allotted only $43 million through the Mills-Alquist-Deddeh Act
(SB 325) for transit planning and capital expenditures (89).
funds would have to be mandated through additional legislation.
Additional
Even if the financial obstacles could be overcome, the interim
nature of vehicle restraints that might be implemented (i .e. until newer,
more controlled vehicles dominate the auto population) requires that an
important policy decision be made.
Is such a large capital outlay justi-
fied if the new, forced demand for mass transit will only be temporary?
In other words, are the short-range transportation goals and requirements
of this program consistent with the long-range transportation needs of the
Basin? It would seem .reasonable to allow for the necessary lead time
ation of the artificial transit demand created by vehicle use restraints.
would retain a high level of attractiveness and utility. even after elmini-
ation of the artificial transit demand created by vehicle use restraints?
This ultimately will be accomplished through better land use planning.
186-
-------
Social costs of air pollution are not well quanitified.
A sounder,
more balanced basis for analysis must be developed before the policy
decisions and trade-offs outlined above can be properly evaluated and
acted upon.
In addition to the financial implementation obstacles, the limiting
factor for vast expansions to bus services is the present bus production
capabilities of the United States.
SCRTD personnel (89) indicated the
two major companies producing conventional urban transit buses are opera-
ting essentially at capacity.
Numerous other cities, in addition to Los
Angeles, will be attempting to acquire large numbers of new buses on
short delivery schedules as part of their programs to meet the 1977 air
quality standards.
The willingness and ability of the major bus producers
and other manufacturers to gear up to meet such a high, short-term demand
is uncertain as is the economic impact it would have on the price of buses.
Increases in transit capacities can be achieved by means other than
the purchase of new buses.
For example, the licensing of jitney opera-
tions, presently illegal in the Basin could help meet the new peak hour
demands for transit.
Taxi services could be subsidized during peak hours
so that they could be used to feed and redistribute patrons of truckline
routes (e.g. buses on exclusive freeway lanes).
Additional incentives
for carpooling could be implemented.
Bicycling, which is a potentially
viable mode of transportation in the Basin, could be encouraged through
the careful addition of bicycle routes.
The above schemes all merit
further study; however, it is not expected that implementation of these
programs could substantially reduce the bus fleet requirements.
-187-
-------
10.0 PROPOSED CONTROL STRATEGY (SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN)
The relationship between air pollutant emissions and ambient air
quality is still not well understood, despite major efforts to develop
both sophisticated analytical and statistical models. (33,47,81,83)
The inaccuracies in the ability to predict air quality result from many
factors, some of which are:
.
Inadequate and questionable emission inventories
. Questionable air quality data
. The representativeness of test cycles to actual driving pat-
terns; e.g., 7-mode vs. CVS
. The uncertainties of the real effectiveness of various control
strategies.
The control strategy recommendations presented are based on propor-
tional rollback techniques that relate estimated emissions to air quality
in a linear fashion.
This has been done primarily because of the time
constraints of the study.
The validity of this technique is highly ques-
tionable and consequently does not serve as an adequate basis on which
to implement severe control measures.
Full implementation of the control measures outlined should allow
attainment of the air quality standards by the 1977 target date.
Imple-
mentation of Phase I measures can be justified on the basis of air qual-
ity improvements at reasonable costs.
The impact of implementing the
Phase II control measures is staggering.
This study had neither the
time nor the data base to fully evaluate the social, political, and
economic ramifications of such a measure.
Hence, it cannot be recom-
mended at this time although it would, in all probability. result in the
desired goal.
-188-
-------
The control measures outlined are not new and have been proposed
elsewhere; no "magic solution" was found and only incremental improve-
ments can be expected from each strategy.
The primary reason for this
is a host of control options were evaluated, the large majority of
which proved to be relatively ineffective.
The California Air Re-
sources Board is actively engaged in field testing a variety of control 1
strategies and has extensive experience in the field of air pollution
control; it would be a mistake to usurp their efforts and knowledge with
massive unproven control measures.
The severity of the air pollution
left few alternatives for measures which would be adequate to accomplish
the program requirements.
Phase I Measures:
1.
Evaporative Controls (See Section 4.2) - Accelerate the evalua-
tion program of evaporative control devices for 1966-1969 vehicles.
At
the earliest date, if the devices are shown to be effective and available,
a mandatory installation program should be implemented.
2.
Oxidizing Catalytic Converters (See Section 4.2) - Accelerate
the evaluation program of oxidizing catalytic converters.
If these con-
verters are effective and become available, incentives should be made to
encourage their use on 1966-1974 vehicles.
3.
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance (See Section 4.1) - Implement
a program of inspection and maintenance for in-use vehicles.
The pro-
gram recommended is the second stage expansion of the recommended pro-
gram of the Governor's Task Force on Periodic yehicle Inspection and
Maintenance.
This measure will provide significant reductions in motor
vehicle emissions and is necessary to derive the full benefit from both
-189-
-------
new and used car emission controls.
This should result in a reduction of
ten to twelve percent of the reactive hydrocarbons left uncontrolled in
1977 (approximately 40 tons/day).
4.
Mandatory Conversion of Fleet Vehicles to Burn Gaseous Fuels
(See Section 4.3) - Implement a program requiring the conversion of all
fleet vehicles of model years 1970-1974 to use a gaseous fuel.
This
measure will significantly improve the emissions from vehicles which
presently account for a disproportionate share of the miles travelled
in the South Coast Air Basin.
The reduction from this program is estima-
ted to be approximately 12 tons/day of reactive hydrocarbons.
5.
Evaporative Loss Controls (See Section 4.4) - Implement a pro-
gram to substantially reduce hydrocarbon losses from fueling operations,
specifically from the loading of underground storage tanks at the gaso-
line station and from the service pump to the automobile fuel tank.
The control of these marketing losses is estimated to be approximately 65
tons/day of reactive hydrocarbons.
6.
Additional Stationary Source Controls - Stationary source con-
trols were not evaluated as part of this study; however, as mobile source
controls become more effective, the proportionate contribution of sta-
tionary sources to the problem will increase.
The emission reductions
claimed from this strategy were calculated by the EPA and have tenta-
tive1y been accepted.
They are as follows: 6 tons/day from dry cleaning
vapor control, 25 tons/day from degreaser substitution. and 45 tons/day
from a 50 percent strengthening of the Los Angeles County Air Pollution
Control District's Rule 66.
All in all, approximately 76 tons/day of
reactive hydrocarbons can be controlled from additional stationary source
controls.
-190-
-------
7.
Mass Transit (See Chapters 7.0-9.0) - The level of mass transit
available presently is totally inadequate to handle any substantial
increases in ridership.
Improving mass transit both in terms of fre-
quency and efficiency of service and the breadth of coverage in areas
served, is a necessary first step to attract additional riders.
It is
also needed for making any measures which discourage private auto use
more effective.
Finally, should Phase II be implemented, it is impera-
tive as an alternative mode of travel.
A much closer examination should
be given to establishing express bus and carpool lanes on certain free-
ways.
Park-and-ride facilities, as well as bicycling, should be en-
couraged in more areas of the Basin.
Implementation of a series of mass transit improvements plus a vari-
ety of incentives to discourage the private use of the automobile should
result in a 5-8 percent reduction of VMT in 1977.
The reduction in re-
active hydrocarbons is estimated to be no more than 5 percent of the
remaining controllable emissions or approximately 17 tons/day after the
implementation of the Phase I measures.
-191-
-------
Phase II Measure:
8.
a) VMT Reduction (See Section 8.3) - Implement a massive program
to significantly reduce the vehicle miles travelled within the Basin, hence
eliminating the major source of hydrocarbon emissions.
This can probably
be done most effectively by rationing the gasoline supply.
Rationing can
be accomplished either by limiting the supply to the actual consumers from
the gasoline station or from the refinery to the service station; or
b) Evaporative Retrofit Device and/or Oxidizing Catalytic Conver-
ters with VMT Reduction - If upon completion of the Air Resources Board's
studies of these controls (Measures 1 and 2). it can be shown these devices
can make a significant impact on the air quality improvement of the Basin,
implement programs to require their installation.
A detailed examination
should be made of costs and benefits to be derived by a mandatory retrofit
program.
This will become more important as time passes and the older cars
represent a smaller contribution to the overall problem.
Assuming a given reduction in VMT is the equivalent percent reduction
in gasoline consumed, an 87 percent VMT reduction is required beyond the
Phase I measures.
This would result in approximately 292 tons/day of re-
active hydrocarbons not being discharged into the atmosphere (283 tons/day
from vehicular emissions and an additional 9 tons/day from marketing losses).
This same level of control could be accomplished by an 81 percent VMT
reduction after implementing mandatory installation of the controls de-
scribed in Measures 1 and 2(evaporative control devices and oxidizing cat-
a1ytic converters).
would then become:
The approximate reductions in reactive hydrocarbons
26 tons/day from evaporati~e control devices;
84 tons/
day from oxidizing catalytic converters;
8 tons/day from marketing losses;
and 174 tons/day from an 81 percent VMT reduction after all other control
measures had been implemented.
-192-
-------
Figure 10.1 summarizes the impact of the strategies outlined and
their contribution to arriving at the desired goal.
10. 1
Implementation Obstacles
Implementation obstacles for the various control measures outlined
generally fall into the several categories shown below.
A brief eva1ua-
tion of the probable obstacles likely to be encountered for each control
measure is presented.
Technical Obstacles - Obstacles involving the design of hardware,
details of administrative procedure, or specification of standards or
acceptance limits necessary for implementing recommended control mea-
sures.
Legislative Obstacles - Obstacles involving the writing and passing
of laws, rules, and regulations required for instituting and administer-
ing control measur~s.
Socio-Economic Obstacles - Obstacles involving the impact of control
measures on the public, commerce, and industry.
Political Obstacles - Obstacles involving the feasibility of pro-
ductive interaction among appropriate leaders, administrators, legisla-
tors, and special interest groups for the purpose of instituting recom-
mended control measures.
1, 2.
Evaporative Controls and Oxidizing Catalytic Converters ~
The acceleration of these two evaluation programs should be possible
without major implementation obstacles.
Implementation of these programs,
however, would require additional legislation due to the estimated costs
of these controls.
3.
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance - Would require additional leg-
is1ation; this might be difficult in view of the fact that three such
bills died in the Legislature during 1972 (see Appendix J - Section II).
-193-
-------
Figure 10.1
The Impact of Proposed Control Strategy on
Reducing Reactive Hydrocarbon Emissions (1977)
700
V'! 600
I::
0
'r-
V'!
V'!
'r- 500
E
L.i.I
I::
0 ..........
..a >, 400
s... to
to I::)
U -
0 V'!
s... I::
" 0
>, I- 300
:I: --
(]) "Allowable
>
'r-
~ 200 Emissions"
u
to
(])
a:::
100
I'T1 c: CJ CJ 3: 3: 3: 3: 3: 3:
3~ 01:: ro ro ro ro ro ro
......() ~""1 QJ QJ QJ QJ QJ QJ
V'! 0 rT""1 V'! V'! V'! V'! c.n V'!
c.n~ ""1ro I:: c: c: I:: c: I::
...... rT O~ ""1 ""1 ""1 ""1 ""1 ""1
0""1 ...... rT ro ro ro ro ro ro
~o V'! ......
c.n ...... '< w ~ ()'l 0"1 ""'-J (X)
......
ro "'U
0. ......
QJ
~
~
ro
0.
o Motor Vehi cl es
illllill Aircraft, Motorcycles, etc.
[iSA Stationary Sources
-194-
-------
A number of studies on the subject have been conducted by the State and
the public is apparently ready to accept it.
are impeding this control measure.
The legislative obstacles
4.
Mandatory Conversion of Fleet Vehicles to Burn Gaseous Fuels -
Would require additional legislation; again, the Legislature has not been
favorable to this type of bill.
Reaction from those to be affected has
been mixed, ranging from fleets voluntarily converting to gaseous fuels
to operators who have come out in public opposition to any such measure.
5.
Evaporative Loss Controls - Since several local APCD's have
adopted regulations to control these sources, there should only be minor
problems in implementing this control measure; presently, the main prob-
lem is the availability of hardware to use at the stations and on the
automobile fuel tanks.
6. Additional Stationary Source Controls - Presently, under the
jurisdiction of the local APCD's, implementation should be possible with
the main opposition coming from those sources to be controlled.
7.
Mass Transit - This control is out of the jurisdiction of the
ARB and would have to be implemented by the transportation agencies of
the area (e.g., Southern California Association of Governments, Southern
California Rapid Transit District, Orange County Transit District).
Improvements of the types required will require additional funding, most
probably from the Federal level.
The long range planning of transporta-
tion agencies may conflict with the short range needs of this program.
8.
VMT Reduction - A large scale VMT reduction through gasoline
rationing will be extremely difficult to implement.
Since nearly everyone
will be affected, opposition can be expected on all fronts.
Due to the
-195-
-------
severity of the measure, the political, institutional, socio-economic
constraints are likely to force a reevaluation of the overall program
obj ecti ves .
10.2 Implementation Time Schedule
The time schedule for implementation of the outlined control mea-
sures is presented in Table 10.1.
The dates given for the control
strategies generally represent "target dates" which would result in the
maximum benefit being derived from the program; the necessary lead times
have been considered.
The following discussions present some considera-
tions which went into the implementation scheduling.
1.
Evaporative Control Devices - The currently proposed evaluation
program for these devices will probably be completed by late 1973.
If
warranted upon completion of the study, applications for certification
of specific devices will probably take another nine months or so.
Since
additional legislation would be required for such a retrofit program,
the earliest date one would expect such a program to be implemented, if
at all, would be early 1975.
It is recommended that the study and cer-
tification program schedule be accelerated; simultaneously, efforts should
be made to obtain the necessary legislation to implement such a program.
The passage of time alone eliminates the number of 1966-1969 vehicles.
Implementation of this program in 1974 would result in a larger reduction
of hydrocarbon emissions from these sources.
2.
Oxidizing Catalytic Converters - The current testing program of
prototype catalytic converters should be ex paDded and accelerated to
determine their feasibility as a retrofit on 1966-1974 vehicles.
If
these devices can be proven as workable on a large sample of cars, a
-196-
-------
program should be implemented to encourage their use.
Additional 1egis-
1ation would again be required to implement a mandatory installation
program.
3.
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance - The feasibility and costs
for a variety of inspection/maintenance programs have been evaluated in
California; however, there has been difficulty in obtaining the required
legislation to institute such a measure.
The earliest date for imp1e-
menting such a program in the South Coast Air Basin appears to be 1974-
1975.
4.
Gaseous Fuel Conversion - To derive the maximum benefit of this
program, implementation should begin as soon as possible.
Legislation
for such a program could not be expected until 1973.
should be completed by January 1975.
Implementation
5.
Evaporative Loss Controls - Currently being held up by the sup-
ply of available hardware devices for service stations and non-standardized
automobile fuel tank fill pipes.
6.
Additional Stationary Source Controls - Although stationary
sources are under numerous rules and regulations, as mobile sources come
under stringent controls, additional ways will have to be found to further
control stationary sources.
Especially in the Los Angeles region, new
stationary sources should be carefully regulated.
Mass Transit - Improvement and expansions are limited by the
7.
current supply of buses.
The lead time required for a large order of new
buses is on the order of two to three years.
Legalizing jitney services
could be accomplished in a shorter time frame.
The legal authority pres-
ent1y exists for establishing exclusive bus and car pool lanes.
No spe-
cific legal authority is needed to institute park-and-ride facilities.
-197-
-------
8.
VMT Reduction - If it becomes necessary to implement thlS control
measure, it should be done so gradually.
This measure should be used
initially as an interim control during the peak oxidant season (May-
October).
At least one season at a low to moderate level of rationing
would be necessary to work out the administrative procedures and to mon-
itor the impacts on the Basin.
Again, if necessary, it could be expanded
to a year-round program with two levels of rationing - one for the summer
season and one for the winter.
-198-
-------
Table 10.1
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIME SCHEDULE
I
.....
~
\0
I
Control Measure 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
Revised Implementation Plan Submitted to A
EPA (February 15, 1973)
Legislative Authority Required for Controls
California Air Resources Board
, Obtain enabling legislation for A
inspection/maintenance
, Obtain enabling legislation for .
gaseous fuel conversion of fleets
, Obtain enabling legislation for ~
additional retrofit devises
(to be used ~ if proven effective)
, Obtain enabling legislation for A
gasoline rationing
Accelerate Evaporation Controls Evaluation
Program (Measure 1)
, Completion of Evaporative Control Study A.i
, Certification Program (if warranted) ... ""
Accelerate Testing Program for Oxidizing
Catalytic Converters (Measure 2)
, Testing of Devices ... "
Certification Program (if warranted) '" ...
,
-------
Table 10.1
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIME SCHEDULE (CONTINUED)
I
N
o
o
I
Control Measure 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
Inspection/Maintenance Program (Measure 3)
, Program Design ..~
. Program Preparation
, Mandatory Emission Inspection Begins
Gaseous Fuel Conversion of Fleet Vehicles (Measure 4)
, Program Initiation .
...
, Program Completion
Evaporative Loss Controls (Measure 5)
, Establish necessary regulations .
(where applicable) I
Initiate program of controlling losses from I... I
.
filling of service station underground tanks
Additional Stationary Source Controls (Measure 6)
Strengthen Rule 66 (LAAPCD) ...
, -- '--- '---
, Dry cleaning vapor control -- --- ~--
, Degreaser substitution -t-'-1
-------
Table 10.1
PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIME SCHEDULE (CONTINUED)
I
N
o
......
I
Control Measure 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
Mass Transit Program (Measure 7)
Improve levels of service '" .--
. -.
Establish exclusive bus and carpool lanes & ...
.
on the freeway where feasible
Establish park-and-ride facilities were ..
.
feasible
VMT Reduction through Gasoline Rationing ... ~ ... A. A. A..A .A ... ----
(Measure 8). or
Additional Retrofit Devices (if warranted) .A. '"
with a slightly lower VMT reduction
PHASE I - MEASURE 1- 7 (RECOMMENDED)
PHASE II - MEASURES 8 (IF REQUIRED)
-------
Bibliography
1.
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, The Economics
of Clean Air, Annual Report to the Congress of the United States,
f'larch 1972.
2.
Altshuller, A. P., W. A. Lonneman, F. D. Sutterfield, and
S. L. Kopeznski, "Hydrocarbon Composition of the Atmosphere of the
Los Angeles Basin 1967," Environmental Science and Techr~,
5(10): 1009-1016 (1971).
3.
.'\shabraner, Phil, "Pressures for Better Public Transportation",
RPA Planner, vol. #12, January, 1972.
4.
5.
Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc., 1971 r~otor Truck Facts.
Babcock, R. F. and F. P. Bosselman, paper presented at NSF-Conference
on Research ~eeds in Planning our Physical Environment, Boulder,
Colorado, July 23 - August 4, 1972.
6.
Blum, E. H., Approaches to Dealing with Motor Vehicle Air Pollution,
Rand Corporation, P-3776, December 1967.
7.
Board of the Greater Los Angeles Urban Coalition, Summary: Proposed
Study of Public Benefit from Increasing Commuter Vehicle Occupancy
by 1975 in the Los Angeles Basin, unpublished paper, June 1972.
8.
California Air Resources Board, Technical Advisory Committee, Present
and Future Options for Air Pollution Control in California,
December 1971.
9.
, Recommended Air Quality Standards Applicable to All Air
Basins, September 1970.
10.
, Addendum to Control of Vehicle Emissions After 1974,
July 1971.
11.
12.
, Control of Vehicle Emissions After 1974, November 1969.
California Air Resources Board, Los Angeles County Air Pollution
Control District, Western Oil and Gas Association, Gasoline
Modification -- Its Potential as an Air Pollution Control Measure
in Los Angeles County, November 1969. -
13.
California Division of Highways, 1971 Traffic Volumes on the California
State Highways System, 1971
, 1971 Travel Time Study - Los Angeles, California, November
14.
1971 .
15.
, LARTS Base Year Report - 1967 Origin - Destination Survey,
Decerrber, 1971.
-202-
-------
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
~1.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Second
and Control Pro'ect
California Division of Highways - District 7, Freeway Inventory of
Geometric Bottleneck Congestion, February 1970.
- ' Update on the Program to Upgrade and Control the Los Angeles
Freeway Network, January 1972.
California Institute of Technology. Environmental Quality Laboratorv,
Caltech Clean Air Car Project - Gaseous Fuels Manual, Pasadena,
California, March 1972.
Carlin, A., The Implications of Geographic-Specificity for Air
Pollution Abatement Strategy. Rand Corporation, P-4237, October 1969.
Carlin, A. f'. and G. E. Kocher, Environmental Problems: Their Causes,
Cures, and Evolution Using Southern California Smog as an Example,
Rand Cor~oration, R-640 - CCIRC, May 1971.
Carlin, A. and M. Wohl, An Economic Re-Evaluation ~_t~e Proposed
Los Angeles Rapid Transit System, Rand Corporation, P-3918,
September 1968.
County of Los Angeles, Air Pollution Control District, Rules and
Regulations, 1972.
, Annual Summary Meteorology, Air Pollution Effects and
Contaminant Maxima - Calendar Years 1966-1970, Data Processing
and Meteorology Section - Technical Services Division.
, Profile of Air Pollution Control, 434 South San Pedro
Street, Los Angeles, California, 1971.
City of Los Angeles Traffic Department, Cordon Count
Los Angeles, May. 1971.
Downtown
Dales, J. H., Pollution, Property, and Prices, University of
Toronto Press, 1968.
D1Arge, R. C., "Economic Policies, Environmental Problems, and
Land Use: A Discussion of Some Issues and Strategies in Research,"
presented at NSF-Conference on Research Needs in Planning our
Physical Environment, Boulder, Colorado, July 25 - August 5. 1972.
Bubik, "Automotive Exhaust Emission
Preliminary Tests," in Project Clean
3, University of California,
D'Arge, R., T. Clark, and O.
Taxes: Methodology and Some
Air-Research Reports, Volume
September 1970.
"Effect of Changing Gas Volatility on Refining Costs," Chemical
Engineering Progress, ~:51-58 (1969).
-203-
-------
31.
32.
34.
35.
36.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
The Environmental Protection Agency, "Conversion of Motor Vehicles
to Reduce Air Pollution," (Position Paper), April 1972.
The Environmental Quality Laboratory Staff, Smog: A Report to the
People of the South Coast Air Basin, EQL Report No.4. California
Institute of Technology, 1972.
33.
Eschenroeder, A. Q. and J. R. Martinez, Further Development of the
Photochemical Smog Model for the Los Angeles Basin, General Research
Corporation, CR-1-191, March 1971.
Fort, D. M., W. A. Niskanen, A. H. Pascal, and W. F. Sharpe,
Proposal for a "Smog Tax", Rand Corporation, P-162l-RC, February 1959.
GSA Sponsored Symposium, Gaseous Fueled Vehicles and the Environment,
selected papers from the GSA sponsored symposium, May 24, 25, 26, 1972,
Washington, D. C.
37.
Gold, D., "Public Concerns and Beliefs About Air Pollution in
California: A Statewide Survey." in Project Clean Air-Research
Reports, Volume 3, University of California, 1970.
Goldman, M. I., Controlling Pollution - The Economics of a Cleaner
America, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1967.
38.
Haase, R. H., Are We Willing to Pay for Congestion - Free Trans-
portation?, Rand Corporation, P-28l3, January 1964.
Haskel, E. H., "State Governments Tackle Pollut.ion," Environmental
Science and Technology, ~(11):1092-l097, 1971.
Institute of Gas Technology. Emission Reduction Using Gaseous Fuels
for Vehicular Propulsion, June 1971.
Institute of Public Administration, Teknekron, Inc., and TRW, Inc.,
Evaluating Transportation Control to Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions
in Major Metropolitan Areas, Interim Report, March 1972.
Kagan, D., D. Newman, S. Sander, and B. Walstoncroft, Mass Transit
in Los Angeles: An Analysis, Proqram in Public Policy Studies of
the Claremont Colleges, June 1972.
Kearin, D. H. and Lamoureaux, R. L., A Survey of Average Driving
Patterns in the Los An eles Urban Area, System Development
Corporation Technical Memo TM L - 4119/000/01), February 1969.
Kramer, M., L. J. Bintz, and T. A. Tappenden, LP-Gas and the Auto-
mobile Club of Southern California, Automotive Engineering Department
Automobile Club of Southern California, June 1972.
Lee, D. B., Consequences of Service Reductions in Municipal Transit:
San Francisco's Muni, Institute of Urban and Regional Development
University of California, Berkeley, Working Pater No. 193, September 1972.
-204-
-------
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
Lees, Lester, et al, SMOG: A Report to the People, Environmental
Quality Laboratory. California Institute of Technology. 1972.
Martinez, J. R., R. A. Nordsieck, and A. Q. Eschenroeder, Morning
Vehicle - Start Effects on Photochemical Smog, General Research
Corporation, CR-2-191, June 1971.
Mayor and Council of the City of Riverside, Air Pollution Smog -
An Existing Health Hazard - An Imminent Disaster, June 1972.
Meyer, J. R., J. F. Kain, and M. Wohl, The Urban Transportation
Problem, Harvard University Press, 1965.
"Mini-VeterT.[\'1. Catalytic Converter Emission Control Systems,"
Universal Oil Products Company, November 1972.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the U. S., Inc., 1972
Automobile Facts and Figures.
Nelson, E. E., "Hydrocarbon Control for Los Angeles by Reducing
Gasoline Volatility," presented at the International Automotive
Engineering Congress, Detroit, Michigan, January 13-17, 1969.
Newman, Leonard, Dunnet, Alex r~., and ~1eis, Gerald J., "An
Evaluation of Ramp Control on the Harbor Freeway in Los Angeles,"
Highway Research Record, #303, 1969.
The Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, The Shirley Highway
Express Bus-on-Freeway Demonstration Project - A Summary of the
First Year of Operation, June 1972.
r~orthrup Corporation with Olson Laboratories, Inc. ,Mandatory Vehicle
Emission Inspection and Maintainence, Part A - Feasibility Study
Volume 1, Summary. May 1971.
, Mandatory Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintainence,
Part B - Final Report, Volume V, Part 1, Summary, December 1971.
Office of Business Economics, U. S. Department of Commerce, Economic
Projections for Air Quality Control Regions, National Technical
Information Service, PB 195805, June, 1970.
Panger, J., "Idle Emissions Testing," S.A.E. Paper No. 720937,
October, 1972.
Papetti, R. A. and F. R. Gilmore, Air Pollution, Rand Corporation
P-4571, February 1971.
Refinery Management Services Co., Motor Fuel Vapor Emission Control
Study (Draft Report), October 1972.
-205-
-------
61.
Report of the Legislative Analyst to the Joint Legislative Budget
Committe, Analysis of t~e Budget Bill of the State of California
for the Fiscal Year July 1, 1972 to June 30, 1973, California
Legislature 1972 Regular Session, 1972.
62.
Report of the Panel on Automotive Fuels and Air Pollution, Auto-
motive Fuels and Air Pollution, U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Ma~1971.
63.
Rose, A. H., R. Smith, W. F. McMichael, and R. E.
of Auto Exhaust Emissions from Two Major Cities,"
Air Pollution Control Association Annual Meeting,
June 1964.
Kruse, "Compari son
presented at the
Houston, Texas,
64.
Shooter, D. and A. Kalelkar, The Benefits and Risks Associated with
Gaseous Fueled Vehicles, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Case 74400-2,
May, 1972.
"Solvent Vapors Under Fire," Environmental Science and Technology,
~(1l):1086-1087, 1971.
65.
66.
Southern California Association of Governments, Employment Pro-
jections for the SCAG Area, (unpublished information) rjovember 1972.
Southern California Rapid Transit District, Fast Facts on the RTD,
April 1971.
67.
68.
Southern California Rapid Transit District, California Division
of Hi gl1ways - Di s tri ct 7, San Bernardi no Freeway Express Busway
Project - Facts at a Glance, January 1972.
"Standards for r~otor Vehicle Fuels'; Subchapter 5, Section 2251 from
Register 72, r~o. 31, July 29,1972.
69.
70.
State of California, Department of Motor Vehicles, Projected Motor
Vehicle Registration and Drivers Licenses Outstanding 1970-1985,
Report No. 31, March 1970.
71.
State of California, Environmental Quality Study Council, Progress
Report, February 1971.
72.
State of California, Governor's Task Force on Periodic Vehicle
Inspection and Maintainence for Emissions Control, Task Force
Report on Periodic Vehicle Inspection and Maintainence for Emissions
Control, and Recommended Program, October 1972.
73.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
Air Pollution Control in California 1970, January 1971.
, Air Pollution Control in California 1971, January 1972.
74.
75.
, "Effect of Speed on Emissions," Project ~1-220, March 1971.
-206-
-------
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
, California Emission Inventory 1970, July 1972, pp.41-52.
, "Modification or Conversion of Vehicles to Operate on
Natural Gas or Liquid Petroleum Gas Fuel," November 1, 1971.
, "Status Report on Used Car Devices," February 16,1972.
. ,.T~e State of.Ca1ifornia Implementation Plan for Achieving
and nalntalnlng the Natlona1 Ambient Air Quality Standards,
January 30, 1972.
"Statement on Cost of Changing Fuel Composition," November 10, 1969
(author unknown).
Systems Applications, Inc., Development of a Simulation Model for
Estimating Ground Level Concentrations of Photochemical Pollutants,
Report 71 SAI-21, July 1971.
Transportation for the Future: Mass or Mess? A special conference
on transportation, October 19.1972, Los Angeles, California.
a.
~100rehead, J. D., "A Paper on Funding Transportation in California"
b.
Ralph, E., "Article 26:
California"
Obstacle to Improved Transportation in
c.
Ackermann, W. 0., "Southern California Regional Transportation
Planning"
d.
Siegel, B., "Regional Transportation Planning in Southern
California Comment, Critique and a New Approach"
83.
Trijonis, John C., An Economic Air Pollution Control Model Application:
Photochemical Smog in Los Angeles County in 1975, Ph.D. Thesis,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, 1972.
84.
U. S. Government, General Services Administration, A Report on the
General Services Administration's Dual-Fuel Vehicle Experiment -
Pollution Reduction with Cost Savings.
85.
Voelz, F. L., et al, "Exhaust Emission Levels of In-Service Vehicles -
Comparison of 1970 and 1971 Surveys,"S. A. E. Paper No. 720498,
~1ay, 1972.
86.
Alan M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc., Los Angeles Mode Choice Model
Development Study, February, 1972.
West, John and Schaefer, Bill, Developing a Freeway Traffic ~1anage-
ment System for Los Angeles, Presentation to A.A.S.H.O., Houston,
Texas, November, 1970.
87.
-207-
-------
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
Personal communications with California Division of Highways -
District 7 staff personnel, October 1972.
Personal communications with Southern California Rapid Transit
District staff personnel, October, 1972.
Personal communications with Orange County Transit District staff
personnel. October, 1972.
Personal communications with the Traffic Engineer, City of Los
Angeles, November, 1971.
Personal communications with California Division of Highways,
District 7, Advance Planning staff personnel, November, 1972.
Branch, M.C. and E.Y. Leong (eds.), Research Investigation-
Air Pollution and City Plannin9, Environmental Science and
Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, 1972.
California Air Resources Board, Technical Advisory Committee,
Emission Control of Used Cars; Available Options: Their Effec-
tiveness, Cost and Feasibility, June, 1971.
State of California, The Resources Agency. Air Resources Board,
"A Report to the Legislature on Vehicle Emission Inspection,"
July 1, 1971.
-208-
-------
APPENDIX A
AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND EMISSION INVENTORY
TABLE A-1
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
(Primary-protective of public health)
POLLUTANT
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Particulate Matter
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Photochemical Oxidants
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Oxides
LEVEL NOT TO BE EXCEEDED1
3 2
80 ~q/m (0.03 ppm)
3 3
365 ~g/m 4(0.14 ppm)
3
75 110/[11 3
3
260 !lg/m
10 m9/m3
3
40 m9/m
160 tJg/m3
160 ~g/m3
1 00 ~g/m3
5
(9 pDm)
6
(35 pom)
(0.08 ppm)6
(0.24 ppm)7
2
(0.05 ppm)
1~g/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter of air, 10-6g/m3); ppm (parts per
million of air); mg/m3 (milligrams per cubic meter of air, 10-3g/m3)
2Annua1 arithmetic mean.
3Maximum 24-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once a year.
4Annua1 geometric mean.
5Maximum 8 -hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once a year.
6Maximum one-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once a year.
7Maximum 3-hour concentration (6-9 a.m.) not to be exceeded more than
once a year.
Source:
See Reference A-1
A-1
-------
TABLE A-2
CALIFORNIA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
POLLUTANT
~ Oxidant, including
, ozone (03)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Visibility-Reducing
Particulates
Suspended Particulate
Ma tte r
Lead (particulate)
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S)
Nitru~en Dioxide (N02)
CONCENTRATION
o . 1 0 ppm
10 ppm
40 ppm
0.5 ppm
0.04 ppm
Insufficient amount to
reduce the prevailing
visibility to 10 miles
when relative humidity
is less than 70%*
60 jJg/m3
100 jJg/m3
1.5 jJg/m3
0.03 ppm
0.25 ppm
DURATION OF
AVERAGING PERIOD
1 hour
12 hours
1 hour
1 hour
24 hours
1 observation
24-hour samole, annual
geometric mean
24-hour sample
30-day average
1 hour
1 hour
*Prevailing visibility is defined as the greatest visibility which is
attained or surpassed around at least half of the horizon circle, but
not necessarily in continuous sectors.
Source:
See Reference A-2.
A-2
-------
TABLE A-3
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN EMISSION INVENTORY (1970)
~
I
W
Emission Source Organic Gases Parti-
(Tons/Day) Reactivitv culate Oxides 0 Sulfur Ca rbon
High Low Total Matter Nitrogen Dioxide Monoxide
STATIONARY SOURCES
PETROLEUM
Production 114 114 0.4 27.9 5.5
Refining 5.0 40.0 45.0 5.0 22.0 50.0 5.0
Marketing 68.1 79.5 148 11 .0
SUBTOTAL 73.1 234 307 5.4 60.9 55.5 5.0
ORGANIC SOLVENT USERS
Surface Coating 49.2 201 250 15.0
Dry Cleaning 6.1 26.1 32.2
Degreasing 22.6 82.6 105
Other 32.9 140 173 6.0 1.0
SUBTOTAL 110 450 560 21 .0 1.0
CHEMICAL 0.5 0.2 115.0
METALLERGICAL 21.3 3.0 32.9 3.0
MINERAL 1 .0 1 .0 26.5 5.5 0.8
INCINERATION
Open Burning (dumps) 0.2 2.0 2.2 0.7 0.3 0.1 4.0
Open Burning (backyard) 1.2 13.0 14.2 4.7 2.3 0.2 34.4
Incinerators 1 .2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3
Other 0.5 4.3 4.8 10.2 2.4 30.0
SUBTOTAL 1.9 20.5 22.4 16.8 6.2 0.3 69.7
-------
TABLE A-3 - STATIONARY SOURCES (Continued)
)::0
I
.j:::o
Organic Gases Parti-
Emission Source Reacti vitv cu1ate Oxides of Sulfur Carbon
High Low Total Matter Nitrogen Dioxide MonoxidE
COMBUSTION OF FUELS
Steam Power Plants 0.2 6.8 7.0 7.8 135 40.9
Other Industrial 0.1 6.7 6.8 9.8 88.8 9.5 1.1
Domestic and Commercial 0.2 0.2 0.4 9.8 60.1 0.6 0.4
SUBTOTAL 0.5 13.7 14.2 27.4 284 51.0 1.5
AGRICULTURE
Debri s Burni ng 0.9 7.1 8.0 4.6 0.5 24.1
Orchard Heaters 5.0 5.0 3,8 1 .6
Agricultural Product Processing Plants 8.9 0.5 9.4 0.9
SUBTOTAL 9.8 12.6 22.4 9.3 0.5 1.6 24.1
TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 195 732 927 128 360 258 103
MOBILE SOURCES
MOTOR VEHICLES
Gasoline Powered
Exhaust 1200 401 1600 62.4 951 34.9 10,800
B10wby 51.3 16.9 68.2
Evaporati on 360 154 460
Diesel Powered 51.7 51.7 16.8 229 16.8 218
SUBTOTAL 1560 623 2180 79.2 1180 51.7 11 ,000
AIRCRAFT
Jet Driven 21.7 36.6 58.3 23.8 13.1 3.0 44.1
Piston Driven 11.3 16.3 27.6 0.2 7.3 1.0 155
SUBTOTAL 33.0 52.9 85.9 24.0 20.4 4.0 199
SHIPS AND RAILROADS 5.4 5.4 3.6 6.2 1.1 9.2
TOTAL MOBILE SOURCE 1590 681 2270 107 1210 56.9 11 ,200
GRAND TOTAL 1790 1410 3200 235 1570 315 11 ,300
Source:
See Reference A-3
-------
TABLE A-4
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Comparison of Emissions by County
(Tons per Day)
1970
Total Parti-
Organic culate Ni trogen Sulfur Ca rbon Total
County Gases Matter Oxides Dioxide r~onoxi de Emissions
Los Angeles* 2,380 129 1 ,140 250 8,080 12,000
Orange 379 22.5 190 15. 1 1 ,620 2,240
Riverside* 107 18.8 4/i.7 3.7 433 609
San Bernardino* 144 32.5 85.5 39.5 596 898
Santa Sa rba ra* 47.0 3.9 22.7 1.4 71.8 147
Ventura 135 28.8 76.0 5.2 477 722
Total 3,200 235 1,570 315 11 ,300 16,600
*That portion of the county within the South Coast Air Basin.
Source: See Reference A-3
References:
A-1.
Environmental Protection Agency, "Nationa1 Primary and Secondary
Ambient Air Quality Standards, "Federal Register, Vol. 36, No. 84,
April 30, 1971, p. 8187.
A-2.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
Air Pollution Control in California - 1970, 1970 Annual Report,
January, 1971, p. 24.
A-3.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
California Emission Inventory - 1970, July 1972, pp. 43, 46.
A-5
-------
APPENDIX B
AIR QUALITY - DATA, MONITORING STATIONS AND METHODS
This appendix is divided inta three short sections. Section I provides
a slightly more detailed breakdown of air quality violations and levels
as experienced in Los Angeles County. Similar data exists for the other
counties of the South Coast Air Basin as well. The severity of the prob-
lem is self evident from the data. Section II illustrates graphically
the locations of various air quality monitoring stations around the Basin
Section III summarizes in table format, the air quality monitoring tech-
niques presently being used by the State and Los Angeles County Air
Pollution Control District.
B-1
-------
TABLE B-1
1. AIR QUALITY DATA - LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CARBON MONOX IDE
Number of Days on Which State Standard for CO was Equalled or Exceeded
(10 ppm Average for 12 Hours)
LOS ANGELES BASIN
YEAR
MONTH 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
JAN. 31 31 31 31 20 27
FEB. 28 28 28 29 15 22
MAR. 31 31 31 31 19 18
APR. 30 30 30 12 4 12
MAY 31 31 31 2 3 8
JUNE 30 30 30 1 2 3
JULY 31 31 31 1 4 7
AUG. 31 31 31 3 12 12
SEPT. 30 30 30 9 14 20
OCT. 31 31 31 15 24 20
NOV. 30 30 30 24 26 27
DEC. 31 31 29 27 28 27
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL
365
365
363
185
171
203
Source: see Reference B-1
B-2
-------
NITROGEN DIOXIDE
Table B-2. Number of Days on Which State Standard for
Nitrogen Dioxide Was Equalled or Exceeded
(Hourly Average - 0.25ppm)
LOS ANGELES BASIN
YEAR
MONTH 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
JAN. 8 13 10 14 15 8 9
FEB. 12 11 7 17 13 3 10
MAR. 3 2 12 7 10 6 5
APR. 4 5 4 0 6 3 3
MAY 3 1 1 3 5 4 9
JUNE 4 1 2 3 11 1 4
JULY 6 5 10 9 14 10 13
AUG. 3 11 5 9 7 14 9
SEPT. 9 11 9 6 11 16 19
OCT. 16 22 12 22 13 11 12
NOV. 6 8 7 14 15 16 16
DEC. 4 10 10 9 12 10 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 78 100 89 113 132 102 115
Source: see Reference B-1
B-3
-------
OX IDANT
Table B-3. Number of Days on Which State Standard for
Total Oxidant (Kl Method) Was Equalled or
Exceeded
(Hourly Average - 0.10 ppm)
LOS ANGELES BASIN
YEAR
MONTH 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
JAN. 9 9 11 10 8 8 5
FEB. 16 17 13 22 13 7 11
MAR. 12 10 23 18 18 17 19
APR. 15 17 26 14 24 22 19
MAY 22 21 26 22 26 26 26
JUNE 27 25 29 24 26 22 27
JULY 31 31 31 31 31 30 31
AUG. 30 31 31 31 29 31 31
SEPT. 30 24 28 28 25 30 29
OCT. 27 28 30 31 26 27 24
NOV. 10 15 17 20 20 14 17
DEC. 3 8 6 8 6 12 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 232 236 271 259 252 246 241
Source:
see Reference B-1
Note:
California IS air quality standards were promulgated before the federal
ambient air quality standards and consequently. much of the State's
air quality data base uses the State standards as a reference.
B-4
-------
OZONE
Table B-4. Number of Days Each Month During 1969 and 1970
on Which the Daily Instantaneous Maximum Ozone
Concentration (Kl Method) Equalled or Exceeded
Levels Indicated
LOS ANGELES BASIN
1969 1970
MONTH CONCENTRATION, PPM CONCENTRATION, PPM
0.10 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.40 0.10 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.40
JAN. 8 4 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 0
FEB. 9 2 0 0 0 15 9 1 0 0
MAR. 19 13 5 1 1 21 12 3 0 0
APR. 23 15 3 0 0 21 13 3 0 0
MAY 27 24 16 5 2 29 22 7 4 2
JUNE 25 19 5 2 1 27 23 13 7 6
JULY 30 30 24 7 4 31 31 27 10 5
AUG. 31 31 31 19 7 31 31 30 10 6
SEPT. 30 28 23 15 10 29 29 21 9 7
OCT. 28 20 5 0 0 25 20 8 1 1
NOV. 16 9 3 0 0 19 11 2 0 0
DEC. 17 5 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 263 200 115 49 25 264 203 -15 41 27
Source: see Reference B-1
8-5
-------
II. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations - South Coast Air Basin
During 1970, the ARB compiled air quality data for the South
Coast Air Basin from 40 monitoring stations. The breakdown of
these stations is given in Table B-5. The locations are illustrated
i n Fig u re B-1.
TABLE B-5
- South Coast
Agen~
Los Angeles County APCD
Orange County APCD
Riverside County APCD
San Bernardino County APCD
Ventura County APCD
University of California at
ARB
NASN-EPA
No. of Stations
Riverside
12
4
2
4
5
1
1
11
Total
40
Sou rce :
see Reference B-2
B-6
-------
:. ': , ,\
-- ;.. ;. G ;. ~ ;.
..
\
\
\
* \
V E n T II R {, \
..
*
***
*
/
*
. '
L [ S 1:. **
SAN B *
, r-~[RNARD
, ;' **-L.. - I N 0
\~:-' . - -
\
IVERSID[
)
- /' *
*
**
* 1 u 11 Station
. rart lal Station
. Particulate Only
* :W)IHP~
Figure B-1.
Location of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
(South Coast Air Basin - 1970)
See Reference B-2
Source:
B-7
-------
III. Federal, State, and Local Air Quality Monitoring Reference Methods
Various agencies have adapted different reference methods for
monitoring ambient air quality. In part, this is due to the con-
stant change and improvement in methods which have become available.
The differences between agencies, is often due to practical consid-
erations such as budgetary constraints. The following tables summar-
ize the reference methods which have been adapted by various levels
of government.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently issued
a series of reference methods applicable to those pollutants for
which primary and secondary ambient air quality standards have
been established. A listing of these methods as well as the EPA
standards is given in Table B-6.
Table B-6.
National Air Quality Standards and Reference
Methods
Primary Averaging Principle
Pollutant Standa rds Times Reference Method of Detection
S02 0.03 ppm Annual mean Pararosaniline Colorimetric
O. 14 ppm 24 hours " "
Particulate 3 Annual mean
74jJg/m "Hi-vol" sampler Gravimetric
Matter 3
260jJg/m 24 hours II II
CO 9 ppm 8 hours Nondispersive IR Infrared
35 ppm 1 hour
Photo- 0.08 ppm 1 hour Gas phase 03-C2H4 Chemiluminescence
chemical
Oxidants
HC 0.24 ppm 3 hours Gas chromatography Flame ionization
N02 0.05 ppm Annual mean 24-hour integrated Colorimetric
samples collected
Source: see Reference B-3
B-8
-------
In addition to the specified reference methods, provisions have
been made for "equivalent methods" to be used for air quality measure-
ments. The "equivalent methods" supposedly yield results consistent
with those obtained by the reference method. Establishing equivalency
sometimes is based on the judgment of "experts" in the field rather
than upon detailed experimental evidence.
In California, air pollution control is primarily the responsi-
bility of the Air Resources Board (ARB). The ARB has likewise adopted
a series of methods to be used for monitoring air quality. Table B-7
summarizes California's most recent standards and methods of analysis.
Again, "any equivalent procedure which can be shown to the satisfaction
of the Air Resources Board to give equivalent results...may be used
(B-4)."
Table B-7.
Po 11 utant
S02
Vis i b il i ty
reducing
particles
Oxidant,
including
03
N02
Lead
(particulate)
H2S
Source:
California Air Quality Standards and Reference Methods
Averaging Reference Principle
Standards Times Method of Detection
0.04 ppm 24 hours Conductimetric Conductimetric
0.5 ppm 1 hour II II
In suffi- 1 observa- Trained observer Human observa-
cient amount to tion tion
reduce the pre-
vailing visi-
bil ity to 10
miles when the
relative humi-
dity <70%
O. 10 ppm 1 hour Neutral buffered Colorimetric
KI
0.25 ppm
3
1 .5 wg/m
1 hour
30 days
Colorimetric
Colorimetric
Saltzman
0.03 ppm
1 hour
"Hi-vol"
sampler,
dithi ozone
Stractan, Ca(OH)2Colorimetric
see Reference B-4
B-9
-------
The ARB maintains and operates 30 fixed and 5 mobile stations in
its State Air Monitoring Network. In addition to these 35 stations,
40 other air monitoring stations are independently operated by local
districts, primarily Air Pollution Control Districts. The largest of
these control districts is the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control
District (LAAPCD), which monitors air quality in the South Coast Basin.
The methods currently in use by the LAAPCD are outlined below (Table B-8).
The definitions of the principle of detection appear in Table B-9.
Table B-8.
LAAPCD - Methods Employed for Ambient Air Monitoring
Pollutant
Reference Method
Principle
of Detection
S02
H202 oxidation, electroly-
tic conductivity
Coefficient of mass (K )
m
or soiling index
Conductrimetric
Particulate
matter
Light reflectance
Filterable
aerosols
"Hi-vol" sampler
Gravimetric
CO
03 (oxidant)
HC
Nondispersive IR
Neutral KI titration
Infrared
Colorimetric
NO/N02
Gas chromatography
Saltzman
Flame ionization
Colorimetric
Source:
see Reference B-5
B-10
-------
Table 8-9.
Principle of Detection
Colorimetric
Gravimetric
Infrared
Chemiluminescence
Flame Ionization
Conductimetric
Coulometric
Definitions of Principle of Detection
Definition
The pollutant of interest is bubbled through an
appropriate reacting solution, usually containing
a complexing reagent; a colored solution is formed,
the intensity of which is quantitatively determined
in a photometer.
The pollutant(s) are collected for a specified time
period after which they are accurately weighed on
an analytical balance. The weight of material accum-
ulated gives an index of the extent of pollution.
The pollutant of interest absorbs IR radiation
at a series of wavelengths characteristic of the
particular pollutant.
The pollutant reacts with another compound to emit
light which is measured accurately, with a photo-
multiplier tube, amplified, and read out electron-
ically.
Pollutants present in a hydrogen flame are ionized
producing an ion current which is accurately moni-
tored. The magnitude of the ion current produced
is directly proportional to the pollutant concen-
tration.
The pollutant reacts to form a strong electrolytic
species in solution; then, the conductance of the
solution is determined (any ions present; e.g.,
N03 ~ Br ; C£~ OH-in the solution will be measured).
The pollutant reacts in aqueous solution to set off
a series of reactions which result in a current
being produced. The amount of current produced in
the electrochemical cell is measured and related to
the original pollutant concentration.
8-11
-------
REFERENCES
B-1.
B-2.
B-3.
B-4.
B-5.
County of Los Angeles, Air Pollution Control District, Profile
of Air Pollution Control, 1971, pp. 73, 75-77.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
The State of California Implementation Plan for Achieving and
Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards,
January 30, 1972.
Environmental Protection Agency, "National Primary and Secondary
Ambient Air Quality Standards," Federal Register, 36(84):
8185-8201, Apri 1 30, 1971.
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
Air Pollution Control in California - 1970, 1970 Annual Report,
January 1971.
County of Los Angeles, Air Pollution Control District, Technical
Services Division, Atmospheric Analysis Program - Procedures
Employed, October 1970.
B-12
-------
APPENDIX C
ECONOMIC DATA FOR THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
TableC-1.
Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 -
United States
Item 1967 1970 1975 1980
--
Population 197,849,000 204,820,000 219,021,446 234,208,000
Total Personal 546,864,730 629,046,000 783,303,783 975,373,000
Income
Total Earnings 440,561,730 503,237,000 621 ,661 ,366 770,545,000
Per Capita Persondl 2,764 3,071 3,576 4,165
Income ($58)
Per Capita Income 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Relative (US=1.00)
Source: see Reference C-l
Table C-2.
Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 -
Sum of Air Quality Control Regionsa
Item
1967
97,939,836
1970
102,038,853
1975
---
1980
118,952,331
Population
Total Personal
Income
Total Earnings
Per Capita Personal
Income ($58)
Per Capita Income
Relative (US=1.00)
315,968,601
256,700,068
363,165,622
293,951,116
110,139,251
452,781,232
3,559
364,103,413
4,111
564,896,211
452,481 ,535
3,226
4,749
1.17
1. 16
1. 15
1.14
aS5 air quality control regions are included in this data
majority of the larger metropolitan areas and accounting
50% of the U.S. population
Source: see Reference C-1
representing the
for approximately
C-1
-------
Table C-3. Population, Personal Income and Earnings, 1967-1980 -
Air Quality Control Region, Los Angeles, Ca1if.a
Item 1967 1970 1975 1980
Population 9,513,841 10,058,700 11 ,324,054 12,748,400
Total Personal 31,689,388 37,126,505 48,432,384 63,180,948
Income
Total Earnings 25,875,847 30,168,998 38,978,743 50,513,168
Per Capita Personal 3,331 3,691 4,277 4,956
Income ($58)
Per Capita Income 1. 21 1.20 1.20 1. 19
Relative (US=1.00)
athe Los Angeles air quality control region in this analysis included the
following counties: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura and
Orange.
Source: see Reference C-1
C-2
-------
Table C-4.
POPUL AT 1')1,
TOTAL .E~SONA~ INCOME
n
I
W
TOhL EA~/'«"C~
Ar,~ICUL'~~[.,=,(ST~' . FISHERIES
.. I'''''G
C~uD£ 0ET~~~!UM . NAT.GAS
~J~ING E)'~. ~UEl~
"ETA~ ~II""G
NO"'''~TALL 1\:
~O"T~ACT C:'ST~~CTtO"
..ar4lJF ACT'J~ I ,.:,
.000 . «'CPED O~~DUCTS
TFOT I L E "I Ll p:.052
1)1.928
l05.9Ol
1730H1
102]0.762
874.223
lI5.723
650.500
1.76,...n6
10021.831
158.4)6
"030887
.59.508
55.391
77.078
252.583
7.....49
~16.9'9
216.806
5 .1T6 .968
1.72).507
5,"32.)07
4.6570591
".160.267
932.295
3.ll7.972
"97.331
1970
105. T "
111.2
116.6
10Jo 3
10).7
101.0
111.1
116.1
101.t.
11t';.~
112.6
106.6
11109
109.3
111.2
120.2
111.6
112.4
1110"
112.1
111.1
UI.~
108.5
115.1
109.5
"4.6
111.11
111.3
119.4
115.0
120.9
lU.9
11..5
95.5
12l.0
11..1
112.5
I1JoO
II 7.e
116.7
112.3
115.3
116.0
111...
119.4
120.4
122.9
121.4
12).4
102.9
)1.971.743
)11....,
161.171
112.7"6
.1.405
15 .5"0
)l.1..5
2.124.741
11.570.5...8
615.H8
58.111
JZ5.5<18
49T.519
112.".
28.."3
3.307.0H
997'''''5
2.309.5"6
l.5C6.91',
27".3'.
2.22".~11
3,592./);8
11101:;0
2)6....2
4".657
1.513.999
1.15-.660
269.219
885.6..1
2.2)1.1<0'
1.292.5\"
186.3R0
5Z1.n7
58","17
..,.In
'4.178
U7.bl3
95.5..,
669.255
275.9,,0
6.744.7R1
2.162.38C
1.360.591
6.30....858
5.T50.614
1.217.366
4.5)3.~4~
554.244
1"5
119.0 (I
15'.1
150.6
10..5
11..6
108.7
111.2
In.6
121..
167. )
140.6
Ill..
1 n. 9
111.1
142.1
15...9
1l7.4
I...'
139.1
1"7.6
lU.4
172.3
121. "
1.5.8
13..8
15".8
111.5
142.4
157.7
1.3.6
162.6
1...4
l"..ft
11Z.3
157.7
147.7
136.3
13'.0
152.1
...9. ~
142.6
146.7
151.2
147.3
160.3
163.0
'''.9
158.5
In.1
11..7
50.5\)0168
'H~.1 Jb
l'e.~,...
111.)0:
51.11)
la,)~~
18.82)
2.149.,..
14..75.1t)
".1,'-5"
TI 01 02
390...S5
61&.961
-9J .134
)24.836
..26e.H'
1.24fh2~1
].022.268
2.98..h8
]46.870
2.".1.4'1'
4.'~8.46.
BC..12
272.328
511.115
1.01l.H3
1.52~.5'76
))5.978
1.189.59.
2.837.65-
1.6;&.-.,)
219.250
673.966
7..3.277
81.3".
114.9.8
42..931
172.05.
849.9:'0
)s1.B!
',787.265
2.113.0~"
9.8.2.2'1-
8.573._70
7,955.801
1.589.518
6.366.229
6P.663
".0
-.- ----
U4.0a
1",4
1".:
10'.8
126.'1
116. i
155.0
162.2
151.11
216.5
1T'.9
15".6
11-7.5
157.2
1e3.4
199.6
145..
187.1
17).8
In.2
157.9
213.9
152.6
185.0
166.0
111.'1
154.7
182.1
20'.4
179.2
211."
183.1
183.3
Ul.1
203.7
111.8
165.1
168.'
198.1
191.~
181.1
186.7
197.0
18-.8
215.2
221.1
2'5.1
207.0
.241.3
127.'
-------
Table £--5.
Total Personal Income - Los Angeles County and California
(Billions of Current Dollars)
Year
Los Angeles Co~nty
C'llifornia
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
not available
no~ available
not available
not available
not available
not available
13.085
15.387
15.943
17.334
18.071
19.037
20.341
21.580
22.979
24.288
26.098
27.923
29.908
32.407
19.774
22.756
25.214
27.002
'27.682
30.378
33.177
35.497
37.361
47.010
42.980
45.678
49.051
52.615
56.570
60.234
65.156
69.936
76.900
83.408
Source:
see Reference C-2
Table C-6.
Projections of Real Per Capita Personal Income
(Thousands of 1958 Dollars)
Year Los Angeles Count)' California
1970 3.691 3.350
1975 4.277 3.883
1980 4.956 4.500
1990 6.314 5.734
Source: see Reference C-2
C-4
-------
Table C-7.
Price Index (1957-59 = 100)
Year
Los Angeles County
California
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
82.4
89.4
92.0
92.8
92.7
92.7
94.1
97.2
100.6
102.2
104.1
105.4
106.6
108.2
110.2
112.5
114.7
117.6
122.2
128.0
81.6
88.4
91.2
92.3
92.3
92 .1
93.8
97.1
100.6
102.3
104.3
105.6
106.9
108.4
110.3
112.6
115.0
118.0
122.8
128.9
Source:
see Reference C-2
REFERENCES:
C-1.
Regional Economics Division, Office of Business Economics, u.s.
Department of Commerce, Economic Projections for Air Quality Control
Regions, APTD-0596, Washington, D.C., June 1970.
Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.), Research Investigation - Air
Pollution and City Planning, Environmental Science and Engineering,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1972, Appendix G.
C-2.
C-5
-------
APPENDIX 0
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AND TRANSPORTATION
FUNDING MECHANISMS
In the South Coast Basin the intertwining of governmental organiza-
tions responsible for planning, designing, constructing and funding
transportation facilities is extremely complex. Responsibilities and
powers range from the federal agencies which have strong controls of "purse
strings" to local agencies which set priorities for improvements and con-
struct as the money becomes available.
The flow of money for transportation related activities is extremely
important. It is through the regulation of these funds, for example,
that regional organizations can derive the power to coordinate the many
local transportation organizations, or that local transit operations can
hope to maintain service for the many persons unable to own or operate
automobiles. Figure 0-1 is a flow chart illustrating the flow of monies
for transportation in California.
Federal Agencies
The Federal Highway Administration is re~ponsible for allocating
money from the Federal Highway Trust Fund. These revenues are derived
from a four cents per gallon tax on gasoline and diesel fuel; taxes on
trucks, buses, rubber products; and interest (D-la). The funds are
allocated to five federal highway programs: 1) the Federal-aid Primary
and 2) Federal-aid Secondary systems which are roads in rural areas; 3)
the Federal-aid Urban Extension Programs; 4} Federal-aid Urban Programs
and 5) the special TOPICS programs for roads in urban areas. Money from
these federally funded programs are filtered down to state and local
organizations, and can only be used for initial construction or better-
ment of a road or highway. Table 0-1 lists the amounts and distribution
of these federal funds for the 1971-1972 Fiscal Year.
The federal agency responsible for funding public transportation is
the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). This agency was spe-
cially formed by Congress to administer a set amount of funds to local public
0-1
-------
transit agencies. UMTA grants can be used for capital improvements,
demonstration programs to test new system and operational concepts, and
transit planning.
Under recent legislation, local agencies cannot receive federal monies
unless there is continuous, ongoing planning being performed by the
organization and an environmental impact statement written for projects
likely to have an environmental impact on the region.
State Agencies
The California Division of Highways under the Business & Transporta-
tion Agency is responsible for planning, development, construction, and
maintenance of all state and federal highways. Responsibility for route
selection and contract control is vested in the California Highway Com-
mission. The Los Angeles area falls within District 7 of the Division
of Highways (covering Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange counties). A
special staff of District 7 is the Los Angeles Regional Transportation
Study, (LARTS). This group develops information on projected federal
and state highway needs and coordinates local street requirements with
city and county governments.
State funding for construction of highways comes partially from the
federal-aid programs. The Division of Highway must match the federal funds
for a specific project. This money is derived from the 7 cents per gallon
state gasoline and diesel fuel tax. Of the $.07jgallon, $.0361 is used
for matching federal funds. The remainder is distributed to counties and
citi es.
Another source of funds for state highways comes from user taxes on
the automobile provided under Article 26 of the State Constitution. liThe
net proceeds from the registration, weight, and drivers. license fees are
distributed first to the Department of Motor Vehicles, the California
Highway Patrol and for other vehicle regulatory activities, and the
remaining funds are allocated for State highway purposes. II (D-la)
These funds are very strongly committed to highway purposes and there
have been many attempts to legislate some of these monies for other
transportation purposes (e.g. mass transit).
0-2
-------
o
I
W
r
i
I
,:C'''''icle L ;ce~se
~ees
;:290 616 606
t
'~GtQr 'f'e"; ell?
Fee Fund
-.'A.'y'
~Jard 'jf' :la;"'s
-
"0:: ~er"e
.:ner
;:~S,656,666 ~244,960,OO I
S'22,':~::,');o J S122,~2C,')O';
Motor Ver;-::,?,
Fuel License -a,(
$689 27i3.ZOS
1 ",':''''Se
'oa1ecce
I
I
FLOw ,F ~TATL ":j;'W Vlh:V c
fl[~ :.~.:. ~LLL~: ~
HIGHWAY useD T.4XES I~i CALlFO~:,:~ FOO T~~ 1972- J:J7, ::' ~L (r~p
QEV,',;: oRO,.. C;LlFljR~IA ,:~"i[ MUT';~ ':,-H~CLc
i~ ~:'lL~
~se Fuel Tax
Metnr ,pr,cle
1 ~arjs:..ortdt ;(In
..... i :er .)'-"
- d'
>~; .JOD, JJO
33t,,:S' .~'-Iq
t
t
~Qtor .er'~~~ fuel
"'0~r r
~'f:r, 1 L I.
rd',
,-
( ....r-'~
L.ortd:i- .-
::"';f!;
(lj ~!ate :OI"l~ro1'er
f~, :.Gard of
:..:iUa111atiGn
. :; I 'Jtl->9f
",. ,~
:"";rectl" .0 -'''iPc I
" j. -h -- I
Directly to Counties
4
FEDERAL SUB'JE'r,r'):~s
Federal Aid
Apport;on~nts FrQ~
The Hic,hway Trust
Fund
5394,246,721
I
s ~ ",170,34;
!BalarJce
i
~72~,O'jC,O'O
~ 7 .6~"-;~. 'Y-,C
-~ate Contr,~ ,cr
c. L~r'u,
! ~ I
I? .
,
r:. :"'J ua
_:d~r:
('''01
,
,]
;"l:'\l~rvl:'-
.:.?~ .~3'~. '~''J1
0: 11,550,OO'J
~'ghwaj ~ser'
7ax ;:und
S816,700,OCO
S203,150,OOO
I
5490,aoo,ooo
STA"i[ H~GH~AY FUND
Administration & Maintenaoce
Construction, Reconstruction,Etc.
S135,807,000
S752,389,721
Sou rce'
Flgure ;)-1
See Peference ~-Ia"
I.~() tv'"
'-
"
-
"f:'i<;Jh~
~r i 'i'E:'r~. !
~ ... 1:"
-"
. ~c.
i 350. !'", j
~
.... ~,.-
,. r. I-
-
0'
~Pf- or~.
~('~.(r~u_:
r, "
-
:,al dm.~-
"
JI ..
...... '"
',] " ""[
JW-ili9E;~J 6'
.)t:. I . r,", I'"'
:'::8,)00,", .,,1
"Trice ~lVlNUl)
Mi-,c~11~neo~s Revenue
:3,210,800'"
I
-------
TABLE 0-1
AMOUNTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF
FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDS
1971 - 1972 Fiscal Years
(Millions of Dollars)
Off
the City County State
Source lQ£ DMV CHP Schools Streets Roads Hwys
Federal-aid 18 18 354
User Taxes
Gas & Diesel 13 141 182 388
Reg. s Wt. s 12 63 142 88
Dr. Lie.
Non-User Taxes
In-lieu 5 9 13 120 120
Transp. Taxa 2 20 5
Totals $32 $72 $142 $33 $279 $320 $835
aIn FY72-73, the last year of existence for this tax, its entire net amount
will be deposited into the State Highway Fund.
Source: See Reference D-la
0-4
-------
Regional Agencies
In the past decade it has been recognized that there is a need to
coordinate the transportation planning activities being performed by the
many local agencies. Consequently, the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) was organized in 1965 to satisfy federal requirements
for establishment of a comprehensive regional plan to allow for receiving
federal funds. SCAG is a voluntary association of city and county govern-
ments from Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernadino, Riverside, and
Imperial counties supported by membership dues and federal grants. Trans-
portation planning is only one segment of SCAG and is controlled by the
Comprehensive Transportation Committee. Although the research and imple-
mentation programs are developed in technical committees under the Com-
prehensive Transportation Committee, all policies of SCAG become official
only upon adoption by SCAG's General Assembly. There is no legislation
which lends power to SCAG's policies. SCAG's only power derives from the
requirement that all federal grant applications and SB325 claims bear the
regional agency's approval.
Local Agencies
On the county level, the Planning Departments and Road Departments
handle construction and maintenance of roadways. In the cities the Public
Works Departments are responsible for these duties. The City Planning and
Traffic Departments evaluate capabilities ot existing streets and define
requirements for future streets. Each of the county departments is
responsible to the county Board of Supervisors and the city departments
are responsible to the appropriate city council and Mayor.
Funds for city and county roads and street purposes come from several
sources. Some money is made available to them from the State user taxes.
Other sources for cities and counties are traffic fines and forfeitures
resulting from Vehicle Code violations. Cities are required to use these
funds for traffic control, law enforcement and street construction pur-
poses. Fifty percent of county fine and forfeiture funds must be used
for construction and maintenance of roads. (D-la)
D-5
-------
Other revenues from the public sector are derived from the sale of
street and road bonds and from street and road taxes. Minor amounts come
from other governmental and miscellaneous sources (O-la). Private invest-
ment, by deve1oper5 and others, finance substantial amounts of road and
street work.
Public transit agencies in the Los Angeles area exist in two counties
and five cities (Long Beach, Santa Monica, Montebe110, Torrance and Culver
City). The Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTO) is a public
corporation established by the State Legislature in 1964. This agency
has the primary responsibility of planning, deve1opin9, constructing and
operating public transit in Los Angeles County. In addition, SCRTO pro-
vides feeder bus service to certain areas of San Bernadino and Riverside.
It is also charged with the responsibility for planning and developing
new public transit facilities in the southern portion of Los Angeles
County. SCRTO and the ~ivision of Highways are working together to coordinate
planning of a regional mass transit system with future highways (SCRTO covers
the largest transit area in Southern California; Orange County Transit Dis-
trict is the second largest).
The public transit agencies get their money from various sources.
UMTA grants fund several different types of projects -- planning,
demonstration, and capital improvement programs. Other federal monies
can come from the States and Local Assistance Act of 1972 (Revenue Sharing
Funds). Local governments (city and county) are given money according to
a specified formula to alleviate problems in eight priority areas. One
of these "pirority expenditure" items is "public transportation", including
transit systems and streets and roads (0-2). In the Los Angeles area it
does not appear that much of this revenue sharing money will be spent
directly for public transportation. In the city of Los Angeles Mayor
Yorty has proposed to use $14.9 million of the $44.2 million to eliminate
a budget deficit (0-3). For the remaining funds, he has suggest 17 other
projects for council consideration. Of the $29.3 million dollars remaining
Yorty has suggested $0.4 million be spent on public transit.
Although a small portion of the revenue sharing money is directed to
public transportation, this money has made other funds available. The
0-6
-------
Los Angeles City Director of Finance has revealed that the Los Angeles
City Council has reserved money out of its General Fund for the SCRTD
(0-4). In Long Beach a similar situation exi~ts. According to the
Director of the Finance Department there, the city has not yet established
its priority expenditures for the revenue sharing money (0-5). However,
the Director suggested that this money has changed the use of the local
property tax. From a $.035 tax per $100 assessed valuation, Long Beach
is planning to obtain $348,000 in order to reduce fares for senior
citizens on the local public transit (0-5).
Another source of funds for local transit in Los Angeles Basin, as
in the rest of California, is the Mi11s-A1quist-Deddeh Act (SB325) passed
into 1 aw November 4, 1971. Pri or to passage of SB325 a sales tax of 5%
was imposed on specified items, excluding gasoline. The revenue derived
from 4/5 of this tax was placed in the State General Fund. The funds
derived from the remaining 1/5 were distributed among the general funds
of local government. "Under SB325 the tax rate remains at 5%, but it is
also imposed on the sale of gasoline (thereby generating about $180
million per year in additional revenue)(la)-" SB325 alters the distribu-
tion of sales tax revenues. The State General Fund now receives revenues
derived from 3-3/4 of the 5%, local general funds get 1%, and the remaining
revenue (1/4%) is to be used by local governments for ~ublic transportation
(i .e. public transit systems and streets and roads). The extension of
the sales tax to gasoline adds about $31 million allocated to local general
funds and provides $138 million per year for local transportation pur-
poses (la).
Most of the money for local transit comes from the 1/4% portion of the
sales tax. In Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernadino, Orange, Imperial
and Riverside Counties SB325 funds are placed in specific local trust funds
but the money cannot be used until SCAG has approved the local claim for
the money. As with claims for FHWA aid and UMTA grants, SB325 claims are
not approved until the locality demonstrates that it is working towards
a balanced transportation plan. After July 1, 1975. SCAG will only honor
claims that conform to the adopted regional transportation plan.
0-7
-------
References
0-1.
0-2.
0-3.
0-4.
0-5.
0-6.
A Special Conference on Transportation: Transportation for the
Future: Mass or Mess?, Los Angeles, California, October 19. 1972.
a)
Moorehead, J. D., IIA Paper on Funding Transportation in
Cal ifornia .11
Ralph, E., "Article 26, Obstacle to Improved Transportation
inCa 1 iforni a. II
b)
c)
Ackermann, W.O., Jr., "Southern California Regional Trans-
portation Planning"
Siegel, B., "Regional Transportation Planning in Southern
California--Comment, Critique and a New Approach."
d)
"State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972", House of Repre-
sentatives Report No. 92-1450.
"Yorty Wants Revenue Sharing for $14 t~illion Budget Deficit,",
Los Angeles Times, November 25, 1972.
Personal communication with the Director of Finance and Budget, Los
Angeles City Hall, November, 1972.
Personal communication with the Finance Director, City of Long Beach,
November 1972.
Southern Ca 1 iforni a Associ ati on of Governments, liThe Transportati on
Development Act of 1971 (5B325, 1971): A General Explanation,"
October, 1972.
D-8
-------
APPENDIX E
SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
Sample Calculation #1
VMT Reductions Due to Increases in Transit Ridership
- [FA FT ] T
VMT = 0 OCA + OCB P
Where:
o = Average distance (miles)
FA = Fraction automobile passengers
FT = Fraction transit passengers
Tp = Total passengers
OCA = Auto occupancy (persons/vehicle)
OCB = Bus Occupancy (persons/bus)
FA = 1 - FT
- [1 - FT ~
:::e~i::Pv~C: VM:oO:BOTP[l :C:To + :~~ ]
VMTo
~ Tp = - F F
T T
-0 0 0
OCA + OCB
[OCB(l - FT) + OCA(FT) ]
VMT = VMTo OCB(l-FT) + OCArrf)
o 0
[VMT - VMT]
% VMT Reduction = 100 V~To = 100 - 100 ~~io
[OCB(l - FT)+OCA(FT)]
= 100 - 100 OCB(l-F )+OCA(F )
To To
E-l
(1)
(2)
(1)~(2)=(3)
(4)
(4)~(3)=(5)
(6)
(5 )~( 6) = (7)
-------
Sample Calculation #1 (Cont'd)
Equation for VMT Reduction Associated with All Trips
Assume:
FT = .022
o
OCB = 15
OCA = 1.4
(See Reference E-l)
(Best estimate)
(See Reference E-l)
% VMT Reduction
= 100 - 100
= 1 00 - 1 00
[15 (1- F T) + 1. 4 F T ]
15(.978) + 1.4(.022)
[15 - 13.6FT]
14.7 = -2.18 + 92.5FT
Equation for VMT Reduction Associated with Work Trips
Assume: FT = .08 (Table 7.1)
o
OCB = 50 (Best estimate)
OCA = 1.1 (See Reference E-l)
Work trip VMT = 32.4% Total VMT (Table 5.4)
o . - f [50 (1- F T) + 1.2 (F T) II
% VMT Reduct 1 on - O. 324 100 - 100 50 ( .92) + 1.2 roa) J
= 0.324 !100 - 100 [50-4:~~OFT] j
= -2.9 + 34.4 FT
E-2
-------
Sample Calculation #2
VMT Reductions Due to Changes
[FA F T ]
VMT = 0 OCA + OCB Tp
in Automobile Occupancy Rate
Where:
D = Average distance (miles)
FA = Fraction automobile passengers
FT = Fraction transit passengers
Tp = Total passengers
OCA = Auto occupancy (persons/car)
OCB = Bus occupancy
(persons/bus)
FA = 1 - FT
Assume:
1)
10% increase in travel length in a hypothetical carpool
scheme, i.e., 1.1 IT
2) No changes in transit ridership
3) No changes in total passenger trips
4) At current levels of transit ridership, it can be
assumed that
FT FA
OCB « OCA
o
E-3
(2)
(3)
-------
Sample Calculation #2
(Cont'd)
,VMT = VMTo - VMT = DTp [o~~; + o~~]
1. 1 DT p [o~~ + o~~]
(2)-+(1)=(4)
[FA 1. 1 F A ~ - 1. 1 F T]
= DTp OCA - OCA + OCB OCB
o
(5)
= DFATp [O~Ao - 6clJ
[OCA - 1 . 1 OCA ]
~ DFATp (OCAo) (OCA)o
(3)-(5)=(6)
(7)
. [6VMT)
% VMT Reductlon = 100 VMTo
tB)
[OCA - 1. 1 OCAo]
= 100 OCA
(7)-.( B)= (g)
[ 1 . 1 OCA )
= 100 1 - OCA 0
(10)
Assume:
1) OCA = 1.4 (see Reference E-l)
o
2) Commuter VMT = 32.4% total VMT (Table 5.4)
3) OCA = 1.1 during commute trips (see Reference E-l)
o
4) 72.5% peak hour VMT is freeway related (see Appendix G, Table G-B,
or Reference E-2).
Therefore, the generalized equations for % VMT reduced are:
Occupancy Rate for All Trips
% VMT Reduction = 100 [1 - (1.1)(1.4)) = 100 [1 - 1.54)
OCA OCA
E-4
-------
Sample Calculation #2 (Cont'd)
Occupancy Rate for Commute Trips
% VMT Reducti on = (.324) (100) [1 - (1. 1 ) (1. 1 ) \ = 32.4 fl 1:111
OCA) l - DCA)
Occupancy Rate for Freeway Commute Trips
(Freeway + Non-Freeway Trip Segments)
% VMT Reduction = (.725)(32.4) [1 - .L1l)
OCA
= 23.5 [1 - 6c~1)
E-5
-------
Sample Calculation #3
The Impact of SCRTD's Mini-Bus Project
Present operation
9 AM - 4 PM
1971 accumulation of auto passengers
20,700 (see Reference E-3)
1967 - 1971 growth rate (see Reference E-3)
1971 = 370,206 passengers
1967 = 345,016 passengers
difference =
25,190
25,190 - 6,125/year = 1.65% of 1971 volume/year
4 years -
2 times
growth rate = 3.3%/year
1977 accumulation of auto passengers
(20,700)(3.3%)6 + 20,700 = 24,800
Average trip length = ~6 square miles
~ 2.4 miles
Potential VMT Reduction = (24,800)(2.4) = 60,000
< 0.1% Basin-wide VMT
E-6
-------
Sample Calculation #4
The Impact of SCRTD's San Bernardino Freeway Express Busway
1974 Patronage
= 17,000 per day (see Reference E-4)
Assuming 50 percent annual growth rate:
1977 patronage
= {17,000){1 + 0.5)3 = 57,800 persons per day
Assume all new passengers after the first year and 50 percent of first
year passengers are also new.
Diverted patrons
= 57,800 - (0.5)(17,000) = 49,300
Assume an average automobile occupancy rate of 1.3 as determined by the
1971 Downtown Los Angeles Cordon Count performed by the City of Los Angeles
Traffic Department (see Reference E-3).
Diverted automobiles = 49,300/1.3 = 38,800 vehicles per day.
Assume on line stops will have one-half the patrons as will those stops
with park and ride facilities and that one-half of the riders will travel
to Wilshire Boulevard, the average two-way trip will be 16.4 miles long.
Hence,
Reduction in
vehicle miles
= (38,800)(16.4) = 635,000
= 0.4 percent of total VMT
E-7
-------
Sample Calculation #5
Joi nt SCRTO-OCTO Santa Ana IIPark-and-Rideli Facil ity
Assume Voorhees Modal Split Model holds and that the following character-
istics are typical for a one-way trip on the system:
Length
= L = 22 mil es
Income
= I = 8.3~/min.($10,000/year)
Transit Access Time = T = 1 min.
a
Transit Fare
= Tw = 5 min.{peak hours)
=10 min. (off-peak hours)
= F = 54~ (Basic fare plus 3 additional zones)
Transit Wait Time
Auto Operating Cost = Ao = $1.05 (4.8~/mile)
Auto Parking Cost
= A = 50~
P
= At = 5 min.(peak hour)
= 2 min.(off peak hour)
Auto Terminal Cost
Since an exclusive bus lane on this freeway is not possible because of
several geometric bottlenecks, further assume that the transit riding
time and automobile riding time (Tr and Ar) are equal.
According to the Voorhees Model (E-5) marginal utility, U, is equal to
F - (A + A )
2.5(Ta + Tu - At) + Tr - Ar + 0.~5 I P
Substituting the assumed values into the equation for this particular
trip, U = -45 and -25 during peak hours and off-peak hours, respectively.
Consequently, a 30 percent commuting ridership and 8 percent off peak
transit ridership can be expected.
E-8
-------
Sample Calculation #5 (Cont'd)
1971 Average daily vehicle volume (E-6) = 120~000
Assume a 2 percent per year growth rate*
1977 Average daily vehicle volume
= 135,000
Assume peak hour traffic averages 7 percent of total traffic.
1977 peak time vehicle volumes = 4 (.07)(135,000) = 38,000
Optimistically assume all of transit ridership is diverted from automobiles
Diverted vehicles = .30(38,000) + .08(97,000) = 19,000 per day
VMT reduction
= 19,000 x 44 miles
= 836,000 vehicle miles
= 0.5 percent of total VMT
*
During 1968 to 1971, volumes on the freeway dropped due to completion
of new freeways in the area. The trend is expected to reverse.
E-9
-------
Sample Calculation #6
VMT by the Los Angeles Yellow Cab Company
1967:
0.1% of all trips by taxi(E-l)
Average taxi trip length in San Francisco = 4.75 mi.
Average taxi trip length in Oakland
Average private auto trip in Los Angeles
= 3.0 mi.
= 7.6 mi. (£-2)
Thereforet a reasonable assumption is that the average Los Angeles taxi
trip distance is less than the average private auto trip.
This implies
that passengers using the Los Angeles Yellow Cab Company account for
less than 0.1% of the Basin's VMT.
Somehow divert passengers over to this system -- 0.2% of the Basin's VMT
could be reduced if Yellow Cab Company doubled their service with two
occupants in each additional trip.
Thereforet it seems unlikely that any
more than a fraction of one percent of the VMT could be reduced by an
expanded taxi service.
£-10
-------
Sample Calculation #6a
Impact of the "Ideal" Transit System (Very Optimistic)
F-(A +A )
U = 2.5(Ta+Tw) + Tr -(2.5At+Ar) + O.~5 i
Where
T +T = 5 minutes
a w
T = A (transit as fast as auto)
r r
At = 2 minutes
F = O~ (free transit)
A +A ~ 36~ (7.6 miles @ 4.8~/mile)
o p
I = 8.3~/minute ($lO,OOO/year)
Trip
Length = 7.6 miles
U = -10
~ % Transit Ridership ~15
~ % VMT Reduction ~10
Sample Calculation #6b
Impact of "Reasonably Improved" Transit
F - (A +A )
U = 2.5(Ta+Tw) + Tr -(2.5At+Ar) + 0.~5 i
Where
T +T = 10 minutes
a w
T = 25 minutes (18 MPH average)
r
At = 2 minutes
Ar = 16 minutes (28 MPH average)
F = 30~ (basic fare)
A +A = 36~ (7.6 miles @ 4.8~/mile)
o p
I = 8.3~/minute ($lO,OOO/year)
Trip
Length = 7.6 miles
U = 64
~ % Transit Ridership ~5%
~ % VMT Reducti on "" 3%
E-ll
-------
Sample Calculation #7
The Impact of Prohibiting Automobile Usage
Example:
Creating an Auto Free Zone in the Los Angeles CBO
Assume that through traffic, which is primarily on the freeway network,
cannot be diverted.
Therefore, only trips with trip ends in the CBO will
be eliminated.
(E-3)
From the 1971 Downtown Los Angeles Cordon Count
1971
-- Peak Accumulation
= 123,853 persons
1971
Commuters -- Accumulation @ 9 a.m. =
97,267 persons
1971
Non-Commuters (difference)
Projections to 1977:
= 26,586 persons
Both commuter and non-commuter historical counts in the Downtown CBO
indicate negative growth rates; however, this trend is expected to reverse
with the current redevelopment program.
Employment is expected to increase by 100,000 in ten years in the CBD(E-7);
hence, commuter accumulation can be expected to increase at the rate of
1 0, 000 pe r ye a r .
Assuming that the non-commuter growth will be less than
twice the growth rate of travel across the cordon boundaries which grew at
the rate of 1.65 percent per year,(E-3) the non-commuter travel will be
estimated by linear projections at 3.3 percent per year.
1977
Commuters -- Accumulation @ 9 A.M. = 97,000 + 6 (10,000)
= 157,000 persons
1977
Non-Commuters
= (26,586)(1 + .033)6
= 29,000 persons
E-12
-------
Sample Calculation #7 (Cont'd)
Assuming that 1971 modal split rates will not change substantially by 1977,
55.6 percent of the commuter accumulation and 57.1 percent of the non-
commuter accumulation will be brought to the CBD by automobile. (E-3)
1977 Commuter - Vehicle Accumulation = 87,000 vehicles
1977 Non-Commuter - Vehicle Accumulation = 17,000 vehicles
From Table 5.4, the average trip length for a commute trip is approximately
10.5 miles and the weighted average of non-commute trips is 6.7 miles.
As defined in the Downtown Los Angeles 1971 Cordon Count, the CSD is slightly
larger than one square mile; hence, the average trip length within the CBD
is probably not more than one mile in length.
Consequently, if automobile use in the CBD were prohibited, one could expect
the following VMT reductions.
Assume that no diversion to mass transit will
take place.
Vehicle Mile Reduced = 104,000 vehicles x 1 mile
= 104,000 vehicle miles
Further, assume that all of the trips with a destination inside of the CSD
will be made entirely by mass transit or by foot.
Vehicle Miles Reduced:
= 87,000 vehicles.x 10.5 miles + 17,000 vehicles x 6.7 miles
= 1,027,000 vehicle miles <1% VMT Basin-wide
E-13
-------
Sample Calculation #8
The Impact of a Four-Day Work Week
The following assumptions were made in the analysis:
. As a result of changing to a four-day week, an individual's
mid-week (Tuesday. Wednesday, Thursday) travel pattern will
be replaced by an additional Saturday-Sunday type travel pattern.
. The extra weekend day will be an average of the typical
Saturday-Sunday travel pattern. For a fixed income, the number
of shopping trips will not increase substantially and will
likely redistribute between the Saturday and new weedkend day.
On the other hand, the new weekend day will not be as restful
as the present Sunday pattern.
. To be socially acceptable, the new non-working day will be
either a Friday or Monday. To preserve the present signifi-
cance of Sunday. Friday was chosen as the substitutional day.
. Certain employment types cannot be adapted to
and hence will be unaffected. Generally, the
workers will be in service-related jobs which
to the non-work demands of others.
a four-day week
unaffected
are responsive
Table 7.8 shows average travel data for various trip purposes
as determined
by the System Development Corporation report entitled A Survey of Average
Uriving Patterns in the Los Angeles Urban Area, and by the 1967 Los Angeles
Regional Transportation Study -- Origin-Destination Study.
The trip lengths
for the various trip types listed in Table 5.4 were applied to the trip
frequency data shown in Table 7.8 to arrive at a weekly total of 33,741
vehicle miles for the sample population.
E-14
-------
Sample Calculation #8 (Cont1d)
From Table 7.8 we calculate the following:
. Average (unweighted) of Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday
vehicle miles
. Average (unweighted) of Saturday, Sunday vehicle mi.
= 5247
= 3633
difference
= 1614
% VMT Reduction = ~~lj = 4.8%
Hence the substitution of the average weekend day for the average weekday
resulted in a 4.8 percent reduction in weekly vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
1980 Employment Projections by the Standard Industrial Classifications (SIC)
were obtained from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
From the projections, it was determined that approximately 70 percent of the
employment force could be put on a four-day work week; hence, a potential
reduction of 3.4 percent of the weekly vehicle miles.
To estimate the impact on daily VMT, it is assumed that the weekly reduction
can be evenly spread over six days of the week, excluding Sunday.
the impact of a four-day week is:
Thus,
% Daily VMT Reduction - 3.4% ""0.6%
--r
E-15
-------
Sample Calculation #9
Impact of Exclusive Bus-Carpool Lane
Assumptions:
1) Trip length = 10.1 miles
2) 20 minute
advantage
lane
travel time
for users of the
3) Values of Voorhees parameters
Ta = 2 minutes
Tw = 3 minutes
F = 46et
Ao = 48et (or 78et)
Ap = 2.5et
At = 2 minutes
Tr-Ar = 20 minutes
I = 8.3
-------
Sample Calculation #9 (Cont'd)
o . { OCB(l-FT) + OCA(FT) }
% VMT Reductlon = 100-100 OCB(l-F )+ OCA(F ) (Eq.(7),S~mple
To To Calculatlon #1)
The percentage of total commute VMT which is travelled on the freeway system
in the Basin is approximately 17 percent (see Appendix G, Table G-8); therefore,
% VMT Reduction = .17
[ OCB(l-FT) + OCA(FT) ]
100-100 OCB(l-FTo)+ OCA(FTo)
Assume:
1) OCB = 50 persons per bus
2) OCA = 1.1 persons per car
3) FT = negligible on freeways presently
o
4) FT = .15 (.20 with IItaxll)
% VMT Reduction = 2.5 (or 3.2 with IItaxll)
To achieve an occupancy of 1.5
Assume:
1) During commute periods, average volume per lane of traffic
of 1500 vehicles per hour
2) Carpool is three or more people per automobile
3) Negligible carpooling on the freeway presently
4) Eight lane freeway (four in each direction)
5) Capacity of freeway lanes is 1800 vehicles per hour
6) No diversion to transit
7) Total person trips on freeway is constant
E-17
-------
Sample Calculation #9 (Cont'd)
Let
N = Number of cars in carpool lane (three persons per
all other lanes are at capacity and the resultant
automobile occupancy is 1.5 persons per vehicle.
car) when
average
Then
(3)(1800 veh.jln-hr)(l.l personsjveh.) + N(3 personsjveh.)
- - = 1.5
(3)(1800) + N veh.jln-hr
~ N = 1440 veh.jln-hr
Persons diverting to carpools = 1440 x 3 = 4320
Total number of person trips = (3)(1800)(1.1) + (1440)(3) = 11,340
% of freeway commuters shifting to car pools = 4,320 = 38%
11 , 340
Impact of Shifts in Carpools
Assume occupancy can be increased to 1.5 persons per vehicle.
From Sample Calculation #2 for commute periods periods,
% VMT Reduction = 32.4 (1- lo~l)
This strategy impacts 72.5 percent of the commute VMT (see Appendix G,
Table G-8).
% VMT Reduction = .725(32.4)(1- lo~l)
= 23.5 (1- 1i~~)
= 4.4%
E-18
-------
Sample Calculation #10
Limitation of Second, Third...Family Cars
surveyed car owners is:
From Appendix F, the corresponding vehicle ownerships as a percentage of
Number of cars owned
2 3 4+
Percent of car owners
32
5
45
18
The cumulative frequency of car ownership is:
1 2 3 4+
Percent of car owners 100 68 23 5
"'iho own at least N cars
(Number of cars = N)
From vehicle mileage data in Appendix F (Question 9 of Consumer Mail Panel
Questionnaire).
Car Number 1
Car Number 2
Car Number 3
Car Number 4
Annua 1 Mil eage
12,300
9,600
9,400
4,700
TOTAL
Percentage of VMT by Car Number 1
Percentage of VMT by "extra cars"
Percent owning
at least N cars
100
68
23
5
Sample Normalized
VMT
1,230,000
652,000
216,000
24,000
2,122,000
= 1,230,000/2,122,000 = 58 percent
= 100 - 58 = 42 percent of respondent
annual vehicle mileage
E-19
-------
Sample Calculation #11
Required Bus Acquisitions
Table 5.5 illustrates the peaking nature of traffic in the South Coast Basin
during commute hours.
The present accepted practice in estimating transit
requirements is based on the assumption that if the commute demands are met,
demands during other times of the day will also be met.
Commute Demand
Assumptions:
.
person trips will remain unchanged in number and length
. average occupancy of bus will be 40 persons per bus during
commute times
. a bus will be able to complete three round trips during commute
times (2 to 3 hours)
. morning demand = evening demand
Home to work person trips = (H-W VMT)(H-W Occupancy)
(H-W Average Distance)(l.O - H-W Transit Ridership)
- (.324)( 168 x 106)( 1 . 14)
- (10.5)(0.92) = 6,409,000
Demand = (H-W person trips/2)(Transit ridership)
=
3,204, 000 x Transit
Ridership
Supply of buses = Demand
Capacity per bus
=
3,204,000 -
(40)(3) - 26,700 x Transit Ridership
E-20
-------
Sample Calculation #11 (Cont'd)
Estimated Current Supply
From Table 9.1,1971 Supply = 1838 buses
Additional Expected Buses
OCTD = 241 buses
5%* Current Supply =
92 buses
TOTAL = 2171 buses
*SCRTD indicated that it keeps a 10 percent reserve which could
immediately be added to the supply. Assume that averaged over the
Basin a 5 percent reserve is available.
E-21
-------
References
E-l
California Division of Highways, LARTS Base Year Report - 1967 Origin -
Destination Survey, December, 1971.
E-2
Kearin, D. H., and Lamoureaux, R. L., A Survey of Average Driving
Patterns in the Los An eles Urban Area, System Development Corporation
Technical Memo TM L -4119/000/01 , February 1969.
E-3 City of Los Angeles Traffic Department, 1971 Downtown Los Angeles
Cordon Count, March 1972.
E-4 Southern California Rapid Transit District, California Division of
Highways - District 7, San Bernardino Freeway Express Busway Project -
Facts at a Glance, July 29, 1972.
E-5 Alan M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc., Los Angeles Mode Choice
Development Study, February, 1972.
E-6 California Division of Highways, 1971 Traffic Volumes on the California
State Highway System, 1971.
E-7
Board of the Greater Los Angeles Urban Coalition, Summary Proposed
Study of Public Benefits from Increasing Commuter Vehicle Occupancy
by 1975 in the Los Angeles Basin, unpublished paper, June 1972.
E-22
-------
APPENDIX F
PUBLIC OPINION SURVEYS LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN REGION
1.
Los Angeles Attitude Survey
Presented on the pages which follow are results of a questionnaire
distributed to a small sample of households in the greater Los Angeles
area (see Table F-l).
The survey was conducted with the assistance of a
professional market research group* which maintains st~nding panels of
households in each major metropolitan area of the U.S.; each panel repre-
sents a broad cross-section of households in the given area.
The following
table indicates some characteristics of the Los Angeles panel.
Table B-1 CAR OWNERSHIP OF SAMPLE
O-Ca r l-Car 2-Car 3-Car 4+-Car Total
Respondents 5 60 85 34 9 193
Percentage 2.6 31.1 44.0 17.6 4.7 100
Table B-2 ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME OF SAMPLE
$4000- $8,000- $10,000-
2$4000 $8000 $10,000 $15,000 $15,000+ Total
Respondents 13 40 27 50 55 193
Percentage 6.7 20.7 14.0 30.1 28.5 100
The results of the survey are presented in Table F-2.
*Consumer Mail Panels, Chicago, Illinois
F-l
-------
Significant insights to public attitudes which can be gleaned from
the survey are as follows:
. Nearly 96 percent of the respondents feel that air pollution is a
problem in the Los Angeles area; 81 per cent feel that the problem
is "serious" to livery serious". The respondents did not feel
that the problem was significantly worse or better nationwide --
98 per cent indicated there was a problem nationwide and 89 per
cent feel that the problem is serious to very serious (see
question 10).
. Los Angeles residents are generally supportive of retrofit pro-
grams for pre-1975 vehicles which would cost about $50 per vehicle.
Some 66 per cent of the respondents indicated they would support
such a program and an additional 15 per cent indicated they were
not strongly opposed to such a program. If the retrofit to pre-
1975 vehicles were to cost $200 per vehicle only some 33 per cent
would support it. One might infer that low cost retrofits would
be highly acceptable but higher priced requirements (e.g.,
catalytic converters) would not be highly palatable (see question 2).
. Some 80 per cent of the respondents favor an inspection/mainten-
ance program. Another 8 per cent are not strongly opposed to
such a program. On the average the respondents indicated they
would be willing to pay nearly $8.00 for the annual inspection,
significantly above the actual estimated costs for inspection
programs under consideration. Over 41 per cent of the respon-
dents feel the inspection should be conducted at state-operated
inspection centers while some 39 per cent feel local service
stations or garages should be able to perform the inspection (see
question 3).
. Reaction to all types of travel restriction controls is generally
negative. Among the restrictive controls, exclusive bus and car
pool lanes followed by restrictions on "non-essential" auto travel
during times of high pollution and a parkin9 and traffic ban in
the downtown CBO were the least objectionable. All three of these
programs are easily perceived by a respondent as not applying to
his particular situation, and hence having the least impact on
his personal travel patterns. A very high vehicle registration
fee was overwhelmingly rated the least acceptable program with
~asoline rationing rated the second most unacceptable program
(see question 4).
. Response to transit related questions generally reflects the
current low utilization of the existing transit system. Over
93 per cent of the husbands, 84 per cent of the wives, and 87
per cent of the children over 16 years of age reported that they
never use public transportation. The most commonly mentioned
reason for using transit was the unavailability of an automobile
F-2
-------
or driver's license while flexibility and faster travel speed
were most commonly mentioned as reasons for using the automobile.
.
It was generally recognized that the automobile costs more, but
lower transit fares were not rated as being an effective strategy to
increase transit ridership. Faster, more frequent, and more conven-
iently located service were the strategies rated highest in potential
effectiveness. The responses indicated that achievement of signifi-
cant increases in the level of transit utilization may require a
, major capital and .operating commitment to a more extensive level of
service than that currently provided rather than cosmetic improve-
ment~ such as cleaner buses, air conditioning, bus stop benches and
shelters, security. and the like (see question 5).
.
Forty per cent of the respondents indicated interest in car pooling
for work commute trips while only four per cent indicated that
they are already in a car pool. On the other hand, however, 84
per cent indicated it would be difficult to organize new or join
existing car pools (see question 6).
. Some 67 per cent of the respondents favor staggered work hours
as a means of reducing traffic congestion while slightly over
20 per cent oppose the concept (see question 8).
. Only 15 percent of the respondents would consider disposal of one
family car if better public transit were available. Another 16
per cent indicated they might consider disposing of an automobile.
F-3
-------
TABLE F-l
LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN AREA ATTITUDE SURVEY
~
CONSUMER MAIL PANELS
323 SOUTH FRANKLIN STREET. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60606
(2-C796)
D('ar Pand Member,
TorJay, I am sending you a questionnaire wbich I cunsidcr both exciting and
interesting. Hopefully, you will too. This questionnaire deals with tbe impor..
tant problem of air pollution caused by automobiles.
A" "UU 1;nu\\', autos arc a major source of air pollution-especially in n1elro-
politan areas. You probably have read in newspapers or n1agazines that auto
Inanulac(urers are being required to make changes in their cars that will
1"f'duc(' the amount of pollutants coming out of cars. This will be particularly
true for cars manufactured in 1975 and thereafter.
MZtny pollution experts believe, however, that despite these new federal regu-
lations on auto air pollution, otbe r ways will have to be found to further reduce
po]]ution caused by cars. The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain your
reaction to these new auto pollution control ideas being suggested by the
experts. In answering some questions, you will probably have to consult
otlwr members of your fan1ily to get their ideas and reactions. I am sorry
if tllis is inconvenient, but I am sure you will agrce that the impurtance of
solving pollution problems is worth making every reasonable effort.
A s always, please check each of your answers after you have completed the
questionnaire. Then return it to me in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.
If you have any additional comments, please write them on the lint." pro-
\ided in Question 11.
Cordially,
'/-~~" ~ .'
F-4
-------
TABLE F-l
(CONT'O)
~,~~.~~!!.".~,~I.~ ~~~~,~,_. - ~
Il-C 7'11 I
AUTO AUl POLLUTION QUESTJONNAIU:
13
I.
,.,. ::' II~', "I'! t~)..rl'",f\('r .....,11 be equipped with rnuTualon controlrit'\'11 {'s tu n:du~, ,'IT
II III \ ',",' '\'''11 "wlwd a, .\T built before that year, how would you feel about a law n°.
.. .,..1 t'!I1L~.,I'" . "l1lr,,1 t'qulpment which milht coa' $lOO un your car" ("X" BEi":QY..)
14-16
0",,"
All .,\11.... .
po-IIIUI"n.
~\'"
..
lio....' "'"Oo',j v"u 1.-..\ .II,put till" I..\.\. II tht, (lat ""'~t:> reduced by lovernrnent .ub"ldy tl' abuut $50')
("X" l(r.I.(1\\ I
!-','('Ilna.!. I d\,ard La......;
\ rTY 111\11 'I 111 la,'nr of taw. .
SIII1\t'"h,\t 1/1 (avur or law. . .
:-'''lIh'WI1i11 ,'~,lln51 lay, . . . . .
V,'r... /'Ilil II ;H~alllb' lJ,w . . . .
I.
Co.t $ZOO
01
CJz 117)
:]3
;14
z.
COlt $50
(II
UZ (18)
[J3
'l4
3..
I::Vl'n lar~ pr"p"rly ,'qUIPIHd with ~'II\!},I"IOn cuntrol f'quipnu'rt mir.ht .till pollulC' the an l{ the equlp-
nu'nt "".~s n..1 pr"p.'1 h. 111.11111.11:11 ,I, l).lw would yuu {eel about ala'" requlrinll periodIc Inspection of
the rmisfIotun l'ontrlJl .:>y...II'IJI I.. a~"lLrt' thai il wa.s workina properly? ("X" ONE ONLY)
Vt.'ry much In
favor 01 law
"'''''H'wh.I! In
1;lv"r "nahlt. < ,!::,I ("I'" till' IIISpt'lllun') (WRITE IN AMOUNT)
ZOD:=JZl
3r.
As!>unlln~ y"u had 10 11.1\" y,'I!r (a.r 11\"p.,~.tt~d at least nnct' is year. whf're do yuu think thf' inspechon
should bt. l1\ad~ ("X ONF. ONLY)
At :.lalt'-op"I"',llt'lI lnt>pt'clloJn rl'nl,'rs ., 11
AI 'Ily-opc.t..lll',j in!>pt" tlnn (l'nlt'I::I. .1 j.:!
At 1"1,11 !>"I"'\'I ,)1'" ~ll"'at-(l'!I ol j\
Al 601\11' otla'r place (Specify):
11-1
2Z
4..
I::v,'n II ,III .Iutt>~ \1,','1"',' t',/uIPIH'd wtth prl'IH'rly Inalntaineod
,'n\l..;::.i"n, .Introl sy...lc'n1!>, ..."lno' (IIU'S IIlIghl t;llll have autu
air POllUII"!) prnblo'lI\-' dIu' 10 llit' Idrge nllfnbrr of, ars
1'1ther on Ihl' ~lr,'('ls at 1111' !>.lnl.' tlnH~ tit t'lIncrntrateo in
parlu'ular a.rt'd:-'. LH-II'd 11.-I,w. ;'HI' sr-\'rral pOl>~nhlf' ways
to rt'dll," 1-"1111111"" IlI,dll .1111 III'" IH.Jth III thC:~t, ,onditic :1S.
Plea!'!(' It..11 IIH' lu.\\ yoll f",'1 .11,,,\11 C,I< 1\ uf Ih~:;e proposals.
I"X" ONF. ON EACII I.INf:, -
Z3
Z4
a.
b.
Pruposal:
Ga.soHnt' ratlllnln..: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Very 11I~h ($';00) 1"'I'~I~lral1l1n b'I' per auto. . . . . . . . . .
Very hij.!.h 1$IiOO) I"'q;1S.lratwn fl'" pl'l'" .lutu hut only
for thr sl'cond. lh~rd. t'te., ..Iutu. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prohibit l"aHlc and paTkln~ u. 't'ntral bU8ine.. di.trict.
[JI
01
1-11
01
nl
[l4
I 14
!J4
[ J4
114
14
[ 15
i J'
I J5
1)5
U'
J'
nl
[ ]1
[jl
IJz
: J2
ilz
Oz
llz
I ]Z
[JZ
rJZ
[ l'
III
113
lJ3
113
I'
!5
Z6
d.
n
e.
f.
A tax un ~ parklnt-( in c'rntr31 busines. districts. .
A tax OIn parlqnl( in It'l1tr.d h1Jsln"~l> rlistric:1. regardl"!:»!1
"J "'h.'llu'r a person pdrkl'd only one hour or all day
Toll:; un ('xit ran\ps of n\aJor fref'ways and expre..way.
Tolls un f'xit ramps uf major frrewa-ya and expre..way.
but only when traffh' was heavy. .. .. . . .. .. .. .
RI.~tric'tio)ns un nun-e::lSI'nl1al auto travel durina (inle.
of high polluti()n by iuuan,:e of 8p~ci.llicen8e
pt.'\t['s or vchu"lt" slickers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Turn somf' (>xlII,tin~ lant'!! inll) "hus unly" and "("ar pot,1
poly' l:tnf'<; 1111 "1~I"r t'lCpr~s"waya and !ltrrf.lta. . . .
34
lK
lJ5
lJ5
Z9
30
LJ3
n3
lJ4
(J4
8.
h.
..
L14
n>
31
IJ!
L- JZ
[-]3
J.
13
I 15
'Z
[ 14
(11
i I!
4b.
Which of thr prnpufiallf h8t~"d ,'\b"v(' would be thc mo.l accrptable?
(Give Letler:)-
\l
4<.
Which wpuld b~ most unacccptable?
.. ..............,.
(Give Letter:l-
F-5
-------
TABLE F-l
(CONT'D)
(2-G796)
Pal. 2
I
I
5a.
QUESTIONS 5-8 ASK FOR INFORMAnON RELA'T'~IO TO OTHEIl HOUSEHOLD MJ:WBEU.
CONSULT THEM. IF NECESSARY. FOR THE ANSWERS.
(For eJl:-
How oCtCD do the varioul member. of your hou.ehold travel by public traD.portation?
ample, by bu., subway, or commuter train.)
Three 01' more time. .. week.
One 01' two time. .. week. . . .
Once. month. . . . . . . . . . . .
Once every three montJu. . . .
Never. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~
...01
. ..02
.. .03 (35)
.. .04
.. .05
.. .06
No bouuhold member. . . . . .
~
...01
.. .02
.. .03 (36)
.. .04
.. .05
.. .06
Children
(Over 16 Veal" Old)
...01
. ..02
.. .03 (37)
.. .04
.. .05
.. .06
5b.
Plea.. rate .ach hou"ehold member', I'...on for u.in8 public tran.portatioD. (Rate the mo.t
important re~ III", the next most important t'Zt" the next ")11, etc. U.. hauI.hold member
never u.e. public tran.portation, "X" the "never u.ell bOJl: at the bottom of the li.t.)
,
,
,
:
.
:~
:.. . (41)
, -
:o.,_(47)
:,.._(53)
:..._(59)
:..._(6S)
:..._(71)
,. More n.zible (I can come :
and 10" I pIe...) . .. _(15) _(16) _1171 i'" _(18) _(19)
b. More re1a.dnl (able to ,
read while traveling). . : - - - - - (Not Applicable) - - - --
:. . . _IZ4) _(25) _IZ6)
j. I do not have a driver'. :
licen.e. . . . . . . . . .. _(Z7) _IZ8) -(Z9I:
,
k. Car 18 not available when :
I need II. . . . . . . . .. _(30) _(31) _(321:
,
I
,
_(33) _(34) _(35) i... _(36) _(37) _(38)
---------------------._---_._----.-----_.~-----_.._-------.-------
m. Neve. un I"X" Box) . .. 01 02 03 (391 !... 01 02 03 (40)
5c.
Pleau= rate each h~u8ebold member'. rea.on. for travelinl by auto.
.. In auutlon 5b. IWRITE IN BELOW UNDER ~)
Sb. Public Tran'Dor~~~:r.D
lOver J6
~ Year. Old)
~
~
a. Cheaper............
b. Fa.ter.............
_(38)
_(44)
_ISO)
_(56)
_16Z)
_(68)
_(40)
_(46)
_15Z}
_(58)
_(64)
_(70)
_1391
_(45)
_(51)
_15.7)
_(63)
_(69)
t;. More comfortable. . . . .
d. Saler for pauenger. . . .
III. Le.. conle.ted. . . . . . .
f. More avanable . . . . . . .
i. Need car during the ,day.
_(ZI) _IZ2) _(23)
- - - - - (Not Applicable) - - - --
I. Other ISpecUy),
5<1.
Follow the .ame procedure
Sc. Auto Tral1'Dor~':;:r.D
(Over 16
~ Year. Old)
_(42)
_(48)
_(54)
_(60)
_(66)
_(72)
_(43)
_(49)
_(55)
_(61) 174-78
_(67) OpeD)
---(73)~
Cd. 2
_(20) Dup.
1-14
- - - - - INot Applicable) - - -.-
- - - - - INot Appllcabl.) - - - --
A,ain. con.u1tina: other member. 01 your bou.ehold, ploa.. rat. iD order of oUecttvel1e.. whicb item.
below you feel would be mo.t eUective 111 oacoura.lq the \I,. 01 public tran.poratlon. (Rate the mo.t
effective item a "111. the next mo.t eUec:th,e "211, the next "3", etc.)
Children
~ ~ ~ (Over 16 Year. Old)
Cleaner and newer vehicle. . . . . . .. _14.1) _(42) _(43)
Fa.ter travel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. _(44) _(45) _(46)
Air-conditioned vehicle. . . . . . . . .. _(47) _(48) _1491
More frequent .ervice. . . . . . . . . .. _(501 _(51) _15Z)
Lower rare. ................. _1531 _(54) _(55)
Parking fadUtie. at .top. or .taUOD' _(56) _(57) _(58)
Shelters again.t bad weather at .top.
or .tation. ............... _(591 _(60) _(61)
Better lecurity to aUlure perianal
aafety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. _1621 _(63) _(64)
More conveniently located .top.
or .tation. ............... _(651 _(66) _(67)
Other (Specify), 171-78 Dp8DI
_(68) _(69) _(701 79gz)80
F-6
-------
TABLE F-l
(CONT'O)
f2-C796)
ba.
How would you or other household member. feel about traveUn, to and from work la. car pool?
("X" ONE ONLY)
Very interelted . . . . . . .01
Somewhat lntere.ted. . . .02
Not at.n intertuted . . . .03
A I ready in car pool. . . . .0'"
Do not travel to and (rom 05
work by car. . . . . . . .
6b.
U it became nece..ary to restrict the number of car. on exprealWay. &..Dd .treeh iD. order to
reduce pollution and car poole became nl"cc...ry, how difficult do you tbink it would be to ,.t
iato one an existing one or or~an'l<:" one amon~at your friend., neighbor. andlor work a..odate..
("X" ONE ONLY)
Extremely difficult. . . . .01
Very difncult ... . . . . .OZ
Somewhat difficult. . . . .03
Somewhat casy .. . . . . .04
Very easy.......... .05
E)(tremely eaay . . . . . . '06
Alreaay in car pool. . . .07
7.
One of the major caulle. oC areall oC tugh pollution 18 tralfic
conse.tion. Pollution could be reduced I( traHic eonge.tion
and .top-and-jto tra(fie wall reduced. Listed below are
.everalldeall Cor reducing tral£ie congelltion. Plealle tell
me bow effective you think each oC thelle ideaa would be in
reducing congelltion and pollution. ("X" ONE BOX FOR
EACH IDEAl
~
a.
b.
Prohibit parking. loading and unloadina on bu.y etreeh
Ine reasp the nUIT1be r of one -way etreet.. . . . . . . . . . .
Eetabli8h reversible lanel on bUIY atreeh to be uaed
during rueh houre. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prohibit turnll at bUllY interllecnon. during rullh houre .
Widen rTlajor IItreet 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Widen major IItreeh at intersechons only. . . . . . . . . .
Provide pedelltrian underpallBell and/or overp..e.ell . . .
lJnprove timing 01 traihc signals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
04
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
Oz
Oz
Oz
Oz
Oz
Oz
Oz
Oz
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
d.
'.
f.
&.
h.
i.
Increase the number and frequen<.y oi radio tra(he re-
ports
Turn lIome existing lan8s into "bus only" and "ca. pool
only" lanes on expressways and bu.y IItreet. ..
04
04
01
01
Oz
Oz
03
03
j.
Your ideae (Pleaap Liet):
01
Oz
03
04
8.
Since tra!flc congestion is mOllt sev("rt> at times when people are going to or cominS from work.
one alternative for reducing congestion would be to have people IItart and IItop work at dUferent
time. o( the day. That 18, 80rne people would start work at 5:00 AM and quit at 2'00 PM, other.
would work (rom 7:00 AM 10 4:00 PM, otheu irom 10:00 AM to 7:00 PM, etc. How do you (eel about
thlo id.a' ("X" ONE ONLYI
Very much in iavor. . . . .01
Somewhat 1n (avor ..,..02
Indiffe nnt. . . , . . . . . . .03
Somewhat opposed. . , , ,04
Very much oppoeed. . . . ,OS
(PLEASE CONTINUE ON THE NEXT PAGE)
F-7
Pa,. 3
Cd. )
DIIp.
1-14
15
16
17
18
19
ZO
ZI
ZZ
23
Z4
zs
26
Z7
Z8
-------
TABLE F-l
CONT'D)
Pa~~ ..
(2.C1'~ )
9b.
Plr3sf' Tt"cord lhr model year of each car owned in your houaehold. (WRITE IN BELOW
l'NOFR .:!!,I
plras«' ...;t1matf! tht' n':mbf'T of miles each car was driven in the la.t year.
IWRITf. I;, :-It'MIIER OF '-IlLES UNDER ~ BELOW)
9..
9c.
rnr each car, plea !IE' f'stIrnate what pf'rcf'nlage of la8t year'. mileage WP8 accounted {or by
cinvin't outside yOUT local metropolitan area. (For eo.ample, vacation, bual.ne.. trtp.,
short ",,'ekf'nrl trlP8. etc.' (WRITE IN BELOW UNDER ~)
9..
Model Year
9b.
Last Year'.
~
9c.
Percent-Ie of Mileage
Out.ide Local Area
Car" 1
_'Ie
-"
Z9QTI31
3ZQTI34
35QTI31
38QTI40
C;lr -z
CO\T ..;
_'Ie
-""
rar ...
9d.
How many IH \'I1.".d drivers are there in your household?
Nun\ber of Licensed Drivera:
(WRITE IN)
041
r~ (' .
11 ht'th'r pubh<. transportation were available, would you conaider dt8p08inl 01 any 01 tbe
,ar9 you "",'n)
y,., lJ~
" I - ) 'H. /low many? (WRITE IN) (:&r87
a..,pl." -
';, "7
4Z [J::] 43
In".
OVl'fal1. I,.w o:.l'rlr),JS a pr'Jhlf"m do you think auto air pollution h in your (:lty?
I'NDF.R ~ "F:I.CW)
Ovpralt. huw "If'f1UIJ~ a pf,,f>lem do you think auto air pollution i. natioDwide? ("X" ONE BOX
1 ~lDf:I' !.2!2. [IF.rnw)
("X" ora BOX
1010.
Vf'ry 5erl"!l8 problf'm. . . . . .
'-;l'flnUS prl)bh"m . . . . . . . . .
<")11J,!htly s..rio'lI! prQblem. . , .
'"Jo prol,lpn, at all. .. . . . . . . .
lOa. City
01
III (44)
[JJ
Ll4
.Ob. NattoD.ide
01
Oz (45)
01
04
II.
If Y"'I havl
.In,, V)t'W., "r ,,,n,nH'nts regarding any question OT idea, plea-Ie record them:
/46-780p"0)
19EID30
1 h.lnl< Y"'I I"r '1"' If hdp. Plf'd"l' (hf'ck your answer5 and then return the questionnaire to me in the
I'nt IIJS( d p""la~"-pa)d "n\ ,'Iopt'.
F-8
-------
TABLE F-2
RESULTS OF THE LOS ANGELES ATTITUDE SURVEY
All ;\utos made in 1')75 and thereafter will be equippcd with emmisian control dC'v;"cs to reduce air
pollution. U in 1975 yon owned a car buHt before that year, how would you feel about a law.!:..S:.
quirin.: yon to put emission control equipment whieh might cost $2.00 on your car? ("X" DELO',';)
How would you feel about this law if the cost was reduced by jl:overnrncnt subsidy to about ~ 50?
("X" BELO\'!)
I.
2.
Feeling Toward Law:
Very much in favor of law. .
Somewhat in favor of law. . .
Somewhat agains t law. . . . . .
Very much against law. . . . .
1.
Cost $200
10.5%
22.2%
13.1%
54.2%
2,
Cost $50
42.9%
23.4%
14.7%
19.0%
3a.
Even cars properly equipped with emmision control equipmt'rt miGht still pollute the air if the eqL!p-
ment W?s not properly mainlaincd. How would you feel about a law requi!'inJ;; periodic inspeclio:\ oi
the emission control system to assure that it was working properly? ("X" ONE O","LY)
Very much in
favor of law
48.4%
Somewhat in
favor of 1 aw
31.6%
Somewhat
against law
8.4%
3b.
Very much
against law
11. 6%
Assuming you ~ to have your car inspected at least once a year, what would you consider a
reasonable cost {or the inspection? (WRITE IN AMOUNT)
$
7.87
3c.
Assurnin!: you had to have your car inspected at leas! once a year, where do you think the ins?ection
should be mad;? ("X" ON!': ONLY)
At state-operated inspection centers.,...
At city-operated inspection centers......
At local service stations or garages. . . . .
At some other place (Spf'cify):
F-9
41.3%
14.3%
38.6%
5.8%
-------
4a.
4b.
4c.
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
To Me This Plan J ~:
-
Q) ... .:J
.... 0 Q) () ~
.0 Z:D ... - ~
ro ... ~
..... ..... Q) ... ro tU ~..: ~
Q, rJ :D C!i ..... .!: ...... (J
Q) '-; ;:
V .r:: '" ..c..o Q, Q, (J
() ;:... ..... ru C! :.J " r:
() Q) Q, 'r< ..... U f u c:
~ E Q) Q) Q, U lJ :;:,
U Z Q) ro 0 rJ
>- 0 u u ~ U') £:: >-
J.. U') ~ ut;) :J ...
Q) « C!i
::> ::>
,
Lvcn if all auloz ,,"erc cquipped wilh properly m.1intaincd
rmi-;,ion control systC'ms, some clties /11ir:hl still have auto
air poll"lion pn)b!eI11' OtiC to the largc number ,,; cars
citiler on the strcets "l tllC ~ame time or conccntrated in
particular "rcas. Li~!ed bdO\..' are several possib!c waye
10 rculIcc pollulion under onc or both oC these co..dition~.
Pleasc lell me how you {eel ,.b"ul ~ o{ theBc proposals.
("X" ONE 0:-< EACH LIJ'-IE)
Proposal
+2
tI
a.
b.
2.1%
0.5%
2.7%
5.9%
c.
Gasonline rationing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Very high ($500) registration fee per auto.
Very high ($500) registration fee per auto
but only for the second, third, etc.,
auto: . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4.4%
Prohibit traffic and parking in central
busines s districts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.1 %
A ta:..:: on ~....i~y parking in central busi-
ne s s dis tric ts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.8%
A tax on parking in central business dis-
tricts regardless of whether a person
parked only one hO\lr or all clay. . . . . . .. 5.4%
Tolls on ex; t ramps of ntajor Freeways
and expres sways. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3.7%
Tolls on exit ramps of major freeways
and expres sways but on]j' when traffic
was heavy........................... 2.2%
Restrictions on non-esfOential auto travel
during times of high poilution by
is suance of special license plates or
vehi cl e s ti ck e r s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5. 1 %
Turn some existing lanes into "bus only"
and "car pool only" lanes on major
expressways and streets.............. 35.1%
29.9%
7.1%
d.
29.0%
e.
16.5%
f.
11.3%
g.
4.8%
h.
8.2%
i.
21.0%
j.
o
6.4%
2.7%
2.7%
8.6%
17.6%
14.5%
8.0%
8.2%
9.7%
10.2%
o
12.8%
2.1%
11.5%
18.3%
14.9%
16.1 %
11.8%
16.5%
18.3%
10.2%
Which o{ the proposals listed above would be lhl" most ;)ccept"hlc?
(Give Letter:) J - 48.1%
I - 19. 9%
Which ....ould be most unacccpt;)h1e?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Give Letter:)
F-10
8 - 56. 1 %
A - 29.6%
-I
72.9%
92.0%
74.3%
28.0%
38.3%
52.7%
71. 7%
64.8%
36.0%
14.4%
-------
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
QUr:STIO:,S 5-8 J\Si~ FOR L"FOR~,lt\TIO:" REL.A.TJNG TO OTHErt HOUSEHOLD MEMBi':R5.
CONSULT TITI.:M. IF NECF.SSAItY. FOR THE ANSWERS.
Sa.
How oftcn clo the- various Hlcmbers of your household travel by public trantJportation?
ample, by bus, subway, or con11nutcr train.)
Three or n1.ore times a week.
One or two time,", c. week. . . . .
Once a month. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Once every three months. . . .
Never. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
No household member. . . . . . .
Husband
Wife
(For ~x.
Childre:i.
(Over 16 Years Olc)
4.7%
0.9%
2.8%
55.1%
36.4%
Sb.
Please rate ~ household member's reason for using public transportation. (Rate the most
important reason "I", the next most important "Z", the ncxt "3", etc. If a household r.:er.:':-cr
never use~ p\l;;'Ec transportation, "X" the "lIc,'cr usc" box at thc bottom of the list.)
0.6%
2.3%
1.1%
1. 7%
86.3%
8.0%
2.7%
1. 6%
2.7%
8.5%
84.6%
Sc.
Please rate ~ach household member's I'''asons for travcling by auto.
as in Question 5b. (WRITE IN DELOW ffi'lDER ~~)
5b.
Public
Reasons
Husband
a.
Cheaper. . . . . . . . . . .
b.
Faster. . . . . . . . . . . .
c.
More comfortable. .
d.
Safer for passenger.
c.
Less congested. . . . .
f.
More available. . . .. SEE COMMErnS
g.
More flexible:: ii ~d.n
come and go as
I please). . . . . . . . .
Transportation
Children
(Over 16
Years Old)
Wife
f-ll
Follow the same ;::~or:cc'~re
I
,
I
,
,
I
: Husband
,
,
I
I
I
,
I
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5c.
Auto
T :-2.!'".s:J0rtatic1
Childr=n
(Over 16
Year& C Id
Wi:",
6
5 5
3 3
5 5
7 7
7 7
5
8
6
3
-------
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------------------------------------------------j--------------------------..
I
I
I
h.
More relaxing (able
to read while
traveling). ... ....
i.
Need car during the
day............. .
j.
I do not have a
driver's license..
k.
Car is not available
when I need it. . . .
1.
Other (Specify):
m. Never use ("X" Box)
---- Not Applicable -.--
3
3
4
---- Not Applicable ----
---- Not Applicable ----
---- See Comments ----
5d.
Again, con""lting othcr mcmbcrs oC your houschold, plci\se rate in order oC eCCectivencss which i~em8
below you feci w01llri bc most eHectivc in encouraging the utle oC public transporation. (Rate the most
eHcctivc it, m a "I", the next moot eHective "2", the next "3", etc.)
Item s:
Cleaner and newer vehicles. .
Faster travel. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Air-conditioned vehicles
More frequent service. . . . . .
Lower farcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Parking facilities at stops or
stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Children
Husband Wife (Over 16 Years Old)
6 6 7
2 3 2
6 6 5
4
3
4
5
5
5
F-12
-------
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
Shelters against bad weather
at stops or stations. . . . . . .
6
Better security to assure
personal safety. . . . . . . . . . .
6
More conveniently located
stops and stations. . . . . . . .
2
Other (Specify):
6
9
6
7
2
2
6a.
How would you or other houaehold members {ecl about tr<1veling to and {rom work in a car pool?
("X" ONE 0NLY)
Very interes tcd . . . . . . . . . . . .
Somewhat inkresf.ec.l . . . . . . . .
Not at all interested. . . . . . . .
Already in car pool. . . . . . . . .
Do not travel to and from
work by car..............
18.1%
22.3%
43.6%
4.3%
11 .7%
U it bec.llne necessary to restrict the number o{ cars on expressways and street. in ordl"r to
J'educe pollution and car poola became necessary, how difficult do you think it would be to set
into onc an existing ono or organize one among 8t your {r iend B. nl"i&h~" r 8 J. nd lor work as Bociatl"'.
("X" ONE ONLY)
6b.
Extremely c.lifficult . . . . . . . . .
Very difficult. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Somewhat difficult. . . . . . . . . .
SOIl1l'what easy. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Very easy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Extremely easy. . . . . . . . . . . .
Already in car pool. . . . . . . . .
F-13
37.2~
24.0%
22.4%
8.2%
2. 2~Y,
3.8t
2.2%
-------
7.
8.
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
Onc of th€ major causes of an'as of high pollution is traffic
concestiol1, Pollution cOlllc! be reduced if trafflc conge~tion
and ~lop-and-go traffic \\"a~ reduced. Lislc'd below arc
.everal ide"-s for reducinG traffic conGcstion. Please tell
me hCJw effective you think each o[ theBe ideaB would be in
rcducin[: congcstion nnd ponutio". ("X" ONE BOX FOR
EACH IDEA)
Idea:
a.
Prohibit parking, ]oading a-nd unloading
on busy streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Increase the number of one-way streets. . . .
Establish reversible lanes on busy streets
to be used during rush hours. . . . . . . . . . . .
Prohibit turns at busy intersections during
rush hours............................
\\' ide n m a j 0 r s t I' e c t s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Widen n1ajor streets at intersections only. .
Provide pedestrian underpasses and/or
overpasses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
Improve timhl[' of traffic signal s ..........
Increase tilt: IJU!llbcr and freque"...., v~
radio traffic reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Turn some existing lanes into "bus only"
and "car pool only" lanes on express-
ways and busy streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
+2
43.8%
28.7%
31.1%
49.2
46.1 %
8.1 %
39.]%
62.1 %
19.9%
35.9%
+1
45.5%
44.8%
37.9%
36.2%
33.9%
39.9%
42.0%
35.Q%
50.6%
42.5%
o
10.2%
19.3%
16.4%
9.6%
17.2%
33.5%
15.5%
2.3%
26.1%
17.7%
c
-I
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Your ideas (Please List):
0.6%
7.2%
14.7%
5.1%
2.8%
18.5%
2.9%
Q.6%
3.4%
3.9%
Since traffic congestion is most severe at times when people arc going to or coming Irom work,
one alternative for rC'ducing congestion would be to have people start and stop work at different
times of the day. Thal i.e, some people would start worl: al 5:00 AM and quit al 2:00 l-'~1, others
would work from 7:00 Al.1 to .1:00 PM, others from 10:00 AM 10 7'00 PM, elc. How do you [eel about
this idea? ("X" ONE O"jLY)
Very much in fe_vor......... 34.9%
Somewhat in fav(Jr.......... 32.3%
Indifferent................12.7%
Somewhat opposed. . . . . . . . . . 10.6%
V h d . 9.5%
ery muc oppose.........
F-14
-------
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
9a.
Please Tecord the model year of each car owned in your household.
UNDER ~)
(WRITE IN BELOW
9b.
Please estimdte tne number of !niles eac/! car wa~ uflvt:n in the iast year.
(WRIT!: IN NUMDER OF MILES UNDER 1~ BELOW)
For each car, please estimate what percC'ntar;c of last year's n1ileage w? s accounted for by
driving outEiJe your local metropolitan area. (For exam?le, vacation, business hips,
short weekend trips, etc.) (WRITE IN BELOW UNDEl( .2.£.)
9c.
9b. 9c.
9a. La 5 t Yea r I 5 Percentage of Mileage
Model Year Mileage Outs ide Local Area
Car # 1 1968 12298 27
Car # 2 1967 9593 24
Car # 3 1967 9366 29
Car #4 1966 4666 3
9d.
How many licensed drivers are there in your housenold?
(WRITE IN)
Number of Licensed Drivers:
2.0
ge.
If better public transportation were available, would you consider disposing of any of the
cars you own?
Yes
Maybe
No
14.7%
15.8%
69.6%
9f.
How many? (WR ITE IN)
1.04
cars
F-15
-------
TABLE F-2 (CONT'D)
IDa.
Ov~ra1l. how serious a problem do you think auto air pollution Ie In your city? ("X" ONE BOX
UNDEP ~ BELOW)
lOb.
Overa1l, how serio'Js a oroblem do you think auto air pollution Ie nationwidc? ("X" ONT. BOX
UNDER lOb BELOW)
lOa.
lOb.
City
Nationwide
Very serious problem. . . . .
Serious problem. . . . . . . . . .
Slightly serious problem...
No problem at all . . . . . . . . .
55.3%
26.1%
14.4%
4.3%
40.8%
48.4%
9.2%
1.6%
I I.
U YOII hav(' any views or comments regarding any question or idca, plca8e record them:
F-16
-------
II.
Additional Los Angeles Attitude Surveys
Our research has uncovered two other recent and germain attitude
surveys in the Los Angeles area.
These publications are respectively
entitled "Public Concern and Beliefs About Air Pollution in California:
A Statewide Survey", published in Project Clean Air Research Reports,
Volume 3, University of California, 1970 and Mass Transit in Los Angeles:
An Analysis, published by Clarmont College, 1972
The first survey sought to document the public concerns and beliefs
about air pollution.
Table F-3 summarizes come of the results below:
. Some 25 percent of the Southern California respondents voluntarily
replied "air pollution" in response to the question, "Is there
anything in this area that particularly bothers you?" Sixty-six
per cent listed air pollution as one of the three "most serious"
problems. Only six percent did not think air pollution was a
serious problem.
.
In response to the questions, "Do you think air pollution or smog
has reached a point where it is a danger for normal, healthy
people?" 73 per cent of the Southern California respondents
replied affirmatively and an additional 14 per cent said "maybe".
. The public generally believes that auto exhaust and industry are
principal causes for air pollution. 81 per cent mentioned auto-
mobiles and 71 per cent mentioned industry (respondents were
allowed to answer more than once).
. When asked if they believe anyone is doing anything about air
pollution 35 percent responded negatively while the remainder of
the Southern California sample did not seem to be in consensus
about who is doing the work. Likewise there is no general
agreement over who should be responsible for insuring clean air.
. The respondents were generally in favor of a mandatory annual
vehicle inspection program, with 71 per cent indicating they
would support such a program. This tends to reinforce the results
of the previously discussed Consumer Mail Panel survey in which
80 per cent responded favorably to such a program.
The second survey was conducted in the city of West Covina, a suburb
17 miles east of Downtown Los Angeles.
The survey tended to indicate
some of commuter attitudes towards mass transit.
Table F-4 lists the
F-17
-------
responses to the questions which are summarized below:
. The respondents generally did not think that there was a need
for more freeways in Southern California. Only 27 percent
thought there was a need.
I Only one-half of the respondents (50.4 per cent) felt they would
benefit from a mass transit system while 85 per cent felt "the
people of Southern California" would benefit indicating the
attitude that mass transit is all right.. .for everyone else.
Forty-six per cent indicated they presently could use a bus
to get to work, but less than two per cent indicated they did not
drive to work.
I Reductions in air pollution and congestion were the most commonly
mentioned benefits that could be derived from a mass transit system.
I It is interesting to note that more than 57 per cent of the
respondents would like to see a Monorail for the mas~ transit
system while only seven percent would like to see a bus system.
Similar low responses were made in favor of other conventional
types of transit (e.g. ground train, subway, freeways).
. When asked about financing of mass transit respondents favored
federal grants and indicated strong resistance to a property tax.
Eighty per cent of the respondents indicated they would not
vote for a transit bond proposal. There was indications of mild
support for a sales tax and an additional gas tax.
I Respondents, on the average, indicated that they felt the commute
fare should be less than 98 cents, and they would be "willing" to
pay around 70 cents per trip.
F-18
-------
TABLE F-3
RESULTS OF PROJECT CLEAN AIR PUBLIC ATTITUDES SURVEY
Is there anything about living in this area that particularly bothers you?
particularly bothers you? Anything else?
(If Yes)
What is it that
Ed'ucation Gecgrapl.ica 1 Area
S.F.'!
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ Otherl N.Cal Bay Other3
high school high school college yrs. college Total Orange S.Cal Total Area N.Cal
"'T\ '% % % I. % % % % I. %
I
--'
\D
Air Pollution/Smog 14 17 20 24 25 29 16 10 11 9
Other General 33 39 42 48 43 42 44 36 40 32
Problems
Personal Problems 18 17 23 21 20 20 21 18 23 14
Nothing 50 45 37 38 39 39 41 49 44 54
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (268)
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'D)
Here is a card listing some problems that peo?le talk about. I would like you to look through these
and select the three you think are most serious th'~I:e days.
Education Geographical Area
S.F.L
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ Otherl N.Cal Bay Other3
high school high school college yrs.college Total Orange. S.Cal Total Area N.Cal
% % % %. % % % '7. 70 0/.
Crime and Violence 70 65 57 59 61 60 62 66 64 68
in the Streets
." Air Pollution 50 59 63 70 66 68 60 50 53 47
I
N
0
Property Taxes 35 40 36 22 34 34 34 34 34 33
Race Relations 23 29 32 44 30 27 38 33 32 34
Unemployment 33 29 29 17 26 26 25 31 26 35
Quality of Local 22 23 19 27 24 25 21 22 20 24
Schools
Poverty 20 19 26 26 20 19 21 26 24 28
Traffic 20 15 16 10 15 17 12 14 20 9
Public Transportation 11 10 12 16 15 16 11 8 8 8
Availability of 13 9 9 9 8 6 12 13 15 12
Adequate Housing
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (263:'
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'D)
Now I'd like to talk specifically about air pollut~.('n or smog. As far as you personally are con-
cerned, do you feel air pollution or smog is very ~"'rious» fairly serious, or not a serious problem?
Education Geographical Area
S.F.2
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ 0 t her 1 N.Ca1 Bay Othcr3
high school high school college yrs. college Tota 1 Orange S.Ca1 Total Area N.Ca1
% 01. % % 0, 7. % % % I.
,.
"'T'1-
I
N
-' Very Serious 61 70 74 78 77 78 72 61 63 60
Fairly Serious 23 22 20 19 18 16 21 26 28 25
Not Serious 13 7 5 3 5 4 5 11 9 13
Don't Know 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
1DO 100 100 iOO 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (268)
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'D)
Do you think air pollution or smog has reached a pcint where it is a danger for normal. healthy people?
Education Geographical Area
S.F.L
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ Otherl N.Cal Bay Other3
high scho.ol high school college yrs. co 11ege Total Orange S.Ca1 Total Area N.Ca1
% I~ % '0 % % I~ '0 '1. I.
-"
,
N
N
Yes 68 69 67 75 73 74 70 64 60 68
Maybe 14 12 19 9 14 15 12 12 13 10
No 14 16 12 15 11 9 16 19 22 17
Don't Know 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 5 4 5
-
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (268)
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'D)
11 th~nk are the main cau,es of smog or air pollution?
What do you. persona y. .
Education Geographical Area
S.F.2
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 cr more S.Cal L.A. / Otherl N.Cal Bay Other3
high school high school college yrs.c:>llege Total Orange S:Cal Total Area N.CCil
% % i. 7. % i. % i. i. %
Auto Exhaust 78 75 81 88 81 81 81 79 80 78
Industry & Fa~tories 64 72 81 79 71 69 78 75 78 74
"T1
I
N
W Bus or Truck Exhaust 19 19 25 21 20 21 15 23 30 17
Aircraft. Jets, 20 18 12 21 19 18 22 17 23 11
Airports
Oil Refineries 12 12 12 12 13 17 4 10 7 12
DiesE:l Trucks 12 11 11 7 11 11 12 11 12 10
Backyard Burning 7 6 3 7 2 1 4 10 6 14
Other 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 4 2 6
Don I t Know 5 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 3 J
(302) (420) (227) (1 )8) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (2()8)
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'O)
Do you think there are any people or organization:: doing important things to solve the air j)ol1ution
or smog problem? (If Yes) Who, that is, what re sons, groups, or organizations would you say are
really doing important things to solve the air ro lution or smog problem? Any others?
Educa tion Geographical Area
S.F.Z
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ Otherl !i.Cal Bay Other3
high school high school colle~" yrs. co 11ege Total Orange S.Cal Tota 1 Area !LCal
7. 7, 7. 7. 7. 7. '1. 7. 7. 7.
Yes 59 68 71 73 64 63 68 73 74 72
Haj or Oil Compani es 13 19 19 17 17 17 17 17 18 16
Any Local or County 12 12 16 22 14 14 12 17 19 16
..,., Agency, Like Air
I
N Poll. Control Dis~
..".
Citizens Croups, 5 12 18 18 13 14 11 14 14 14
College Students
Federal Govt. (Any 10 10 15 13 10 8 15 14 10 18
Federal Agency or
Congress)
Auto Manufacturers 8 10 13 11 10 9 14 10 9 11
Conservation Clubs 4 6 1. 19 7 7 6 13 16 10
State Legislature 7 8 9 12 7 7 5 11 9 13
(Legislators)
Other Industries 6 7 10 12 9 8 13 6
Any State Agency 3 6 7 9 5 6 3 8 7 9
(Air Resources Bd.)
Don't Know 17 17 9 10 14 13 18 14 16 12
No 37 31 2; 26 35 36 30 25 22 27
(302) (420) (22;) (198) (717) (526) (l89) (510) (242) (268)
-------
TABLE F-3 (CONT'D)
}uny people disagree about who should be taking the lead in trying to reduce air pollution or smog.
Which of these groups do you feel should be taking the lead in trying to reduce air pollution or
smog?
Education Gepgraphical Area
S .F.Z
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A./ Other1 N.Cal Bay Other3
high school high school college yrs. co 11ege Tota 1 Orange S.Cal Total Area N.Cal
i. % % i. % i. % % % i.
Federal Government 32 25 24 18 24 27 15 28 30 25
." (Washington)
I
N
U"1
State Government 21 18 14 10 16 16 15 16 18 15
City, County, or 13 15 13 14 13 15 10 15 13 17
Regional Govt.
Private Industry 11 17 15 18 17 18 13 15 18 12
People Like Yourself 6 6 6 7 5 5 7 8 10 7
All of the Above 3S 45 46 S4 45 41 54 43 41 44
Don't Know 6 1 2 2 2 2 2 2
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (26~)
-------
TABLE F- 3 (CONT'D)
The California Legislature is now trying to decid~ if cars should be inspected 7ve~y y;ar for smog
emissions. Would you favor required annual inspections of all cars for smog em1SS o~s
Education Geographical Area
S.F.L
Less than Completed 1-2 yrs. 3 or more S.Cal L.A.! Otherl N.Ca1 Bay Other3
high school high school college yrs. college Total Orange S.Cal Total Area N.Cal
~ % % % % % % % i. % '10
I
N
0\
Yes 74 67 74 78 71 69 77 74 71 76
No 20 27 22 17 24 26 19 20 20 20
Don't Know 7 6 4 5 5 5 5 6 9 4
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
(302) (420) (227) (198) (717) (528) (189) (510) (242) (268)
-------
TABLE F-4
MASS TRANSIT STUDY GROUP TELEPHONE SURVEY
"'TI
I
N
--..,I
Quc5tion
NlJr~ber
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1. 41
1.5
2.0
3.0
4.0
II. 1
5.0
5.1
5.2
6.0
Do you work in or near downtown L.A.? 14.3%
Do you regularly travel in the direction ofL A.? 41.976
How far from home does this trip take you? Average Distance: 36.5 miles
How long does it take you to get there? 22.9 minutes average time; 43.6
Do you Drive? 98.1%
How do you feel about driving?
(Of those who answered Yes to 1.4): 25.5% Negative; 38.3% Neutral;
Could you use the bus to get there?
How often do you use the freeway system?
Never Use - 11.5% Use More than Once per Week - 79.8%
Use Less than Once Per Week - 8.6% (5.0 Average Times per Week)
At what time of day do you use the freeways? (Of the 83 who use freeways):
6 a.m. - 9 a.m. - 42 Noon - 3 p.m. - 9 6 p.m. - 12 p.m. - 6
9 a.m. - Noo~ 8 3 p.m.-6 p.m. - 5 12 p.m. - 6 a.m. -20
Are the freeways clear or congested when YOl use them?
Clear - 48.9% Congested 35.5% ~oderate 15.5%
If the freeways were never congested, would ~ou use them
more often?
Question
(Where Applicable)---
Would you benefit from a mass transit system?
Would the people of Southern California benefit?
Do you see benefits?
What would those benefits be?
Air Pollution - 51
Congestion - 45
(Of the 92 wh) said Yes to 4.0):
Time - 22 Other - 48
Car Costs - 12 Don't Know - 3
Response
Yes
Don I t Know
No
85.7%
58.1%
mph average speed
1.9%
36.1% Positive
45.7% 52.2% 2.2%
50.4% 47.6% 1.9%
84.8% 7.6% 7.6%
87.6% 10.4% 1. 9%
42.6%
54.5%
3.0%
-------
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
"'Tf
I
N
co
12.0
13.0
TABLE F-4 (CONT'D)
Do you see a need for more freeways in Southern Ca1ifornia?
What fare would you be wi11ing to pay? Jverage Fare 71.4~,
What is the most one should pay? Jverage fare 98.4~,
Should a commuter fare be higher than a ru~ t-hour fare?
Methods of Financing (Number of Responses: 104):*
Property Tax
Set! es Tax
G
-------
APPENDIX G
EXPANDED TRANSPORTATION DATA
The following tables contain additional transportation data which
were either used for analysis or would be helpful for further analyses.
These data come principally from the 1967 LARTS Origin - Destination
Study (G-l) and the 1969 A Survey of Average Driving Pattern~ in the
Los Angeles Urban Area (G-2).
Table G-l.
Trip Generation by Family Size
(Weekday)
Fami ly 5i ze Percent of Person Trips Per Driver Tri~s Per
(!,)2\'~ons) HOl!~.cholds Household Person Household ~erson
1 21.9 2.3 2.3 1.8 1.8
2 29.6 5.8 2.9 4.4 2.2
3 15.7 8.5 2.3 6.4 2.1
4 14.8 10.3 2.6 7.2 1.3
5 9.5 11.5 2.3 7.4 1.5
6 or more 3.5 12.9 1.9 7.6 1.1
Source:
see Reference G~l
Table G-2.
Person Trips Per Household By
Vehicle Ownership (Weedkay)
Vehicles Los Angeles Orange Riverside San Verntura LARTS
Available County County County Bernardino County Area
County
o 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.9 1.2
1 5.5 6.2 6.0 6.8 6.5 5.8
2+ 10.2 11. 7 11.4 11.9 12.5 10.7
Total 6.8 8.8 7.5 8.4 9.2 7.2
Source:
see Reference G-l
G-l
-------
Table G-3. Trip Generation by Household Income (Weekday)
I1Jo u s(;'hOTa-Tnco-;;:c-----Vr;-rceil t Pc:rC(:i1t PersQn rr'-i!1s Ori ver "rrlDsl
1 ~<;7 dol1,!'s) HCUS'~:101ds Person Trios Per I-Isld. Per Hsld. I
- .
Less than 3,080 10.2 2.8 2.2 1.1
3,000 - 3,999 7.0 3.3 3.8 2.2
5,000 - 4,S99 8.6 6.7 6.2 4.3
6,000 - 5,999 9.3 8.3 7.0 4.9
7,000 - 7,909 8.8 8.8 7.9 5.5
8,000 - 8,9S9 8.0 9.0 8.9 6.3
9,000 - 9,99S 8.0 9.5 9.4 6.8
10jOOO - 1 2 / ~. 9 12.0 16.5 10.9 7.8
12,500 - 14,999 8. 1 11.8 11.5 8.4
15,000 - 19,999 6.8 10.0 11.8 8.7
20,000 - 2,~,S;9 2.7 4.0 11.8 8.8
Over 25,000 2.8 4.3 12.1 9.1
Source:
see Reference G-l
Table G-4.
Percentage Distribution of LARTS Emp1oyment--1960, 1967
-.-.-. ------
,
San
Los ,Anqe1~;s OranrJe R1 vers; de" Bernardino* Ventura
p,~'t. 2 '
6.4 2.6 4.5 2.3
79.0 11.6 2.5 4.3 2.6
ljGO
1967
* rn~tion in LARTS area
Source:
see Reference G-l
G-2
-------
;I')
I
(.oJ
Table G-5.
Person Trips By Trip Type Average Weekday
I Home- Other- Work- Home- HOine - Total
Other Other Other Work ShoDping Trios
I Person Tri ps 8,503,500 4,156.400 1.698.100 4.974,600 2,356,900 22,189,500
I
Percent 38.3 18.7 7.7 22.4 12.9 100.0
Source: see Reference 6-1
-------
Table G-6.
Average Weekend Day Trips Compared
With Average Weekday Trips
-=---~ --;;;;:o--r----- flverllge \Jeekend Day Average IJeekday
PC1'~; on Tn p
T,ype Va lWI2 Percent Volume Percent
Home-Other 10,694,500 54.9 8,503,500 38.3
Other-Other 3,744,500 19.2 4,156,400 18.7
~'Jork -Othe r 330,750 1.7 1,693,100 7.7
Home-\llork 1,479,500 7.6 4,974,000 22.4
Home-Shop 3,231 ,000 16.6 2,356,900 12.9
Tota 1 19,480,250 1 00 . 0 22,189,500 1 ao . 0
Source: see Reference G-l
G-4
-------
Figure G-l.
Hourly Distribution Of Person Trips
By Trip Purpose At Destination
350
SOCIAL AND
R[G.~A TION
300
250
~ 200
~
~
Z 150
~
1&1
..
100
50
o
12
2
AM
..
6
10 12 2
HOUR DEGINNING
8
10
PM
8
..
6
Source:
see Reference G-l
G-5
1.4
1.2
1.0 ~
0::
I-
-I
0.8 ~
I-
o
I-
u.
0.6 0
I-
Z
w
0.4 ~
w
Q.
0.2
0.0
12
-------
Figure G..2.
Hourly Distribution of Person Trips By
Trip Purpose At Destination (Continued)
350
OTHER
~o
250
~200
f
=
~ 150
II)
C'!
~
100
50
o
12
Source:
2
AM
8
10
PM
..
8
10
12
..
6
6
2
I:O:.Ja C[GII~: :;:!G
see Reference G-l
G-6
1. ..
1.2
'"
1.0 D-
ie
...
..J
0.8 ~
...
~
I&.
0.6 0
...
z
w
u
0." GI:
w
L
0.2
0.0
12
-------
Figure G-3.
Hourly Distribution Of Person Trips By
Trip Purpose At Destination (Continued)
WORK
1200 5.4
II)
1000 4.5 D-
o::
....
8 ...J
800
-------
1-400
1200
1000 -
o
8 600 -
~
a;:
....
z 600
~
t't
IJ
IL 4.00
200
Figure G-4.
I:ourly Distr'ibution Df Pcrc,on T\'ips By
Trip fJurpose /'It Dcstinatio" (Confinued)
.'-
--:--... I ,
o --1--C:::,=:;
12 2 ..
AM
Source:
6
t:OU~ r=:.ji~;!:~~G
see Reference G-l
....,-------...-------.---.-
HOME
, I
12
I I
2
I I
..
J -LJ
6
8
10
PM
G-8
6.3
5.-'
CI)
".5 D-
o:
~
...J
3.6 ~
o
~
~
o
2.7 ~
z
w
U
1. 8 ffi
D-
0.9
0.0
12
-------
Figure G-5.
Hourly Distribution Of Person Trips By
Trip Purpose At Destination (Continued)
2:;0 1.4
SCl100l
2"0 1.2
200 1.0 II)
n.
~ ~
I-
- 160 0.8 ..J
..(
f I-
o
- I-
....
120 0.6 LL
~ 0
I-
Z
.... W
L 60 U
0.4 0::
W
a..
''0 0.2
0 I I 0.0
12 2 " 6 8 10 12 2 " 6 8 10 12
AM HOUR CEGINNING PM
Source:
see Reference G-l
G-9
-------
280
240
200
~ 160
'"
CL
Go:
....
z 120
~
Go:
W
CL 80
Source:
Figure G-6. Hourly Distribution Of Person Trips By
Trip Purpose At Destination
SHOPPI NG
40
o
12
2
AM
6
4
8
10 17 2
HOUR BEGINNING
...
6
8
10
PM
see Reference G-l
G-10
1.4
- 1.2
1.0 ~
0::
~
-'
0.3 ~
o
~
u..
0.6 0
~
z
w
U
0.4 0::
W
n..
- 0.2
0.0
12
-------
Ci>
I
.....
.....
N
U
M
B
E
1,30 I
If!
! I
'00 I'
nolJ
I
2" I
i
I
160 i
I
!
eo I
I
I
I
i
I
-r---
I
I
I
P.
o
f
T
!\.
I
..
,.
.'
Source:
Figure G-7.
Distribution Of Trip Time, Weekday Trips
LIl
L.J-,
-
"
16
~4
32
40
48
56
6lo
see Reference G-2
MINUTES
-------
640
560
N
U
M ~80
B
E
R
~oo
o
F
320
T
t'.
I
P 240
S
160
80
Source:
Figure G-8.
Distribution ~; Trip Uistance,
l;eekday Tr-; ps
5
1 0
1 5
M J L E S
see Reference G-2
G-12
~.
k-L_r-"""'-L_. f-
20
25
-------
160
N
U
H
B 140
E
R
0 120
F
T
R 100
I
P
S
80
260
Figure G-9.
Distribution Of Trip Distance~
Heekend Trips
240
220
200
180
60
40
l.
~~-r-~
20
--
. .
I 1 2 3 ~ 5 t 7 8 S 10 ]1 12 13 l~ 15 16 17 Ie 19 2Q 21 22 Z3 2~ 25 26 27 :8
-..--....--
KILES
Source:
see Reference G-2
G-13
-------
Table G-7. The Typical Three-Trip Day Pattern
(Represents 18% Of All Three-Trip Days, 1.6% Of All Car-Days)
m
I
......
~
r ,,,. I 'l 00'.'"'' i ,..,...I_"~,,..F":_' "~'S:'[..".,.,. """'L-L. w, ",'" "~,"
~.. -'". i n,Y'_'~:, I ~,'~"~;: :'\!T j" ,', ':A:~C.' ~:~:) 1::1:/.; f "-1:::,;;;:.,,:' f'f";.:~r"""'!..;iA;:Gt,~
i ;,;-- : '~;: I " ~: T" - O"";-:-'~;-I '~-:;- -;:;,r~:;-:;~ I"~:; I--;-,~; d",
I ;1'. i I,',.',". I J !:I' 1.7J21 0~')~ - ()7~ry I R.9 4.71 O.J - 6.0 26)1 1~.0 - 45.0
'I i i; I ?;FF I I 'I' _):L I }.J ;:~ = ~:oo ~~:~ i~:6 = ~~:g
I I n,7 IJ.:i I
" 2,~7PIT ~~l~~~ B CCU;R 1--:: tC:t:.\;rl:~~~\':R~6») - 175~ I 7.l I U!I' 0.1 - 4.0 I :1.R,! 10.0 - 35.0
3A IIUJ~:' ,1751, I e.5 I 3.11 0.1 - S.U a,ol 10.0 - 35.0
I 2~ I s~~~ I 1 I ~I' I'J;"') 1~31 - 17~R i 8.4 I J.~i 0.1 - 6.0 1",,41
I i I; Ii: i ~LL IlJ ~:i = ;~o() 1 ~;:;I
I i I I 24. t 12. "1 I
'p, I lW'::! 1 1:1' !';':,sl - I 6.~ I 2.:., O.J - 1..0 122.5 10.0 - J5.0
""'1 ""'~"I U." "~ll~Q"" 'WU1 I
10.0 - 40.0
25.0 - 55.0
15.0 - 40.0
tt ?}.~:::!-: rQ'OALS ~~[::~, PLt!~ OR ~I:.""..!::: 0~;~: STA..':CAP:J DL'/:.\'IION
,'t... ?...\;'~:;. Cr":7.\P:~ A7 1.:'.J..ST 75% 0:- "L~. CA.s:::~ (~C~ '1':::..:'1')
Source:
see Reference G-2
!-oWDER OF ~rors TI~~ (~T:-:)
(rn'ys) If1J..?
~:£A.--: RA:\G[,'"'''' v.EAt~ r..\:\G~~{I'"
11.8 4.0 - 22.0 3.6 1.0 - 8.0
4.3 2.0 - 12.0 I 1.3 0.0 - 2.0
1.5 0.0 - 2.0 0.) 0.0 - 1.0
4 . 5 2.0 - 12.0 1.4 0.0 - 2.0
10:3 3:0
5.7 0.0 - 10.0 1.7 0.0 - 2.0
7.2 0.0 - 14.0 2.0 0.0 - 5.0
5.3 0.0 - 6.0 1.4 0.0 - 3.0
1.9 0.0 - 2.a 0.3 0.0 - 1.0
2.0 0.0 - 6.0 0.5 0.0 - 3.0
"TZ uTI I
5.1 2.0 - 14.0 1.5 0.0 - 3.0 I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
REFERENCES:
G-1
G-2
California Division of Highways, LARTS Base Year
Report - 1967 Origin - Destination Survey,
December 1971.
Kearin, D. H. and Lamoureaux, R. L., A Survey of
Average Driving Patterns in the Los Angeles Urban
Area, System Development Corporation Technical
Memo (TM(1)-4119/000/01).
G-15
-------
APPENDIX H
LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN AREA MODE CHOICE MODEL
FOR VARIOUS INCOMES
In section 7.2 of this report the average family income was
mentioned as one of the parameters used to determine the number of
person trips expected to be made via mass transit for a particular
type of trip. Figures H-l through H-6 of this appendix illustrate
the relationship of average family income on transit ridership for a
typical home to work trip.
To generate these curves the same assumptions used for develop-
ment of Figures 7.3 - 7.8 were made and are listed in Table 7.5. In
additiont a "high" and "low" level of income were defined by greater
than $15tOOO per year and less than $5tOOO per year respectively. The
middle income level shown on these curves is defined as $lOtOOO per
yeart the approximate current median income for the Los Angeles area.
Figures 7.3 - 7.8 were drawn using the middle income level.
The curves reflect the fact that various income groups perceive
differing marginal utility changes for a uniform change in actual con-
ditions. In general t larger percentages of low income travelers will
probably find mass transit more attractive than the automobile for a
given set of actual conditions under the current attitudes about mass
transit in the South Coast Basin.
H-l
-------
40
30
0.
'r-
.c
VI
~
Q)
"0
.r-
0:::
...... 20
.r- loly
VI
C
ItS 1'1)
~ C'o~
I- ~
......
c
Q)
u
~ 10
Q)
0...
High Income
o
o
.30
.60
.90
1.20
1.50
F - doll ars
Figure H-l. Transit Fare (One Way) Vs Percent Transit Ridership
Sou rce :
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan
Area Mode Choice Model
H-2
-------
20
17 .5
/. 0ly
1:
IJC'Q
~~
15.
0..
'r-
.&:.
1/1 12.5
s..
cu
"t:I
'r-
0:::
+J
'r-
1/1 10
c
ns "'idd
s..
~ l~ I
+J f}C'%e
c
cu
u 7.5
s..
cu
0.. I
I
I
5 '
I
I - - Current1y 12
I
2.5 High Income'
I
I
I
I
5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20
Ta + Tw - Minutes
Figure H-2.
Transit Access and Waiting Time Vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
Mode Choice Model
H-3
-------
20
18
I. Oly
/;
16 I)C'%~
CL
.,....
.s:::. 14
1/1
...
Q)
~
.,....
0:: 12
+-'
.,....
1/1
c::
10 10
...
t-
+-'
c::
Q) B
u
...
Q)
a..
6
4
High Income Current1y 48-
2
0
0
Figure H-3.
Source:
40
60
80
100
Tr - Minutes
Transit Riding Time Vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
Mode Choice Model
H-4
-------
0-
-
~
en
...
Q.I
"0
0;: 30
+oJ
-
en
c:
IG
...
I-
+oJ
; 20
u
...
Q.I
0..
40
10
I
I
I
I
I
~ Currently .52
I
I
I
High Income
o
1.00
.50
1.50
2.00
Ao + Ap - dollars
/
2.50
Figure H-4. Automobile Operating and Parking Cost (One Way)
Vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
Mode Choice Model
H-5
-------
40
0.
.,....
~
II!
~ 30
Q)
"
.,....
0::
+>
.,....
II!
C
ttJ
~
~ 20
+>
c
Q)
u
~
Q)
0...
I
I
10 I
I
I current1Y 23
1......-
I
I
0 90 110
10 30 50 70
Ar - Minutes
Figure H-5. Automobile Riding Time Vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
Mode Choice Model
H-6
-------
40
0..
.r-
~ 30
VI
L
cu
"'C
.r-
0:::
of-)
.r-
VI
s::: 20
10
L
I-
of-)
s:::
Q.I t-\idd1e
u
L I
Q.I I
0..
10 t
I
I '2.
I curre"t1Y
I~ . '" 1 "come
I ~'9
I
0 I
0 10 20 30 40
Minutes
Figure H-6. Automobile Terminal Parking Time Vs. Percent Transit Ridership
Source:
Developed from the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area
Mode Choice Model
H-7
-------
APPENDIX I
GASOLINE RATIONING DURING WORLD WAR II
CHRONOLOGY
. April, 1941
The Office of Price Administration (OPA) is formed
under the War Production Board to curtail infla-
tion and administer the distribution of essential
goods which had become scarce due to the war.
. March, 1942
Trial gas rationing begins on the East Coast.
The reason is a regional shortage caused by Nazi
U-boats sinking American tankers in the Atlantic.
Official East Coast gas rationing begins.
. July 1, 1942
. December 1,1942
Official gas rationing is extended to all states
in the nation. However, the reason is to con-
serve the rubber consumption by limiting tire
wear. The Japanese had captured 90 per cent of
the rubber exporting countries.
. December, 1943
By this time, gas rationing throughout the United
States was based on scarcity of gasoline. Tire
wear had become a secondary concern.
With the end of the war with Japan, gasoline
rationing ended.
Administration of Gasoline Rationing Program
. September, 1945
Like all of the rationing systems during World War II, the ration-
ing of gasoline was controlled by a system of coupon books.
There were
basically two types of ration books:
highway types, intended for auto-
mobiles, motorcycles, etc. and non-highway types for motorboats, farm
machinery, etc.
According to an OPA pamphlet written in August, 1942, rationing
was "a community plan for dividing fairly the supplies we have among all
who need them. II
Gas rationing officially began in 17 eastern states on
1-1
-------
July 1, 1942.
This commodity was rationed because of a regional short-
age due to Nazi U-boats sinking American tankers in the Atlantic.
A variety of different classes of ration books existed for the
hi ghway types.
Book "A" ",as the basic rationing book for passenger cars,
whereas Book "B" was the basic rationing book for motorcycles.
If a
registered car owner could adequately demonstrate that he regularly
carried three or more persons in his car to work, or that such a ride-
sharing plan was infeasible and alternative transportation was inadequate,
he could obtain supplementary rations according to his need.
These indi-
viduals would be additionally
supplied with Book liB II coupons.
Ration
Book "C," affording mileage greater. than that of "B" was for drivers
whose driving needs were considered most essential to the war effort.
Finally, there were two books ("T-111 and IT-2") for certain commercial
operations considered essential to the maintenance of the domestic economy
(e.g., trucks, buses, taxis, ambulances, military vehicles, etc.).(I-l)
Each coupon was worth a certain amount of gasoline varying from 2
to 5 gallons.
Every quarter the Director of Petroleum decided the value
of the coupons, usually allowing from 380 to 470 miles of travel per month.
Book "A" contained four pages of seven coupons per page.
Coupons on each
page were numbered successively.
Each page was valid for only a certain
period of time (two or three months) and thereafter became invalid.
If
a person had not used up his coupons during the specified period, he could
never use them.
Ration Book "B" (supplement to "A") had 16 coupons intended for
three months 1 use.
If the mileage need of the holder was less, the period
Book "C" contained 64 coupons, good also for a period
use was extended.
1-2
-------
of three months.
"T-l" books contained 96 coupons and "T-2" books con-
tained 384 coupons worth five gallons each.
The "0" coupon books con-
tained 32 coupons, with the value of each coupon being less than that
for autos.
Rationing was supervised by OPA and administered by local boards
comprised of volunteers.
However, the Petroleum Administrator for War
actually defined the shortage areas and determined the gasoline allotments
available for civilians.
The Administrator created four different cate-
gories for civilian gasoline consumption.
The ';A" coupons were for
pl easure di~i vers, "B" and "c" for those whose occuoati on requi red more
driving, and "X" for those with an unlimited mileage need (e.g. govern-
ment officials, farmers, and others whose driving was essential to the
war effort).
In order to obtain a basic gas rationing book, two forms had to be
filled out -- one .for the coupon book and one for checking tire wear.
Another form, OPA R-535, had to be filled out if the applicant desired
supplemental rations.
The coupons were issued upon receipt of a complete
form with the applicant's signature and a valid motor vehicle registra-
tion with the applicant's name on it.
In order to obtain supplemental
rations, individuals had to demonstrate such a need.
Proof of additional
need was not standardized, and was quite often based on the honor system.
In retrospect, the relative ease with which supplemental rations could
be obtained turned out to be a major "loophole" in the program.
Initially, basic ration books were distributed during three days
(November 9.10, and 11,1942).
Other ration books were distributed for
the rest of the month by the Local War Price and Rationing Boards.
By
1-3
-------
December 1, 1942, gas rationing was extended to the rest of the nation,
primarily to conserve rubber consumption by limiting tire wear.
However,
at the end of 1943 tanker traffic in the Pacific had become so limited,
gasoline rationing for the entire nation was based on scarcity of gasoline.
Records of the number of each coupons issued were kept by the
Registrars and Boards.
These II I nventory Record Forms" were then sent to
the State Director of the OPA, who in turn
sent a summary report to the
OpA.
These records were compiled for comparison of the number of coupons
actually used, and the amount of gasoline distributed.
The coupons were
passed from the car owner to the dealer to the intermediate distributor
and finally, to the licensed distributor.
The licensed distributor was
not required to exchange such coupons to secure replenishment of their
supplies.
Instead they transmitted all of the coupons they received from
the intermediate distributors and dealers along with their State tax form.
Again, in retrospect, this reporting mechanism allowed many violations
to occur in how much gasoline was actually used.
Another check on the rationing system was accomplished by requiring
gasoline dealers and intermediate distributors to register pertinent
information with their War Price and Rationing Boards.
They indicated
on appropriate forms the capacity of their storage tanks and the amount
of gasoline at hand at the time of registration.
As the war progressed,
the administration and issuance of these forms were made easier.
First,
the application and renewal forms were shortened and simplified.
Then,
provisions were made for renewal and other board transactions by mail,
thus saving time and travel.
to gasoline rationing. (1-3)
Also, the ration banking system was applied
1-4
-------
The standard procedure of rationing gas was nationalized from the
east coast policy, but the allotment was more lenient in the western
and mid-western states.
As of December 1, 1942 pleasure drivers on the
Eastern Seaboard states were allowed to travel 378 miles per month while
those in other states were permitted 470 miles per month (i .e. about 24%
more mileage than the east coast).
When the war with Japan ended September 2, 1945, gasoline rationing
ended.
Public Reaction to Gas Rationing
Overall the public saw gas rationing as a necessary burden borne for
the war effort.
President Roosevelt's message on an OPA explanatory
pamphlet in August, 1942 read as follows:
IIWe are now in this war. We are all in it -- all the way.
Every single man, woman and child is a partner in the most
tremendous undertaking of our American history. Ahead there
lies sacrifice for all of us.
But it is not correct to use that word. The United States
does not consider it a sacrifice to do all one can, to give
one's best to our nation, while the nation is fighting for
its exi s tence and its future 1 He. II
However, when extension of gasoline rationing from the East Coast
to the West was considered in Congress, lIit was greed with considerable
misgiving and opposition in the areas affected.II(I-3) IICalifornians
feared rationing would mean a traffic holocaust especially in spread out
Los Angeles; they freely used words like 'panic, riot' to describe their
fears of what rationing might bring.II(I-4)
On a more individual basis, people were confused and bitter because
the distribution didn't seem fair.
IIMany who accerted the IIAII cards
1-5
-------
because they did not have to use their cars for business were bitter
when they found that some of their neighbors, who could equally well
switch to other forms of transportation, had asked for and received "B"
or even "X" cards.,,(I-5)
The Impact of Gasoline Rationing on VMT
By January 1, 1943, 25 million passenger cars were having their gas
intake rationed.
Of these autos, 25.4 per cent (6,370,000) were on "B"
rations and 14.3 per cent (3,590,000) were on "C" rations.
Thus, over
half of the civilians were on "A" rations, or the most limited category.
The Office of Price Administration estimated the average mileage per car
to have been 5,150 miles, which was one-half of the pre-rationing average
mileage.
The sale of gas dropped 40 per cent from December 1, 1942 to
January 1, 1943 in states west of the Alleghenies.
During 1943, total nationwide driving was reduced by 255 million miles
daily or 32.6 per cent from total mileage in 1941.
average mileage reduction was 26 per cent. (1-3)
On a local level the
Problems with Administration and Enforcement
A lot of the administrative problems were ironed out during 1943.
But before this time, there were two main problems with administration.
First, standards weren't specific enough to actually carry out the fair
division of supplies.
Proof of need was not required; gasoline rationing
was basically on the honor system.
Procedures for obtaining ration books were time-consuming, confusing
and i mpersona 1 .
Since registration for the coupons occurred for only a
short period (4-5 days) it was impossible to give individual attention.
1-6
-------
Enforcement problems stemmed from an incomplete system of enforcing
proper use of coupons.
Each car had a window sticker indicating the type
of ration book available to the owner.
However, if the owner had obtained
extra coupons through the black market, these were accepted at many service
stations.
After five months of rationing on the East Coast, OPA investi-
gators found that 70 per cent of the 500 gas stations in these states
were violating gas rationing rules, and distributing more gasoline than
they should have. Besides misuse of valid coupons, there was quite a
problem trying to halt the distribution of counterfeit coupons. (1-2)
No method was established to inspect filling stations so many of
them were bootlegging gasoline.
Finally, a coupon black-market developed.
Many of the coupon books
for any quantity (X books) created for use by ambulances, hearses, taxis,
buses, etc. found their way into the black-market.
Thus, those who could
afford black-market prices were able to avoid "rationing."
1-7
-------
References
1-1.
1-2.
1-3.
1-4.
1-5.
Office of Price Administration, Plan for Milea e
Instructions for Administrators," Form OPA R-538
November, 1942.
10-1-42),
, First Quarterly Report.
, Fourth Report of the Office of Price Administration.
Time, December 30, 1942.
The Nation, March 23, 1942.
Additional references which outline many of the administrative details
for how the gasoline rationing program was carried out:
1-6.
1-7.
1-8.
1-9.
1-10.
1-11 .
1-12.
1-13 .
1-14.
1-15.
1-16.
Office of Price Administration, "Emergency Plan for Gasoline
Rationing - Official Information and Instructions for Those Who
Wi 11 Carry Out the Pl an, II Form OPA-R-517, 1942.
, "Emergency Plan for Gasoline Rationing - Instructions
for Dealers, Dealer Outlets, Suppliers," Form OPA-R-518, 1942.
, "Emergency Gasoline Rationing REgulations," Ration
Order No.5, Title 32, Chapter XI, Part 1394, Form OPA-R-519.
,
July, 1942.
Gasoline Rationing Instructions," Form OPA-R-538,
, "Plan for Gasoline Rationing - Instructions to Dealers,
Intermediate Distributors, Licensed Distributors," Form OPA-R-539,
, "Gasoline Rationing Regulations," Ration Order No. 5A,
Title 32, Chapter XI, Form OPA-R-540.
, "Mileage Rationing: Gasoline Regulations," Ration Order
No. 5C, Title 32, Chapter XI, Form OPA-R-540 (revised).
, "Instructions for Licensed Distributors," Form OPA-R-
550 (revised 10-5-42), November, 1942.
, "Instructions for Licensed Distributors - Supplement
No.1, II Form OPA-R-550 (revi sed 10-5-42). March, 1943.
, "Instructions and Information for Licensed Distributors,"
December, 1944.
, "Division of Research, Foreign Information Branch,
"Gasoline Rationing in Canada," Foreign Information Series, No. 26,
November, 1943.
1-8
-------
APPENDIX J
RECENT AIR POLLUTION LEGISLATION IN CALIFORNIA
This appendix reviews recent California air pollution legislation
related to this contract.
Section I discusses legislation enacted into
law during the 1971 session; the appropiate chapter numbers for each
law are indicated.
The summaries of the law and the anticipated impacts
have been provided by the California Air Resources Board.
Section II reviews several which were up for consideration during
the 1972 1egislative session.
Unless noted, the status of these bills
is presented as of November 8, 1972, when the Senate and House were still
in recess.
The prospects for most of the bills becoming law are slim;
they are presented, however, since several of them are likely to be
resubmitted during the next session.
1.
Enacted 1971 Air Pollution Legislation
SENATE BILL 578 (Ch. 1507) - Cologne
Requires the ARB to set an emission standard which "significantly
reduces" NO in 1966 through 1970 cars and light-duty trucks. The
x
primary consideration must be the greatest possible reduction of
Under this law, a schedule of installation shall be set by
NO .
x
the ARB to cover all motor vehicles affected throughout the state.
No device may be accredited if it is less effective than a
previously accredited device.
1970 vehicles are exempted if they
already meet the California 1971 NO standard.
x
The maximum instal-
lation price of a device is $35.
A certificate of compliance is required for reregistration in
J-l
-------
1973.
Until then, enforcement will be through California Highway Patrol
(CHP) roadside checks and certificate of compliance upon change of
ownership.
The ARB may defer or delete the latter provision for extraordinary
and compelling reasons, and the ARB shall report its action and reasons
for doing so to the Governor and Legislature.
the schedule of installation may be modified.
If such action is taken,
ASSH1BLY BILL 936 (Ch. 1095) - Biddle
This bill requires the ARB in cooperation with the CHP to set
reasonable exhaust emission standards for cars of model years 1955
through 1965 based on the normal e~issions of such cars when tuned up.
No smog control device is required.
It also requires the owner of any
car who has been given notice by a traffic officer that his car does not
conform to these standards not to drive the car for more than 30 days
without obtaining a certificate of compliance from a licensed smog device
station.
SENATE BILL 622 (Ch. 942)
Cologne
This bill authorizes the ARB to accredit a device for installation
on 1955-65 vehicles which controls hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide or
oxides of nitrogen, if it substantially reduces the emissions of any
one of these pollutants without significantly increasing the
emissions of the other two.
ASSEr~BLY BILL 1591 (Ch. 1073) - Biddle
Whenever the Air Resources Board accredits a pollution control
device for used vehicles, it is authorized to establish, in consultation
with the Department of Motor Vehicles and California Highway p~trol, a
schedule of installation.
The schedule of installation cannot be for a
J-2
-------
period of less than one year.
The DMV must require certificates of
compliance upon initial registration, and upon change of ownership, in
accordance with ARB regulations.
ASSEMBLY BILL 1189 (Ch. 1096) - Biddle
Raises the allowable installed cost of smog devices for used 1955-65
vehi cles from $65 to $85 and reduces the durabil ity requi rement for such
devices from 50,000 miles to 30,000 miles.
ASSEMBLY BILL 937 (Ch. 862) - Biddle
This bill requires manufacturers of motor vehicles to guarantee
that each car or truck is built and equipped to conform with the applicable
emission standards and that it will continue to conform for the useful
life of the vehicle with proper maintenance.
It determines useful life
of light-duty vehicles (cars) as 50,000 miles or 5 years whichever comes
fi rs t.
For heavy-duty vehicles (trucks) it permits the ARB to set use-
ful life at a longer time or greater mileage.
SENATE BILL 51 (Ch. 1578) - Beilenson
Creates within the Department of Consumer Affairs a Bureau of Auto-
motive Reapir and an advisory board within the bureau.
Vests in the
Bureau the duty of registering automotive repair dealers.
Defines
"automotive repair dealer. II
Makes it unlawful after June 30, 1972, to be an automotive repair
dealer without being registered.
Transfers from Department of California
Highway Patrol to the Bureau of Automotive Repair the licensing and
regulation of lamp and brake adjusting stations and vehicle pollution
control device installation and inspection stations.
SENATE BILL 1340 (Ch. 1372) - Wedworth
Requires the Air Resources Board to establish criteria for evaluating
J-3
-------
the effectiveness of motor vehicle pollution control devices and of
fuel additives and to thereafter evaluate such devices and additives.
Criteria shall include testing of vehicles when the engineering evaluation
indicates testing is warranted.
The board may request independent test
data.
SENATE BILL 325 (Ch. 1400) - Mills, Deddeh, Alquist
Decreases the state's sales tax from 4% to 3-3/4% and increases
limit on local sales tax from 1% to 1-1/4%.
Extends both taxes to motor
vehicle fuel (previously exempt); these taxes would be in addition to
existing state and federal fuel taxes.
The additional revenue raiseq by the 1/4% increase in local taxes
is set aside for transportation development.
The revenue may be spent
only after approval of expenditures by regional transportation agencies,
which approval must comply with regulations designed for the purpose by
the State Transportation Board.
In counties exceeding 500,000 population, the revenue must be spent
for the development, maintenance and operation of public transportation
systems; in smaller counties, the revenue may also be used for right-of-way
acquisition and construction of local streets and roads.
The bill does not establish criteria by which the regional agencies
must dispense the revenue; no emphasis is placed on rapid transit or
any other form of public transit.
J-4
-------
Le islation Reviewed durin the 1972 Le islative Session
all bills mentioned were still being evaluated as of November 8, 1972)
ASSEMBLY BILL 69 - CREATION OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Deddeh, Lanterman, Schubarum, Hayden, Sieroty
The purpose of this bill is to coordinate the various transportation
planning agencies on a state and regional level.
This is to be
accomplished through the creation of a Department of Transportation
and an altered State Transportation Board.
The Office of Transportation Planning and Research, Department
of Aeronautics, and Department of Public Works are abolished and
their responsibilities and duties are usurped by a new Department
of Transportation in the Business and Transportation Agency.
The
State Transportation Board is removed from the Business and Trans-
portation Agency and a Board Office is set up.
The Transportation Board allocates money for transportation
research and planning from the new Transportation Planning and Re-
search Account in the State Transportation Fund when these funds
are appropriated by the Legislature. The Department is required
to prepare a California Transportation Plan (a study to coordinate
and develop a balanced transportation plan and po 1 i cy ), to be
submitted to the State Transportation Board. The Board mus t adopt
it and send it to the legislature no later than January 1, 1976.
For the succeeding two years and biennially thereafter, the
Director must submit a proposed updating of the Plan.
Two progress reports of the Plan are required to be sent to the
Board for approval and recommendations, and then onto the Legis-
1ature.
The Legislature must receive the first report by July 1, 1974,
and the second by January 1, 1975.
J-5
-------
Implementation of the Plan cannot begin until legislative author-
ization is received.
This is to occur after they receive a report in-
eluding planning, construction, operation and control of resource
allocation for transportation by January 15, 1973.
Each transportation planning agency as designated by the Government
Code must prepare a proposed regional transportation plan and submit it
to the Department by April 1, 1975.
Such a plan must be submitted
annually for the succeeding two years, and biennially thereafter.
Money for the California Transportation Plan will be appropriated
by the Legislature and allocated by the Board from the Transportation
Planning and Research Account.
Also, some of the money in the Motor
Vehicle Transportation Tax Account will be allocated to the Transportation
Planning and Research Account.
This bill places the California Toll bridge authority in the Depart-
ment of Transportation and includes the Department of Alcoholic Beverage
Control in the Business and Transportation Agency.
If passed, this Act
will become operative on July 1, 1973.
Status:
This bill will be considered by the Assembly Conmittee on
Finance November 10, 1972.
It is also being considered by the Governor's
Cabinet.
It has a good chance of passing both houses and becoming law.
This bill has passed both houses and is now before
the Governor. Since he favors the bill, it is very
likely he will sign the bill into law (December, 1972).
ASSEMBLY BILL 391 - AIR POLLUTION CONTROL FOR PASSENGER VEHICLES
Foran
NOTE:
This act requires the State Air Resources Board to adopt passenger
vehicle emissions test procedures and standards.
The Board may, with
the cooperation of the Department of California Highway Patrol, also
J-6
-------
inspect the mechanical condition of the passenger vehicles.
Certificates of compliance will be issued by authorized inspection
stations when a vehicle meets the adopted standards and when a standard
fee is paid.
These fees will be deposited in the Air Pollution Control
Fund.
Upon initial registration or renewals thereafter the Department
of Motor Vehicles will require a Certificate of Compliance in the South
Coast Air Basin.
Motorcycle owners are exempt.
The Department of Motor Vehicles is required to implement a system
for the year-around renewal of passenger vehicle registration.
Related
changes in the Revenue and Tax Code and the Vehicle Code are to be made.
An unspecified amount is appropriated from the Motor Vehicle Account for
the Director of Finance to allocate to the Board and the Department.
The
amounts to be received are not specified.
The State Air Resources Board, in cooperation with the Department of
Consumer Affairs, is required to prepare a handbook containing information
about the inspection program and to distribute these handbooks.
This is
considered an urgency statute to take effect immediately.
Portions of the
act will become operative on the date specified by the Board no earlier
than January 1, 1973 and not later than January 1, 1974.
Status:
This bill will probably die because the Administration is
against it.
ASSEMBLY BILL 406 - AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BY VEHICLE INSPECTION
Deddeh, Foran, Biddle
Provides for an annual inspection of motor vehicles in the South
Coast Air Basin of California to check pollution devices, educate the
consumer, improve the safety characteristics of motor vehicles and to
reduce vehicular noise emission levels.
J-7
-------
A seven-member State Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
Commission is created to:
l.
2.
Set up the annual motor vehicle inspection program.
Apply for federal funds in order to implement pollution
inspection, safety inspection and consumer information.
3.
Upon receiving federal funds, implement such an inspection
program.
Lease, buy, or construct facilities and advanced inspection
equipment capable of providing diagnostic information for
motorists.
4.
5.
Establish regulations and standards to carry out the pro-
gram.
6.
Establish standards by which low income persons may
qualify for assistance for bringing their motor vehicles
up to safety and pollution emission standards.
Compile data from annual inspection and to compare this
data with that obtained from the same area the previous
year.
7.
Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to provide for a staggered
system of vehicle registration in the South Coast Air Basin.
Makes it
illegal to sell a used vehicle which does not have proof of compliance
with the inspection.
Makes the program contingent upon receiving a
commitment from the Federal government for up to 50 per cent of the total
cost from federal funds for at least three years.
If the federal govern-
ment agrees, the program will begin March 1, 1974.
Other funds
($6.2 million) will be appropriated from the Motor Vehicle Account in the
Transportation Tax Fund for administration and other specified costs.
Status:
This bill has passed the Assembly and is now in the Senate
Committee on Government Organization.
It may pass the Senate, but chances
are not very good it will be signed by the Governor.
J-8
-------
ASSEMBLY BILL 886 - AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BY INSPECTION OF MOTOR VEHICLES
Biddle, Quimby
The California Highway Patrol is required to establish and maintain
inspection stations which check emission control devices in vehicles
having a gross weight under 6001 pounds.
These stations must be
functioning by the beginning of 1974 for the South Coast Air Basin, and
by 1977 for the remainder of the state.
A sticker valid for 12 months will be issued to a vehicle meeting
the requirements of the inspection station, and when a $2 fee is paid.
The revenue from the fee will be deposited in the Motor Vehicle Account.
The Department of Motor Vehicles requires every vehicle to have the
sticker on its windshield upon initial registration and renewal of
registration.
On or after the 121st day after the final adjournment of the 1972
Regul ar Sess i on of the Legi s 1 a ture, or January 1, 1973, whi chever is
later, no such specified vehicle, whose owner lives in the South Coast
Air Basin, can legally be operated upon a highway unless its vacuum
spark advance is disconnected or it is equipped with a vacuum spark
advance disconnect approved by the Board.
Vehicles wllich cannot operate
with their vacuum spark advance disconnected can obtain exel:lptions from
the Board.
Status:
This bill is in the Assembly Committee on Transportation
where it will probably die.
SENATE BILL 661 - ~~TOR VEHICLE AIR POLLUTION INSPECTION
Beilenson
Provisions are made to establish a pilot program 1n the South Coast
Air Basin for periodic inspection and testing of motor vehicles.
The
State Air Resources Board is required to prescribe maxililuill air pollution
J-9
-------
emission standards to used when testing motor vehicles in this program.
Supervision and administration of the program will be handled by the
Department of Consumer Affairs, the California Highway Patrol, and the
State Air Resources Board.
If repairs are made on a vehicle by a licensed motor vehicle
pollution control device installation and inspection station in order
to meet inspection and testing requirements, the station must guarantee
that such repairs will meet inspection and testing requirements for a
12-month period.
Furthermore, any additional necessary repairs must
be made by the station free of charge until the motor vehicle satis-
factorily completes inspection and testing.
Financially. this bill appropriates a specified sum (not yet
specified) from the Motor Vehicle Account in the Transportation Fund
in order to administer the program.
It reduces the amount to be spent
for state highway construction in southern counties by forty per cent
of the amount appropriated from the Motor Vehicle Account.
The same
amount of money is to be spent in state highway construction in northern
counties.
The reimbursement for this appropriation will only be
available to state highway consturction in County Group No.2 (southern
counties).
Status:
This bill is up for its Third Reading in the Senate.
Since the Administration is against it, it will probably die.
SENATE BILL 657 - FLEET VEHICLE AIR POLLUTION
[3eilenson
This legislation requires every 1970 or later year model fleet
vehicle operating in the South Coast Air Basin to be equipped with a
"gaseous" fuel system which permits the vehicle to operate on compressed
J-10
-------
natural gas, 1iquified natural gas, or liquified petroleum gas by
December 31, 1974.
If a fleet vehicle does not comply by this date, its
operation will be illegal.
The power of enforcement is provided by the Department of Motor
Vehicles.
When vehicle registration begins in 1973 a valid certificate
of compliance must be presented to register, re-register, or transfer
ownership.
The certificate is obtained from a licensed motor vehicle
pollution control device installation and inspection station.
The gaseous fuel use tax will become ineffective on December 31, 1975
except to fleet vehicles complying with this act.
A fleet vehicle first
registered prior to December 31,1975 and complying with this act can
apply for an additional five years fuel tax exemption.
The amount expended for the construction of state highways in County
Group No.2 (southern counties) will be reduced by 40 per cent of the
reduction in funds tranferred to the State Highway Account due to this
act.
An amount equal to this 40 per cent will be expended for construction
of state highways in County Group No.1 (northern counties).
Status:
This bill has been passed by the Senate and will come be-
fore the Assembly Committee on Transportation November 16, 1972.
Since
the Administration is against this bill, it does not stand much chance of
becoming a law.
NOTE:
This bill was killed in the Assembly Committee on
Transportation on November 16, 1972. Eight votes
were needed to get the bill out of committee; the
final vote was 5 votes for, 5 votes against, and
the remaining committee members either abstaining
or absent.
Since November 8, 1972, it has been learned that all of the bills
reviewed in this section II, except for A.B. 69, have died.
The two
J-11
-------
major factors for this are:
1) a lack of demonstrated public support
and interest in the bills and 2) opposition by the administration for
passage of the bills.
J-12
-------
APPENDIX K
STUDY CONTACTS
This program was initiated in Sacramento on September 15, at the
Air Resources Board main headquarters.
The agencies, institutions, and
companies represented were EPA, TRW, Inc., DeLeuw, Cather and Company,
California Department of Public Works, and the Air Resources Board.
Subsequent meetings in San Francisco, Sacramento, and Los Angeles, re-
sulted in several other agency involvements.
The bulk of the data used in this study came from a limited number
of sources; these are listed below as primary contacts and data sources.
In an attempt to insure that "all the bases were covered," many other
individuals and groups were contacted; these sources are presented for
completeness as "secondary contacts and data sources."
Primary Contacts and Data Sources
California Air Resources
Sacramento, California
Harmon \tJong-\tJoo
Gl adys t1eade
John t~aga
Don Bratton
Board
California Department of Public Works
Sacramento, California
Robert Watkins
Califor~ia Division of Highway,
Los Angeles, California
John Shaver
John Reeves
Bob Blythe
District 7, Advanced Planning
K-l
-------
California Division of Highways,
Los Angeles, California
Jesus Garcia
Richard Green
Robert Kahn
Southern California Association
Los Angeles, California
William Ackerman
Ed Holden
Brian Farris
Environmental Quality Laboratory
Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California
Lester Lees
Ken Heitner
Mark Braly
Mahlon Easterling
James Krier
Southern California Rapid
Los Angeles, California
John Curtiss
Frank Barnes
District 7, Freeway Operations
of Governments
- California
Transit District
Operation Oxygen
Pasadena, California
Jack Novak
Regional Planners Association
Los Angeles, California
Phil Ashabraner
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority
Massachusetts
John Driscoll
General Services Administration
Washington, D. C.
Dick Dockus
K-2
-------
Secondary Contacts and Data Sources
California Air Resources
LOS Angeles, California
I~orman Kayne
Raymond Ingels
Environmental Quality Laboratory
Institute of Technology
Pasadena, California
John Trijonis
Gary Rubenstein
Board
- California
City of Los Angeles Traffic
Los Angeles, California
Walter Schroeder
James Fuller
S. E. Rowe
Larry Glazer
Department
Orange County Transit
Anaheim, California
Peter Fielding
District
University of California
Los Angeles, California
Don McA 11 is ter
Don Ratajczak
James Fountain
- Los Angeles
K-3
-------
.APPENDIX L
EVAPORATIVE LOSSES FROM SERVICE STATION FUELING OPERATIONS
The handling and transfer operations associated with the sale of
gasoline contribute a substantial portion of hydrocarbon emissions
through evaporative losses.
As exhaust emission control standards for
motor vehicles become more stringent, the proportionate share of hydro-
carbon emissions coming from evaporative losses will increase.
Various
regulations have been aimed at controlling certain gasoline transfer
operations.
This section attempts to review hydrocarbon losses from
what are normally the last two fuel handling operations -- the filling
of underground storage tanks at the service station and the f~lling of
automobile gasoline tanks from these storage tanks.
Estimates of the
tonnages lost from these sources are given and a review of some emission
control techniques presented.
Where available, cost estimates and lead
time estimates for implementing control procedures are also given.
Several studies have approximated the hydrocarbon losses in Los
Angeles from service stations for 1967 (L-l, L-2).
These losses were
about 28 tons per day from filling underground storage tanks and 60 tons
per day from automobile filling procedures.
Expanded to include the
entire South Coast Air Basin using the gasoline consumption projections
given in Figure 2-7, the combined uncontrolled emissions from these two
sources become approximately 132 tons per day in 1972 and 159 tons per
day in 1977.
These projections assume the limit on Reid vapor pressure
from April through October as set forth by the CARB.
Assuming no control
methods are instituted, these two sources become a significant air pollution
source by 1977.
L-l
-------
Data on the exact number of storage tanks in use in the South Coast
Basin are not generally available.
However, it was estimated there were
approximately 32,200 permits for storage tanks in Los Angeles County in
1971 (L-S).
Since the permits are required for installation and are not
cancelled when tanks are removed or destroyed, the number quoted is
probably high for storage tanks actually being utilized.
Because these
tanks are valuable and frequently reused, it has been assumed there were
31,000 tanks in actual use in 1971.
Using the same growth projection as before (Figure 2-7), expanded
estimates for the South Coast Basin can be made.
This implies there are
currently about 14,000 service statipns, 42,000 storage tanks, and
126,000 pumps in operation, approximately 470 tank trucks are required
to service these storage tanks.
In projecting the number of stations and related equipment for
1977, a growth factor of less than 2% has been assumed (about half the
projected growth in gasoline consumption).
This was done partially
because of the growing resistance to the increase in stationary sources
which will tend to limit future growth, e.g. the existing moratorium on
service station construction in San Francisco.
If the projections hold
for 1977, the South Coast Basin can expect about 15,000 service stations,
45,000 storage tanks, 135,000 pumps, and 500 tank trucks.
Table L-l
summarizes the data related to service staions.
L-2
-------
Table L-l
Projections of Service Stations and Related Equipment
1South Coast Air Bas i n 1
-~
1972a 1977b
Service Stations 14,000 15,000
Storage Tanks 42,000 45,000
Pumps 126,000 135,000
Tank Trucks 470 500
a
Extrapolated from data for Los Angeles County.
b Assuming < 2% annual growth.
Gasoline Modification - Reid Vapor Pressure Change
One method of lowering the evaporative losses is to change the
composition of the gasoline, e.g. by changing the vapor pressure.
Such
a change requires a complete analysis of the impact on all emissions
subsequent to the change and the resultant change in photochemical re-
activity of the modified fuel.
According to Nelson (L-2), lowering the
Reid vapor pressure from the present 9.0 psi to 6.0 psi reduces the
expected evaporative emissions by 27%.
For the Basin in 1977, this
implies a reduction from stationary automotive servicing sources of
43 tons/day (from 159 tons/day to 116 tons/day).
On the other hand, a joint study by the CARB, LAAPCD, and Western
Oil and Gas Association (L-l) found much less benefit from such a fuel
composition change.
Although, the study found the average percentage
gains in emissions from stationary sources to be in good agreempnt with
Nelson, the total net reduction was considerably less.
Overall, the
CARB study concluded a change in Reid vapor pressure from 9.0 psi to
6.0 psi would produce only a net hydrocarbon emission reduction of 9%.
L-3
-------
The key consideration was that "in general, a reduction in vapor pressure
using fuels like the prototypes would produce a reduction in emissions
due to evaporation of gasoline, an increase in exhaust hydrocarbon emissions,
and a decrease in the total organic emissions associated with both gasoline
associated sources and all sources, mobile and stationary" (L-l).
In addition, if one considers the impact of the reactivity change,
the net benefit from a change in Reid vapor pressure becomes even less
yet.
Using the R-l reactivity scale, it was concluded the overall gain
from all gasoline related emission sources drops to about 4-5 per cent
and if the R-2 reactivity scale is used, the equivalent gain becomes
only 1.2 per cent.
Thus, when the total resultant hydrocarbon losses
(evaporative and exhaust) and the reactivity questions are considered,
the gains in hydrocarbon improvements become quite low.
If one goes on
further to examine the cost associated with such a fuel composition
change, the cost effectiveness of this strategy becomes very marginal.
At least two studies have reviewed the cost of such a change.
The
first (L-6) estimated capital costs at some $60 million and manufacturing
cost per gallon at approximately 1.33 cents for large refineries and
2.13 cents for smaller refineries.
The American Petroleum Institute
(L-7) indicated that modifying gasoline to have a Reid vapor pressure
of 6 psi would increase manufactured costs by 1.24 cents per gallon.
Assuming an average markup between refinery and consumer of about 100%
(Oil and Gas Journal, December, 1972). the cost would average 2.5 cents
per gallon more to the consumer.
Assuming two years for a changeover
(L-6), the change would become immediately effective throughout the
Basin.
Using the same gasoline consumption projections, the cost of
the gasoline modification program comes to some $200 million per year.
L-4
-------
In summary. the key considerations are:
. changing Reid vapor pressures results in substantial
reductions in evaporative losses during fuel transfers
. a lower Reid vapor pressure may increase exhaust hydro-
carbons negating some of the reductions gained
. a lower Reid vapor pressure may increase the reactivity
of the gasoline again, partially negating some of the
reductions gained
.
the cost of such a program for the South Coast Basin is
estimated at about $200 million per year.
In view of the above, changing the Reid vapor pressure of gasoline appears
to be a strategy which deserves further investigation, but which cannot be
recommended at this time.
Evaporative Emission Control - Service Station Modifications
A different approach to controlling evaporative losses from the
filling of underground storage tanks is to use some type of vapor recovery
or mechanical trap system.
Trijonis (L-5) briefly describes such a setup
consisting of a simple base attachment and vapor return system based on
data provided by earlier APCD and A.D. Little reports.
Assuming a two year implementation schedule starting in 1973, the
updated costs for a vapor recovery system are approximately $400 per
storage tank and $1,000 per truck.
The total capital investment for
stations within the South Coast Air Basin by 1975 would be about $18.5
mi 11 ion.
At 8% interest amortized over a 20 year lifetime for the system,
the annual cost would be some $2 million to capture roughly 12,600 tons of
evaporative emissions during the April-October months (approximately 60
tons/day), with lesser recoveries through the cooler remaining months of
the year.
Recently, the American Petroleum Institute sponsored a study of
L-5
-------
methods available for evaporative emission control between the service
station and the automobile.
Of the techniques which primarily service
station oriented "control methods would avoid about 71% of vapor emission
immediately upon completion of the service station conversion.
The vapor
emission avoided would progressively increase over a period of about
10 years to about 94% to 98% depending on the particular method con-
s i dered"
(L-8) .
The variation in the percentage effectiveness over time
is dependant upon the development of a safe, vapor tight filling nozzle
and a matching standardized automotive fill pipe.
Although many alternatives are available, only three of the most
promising techniques are presented.
The descriptions and cost estimates
for these methods are presented:
Case 3 - Vapor Displacement to Underground Storage
with No Recovery of Excess Vapors
This control scheme is based on displacing vapor from the
vehicle fuel tank to the storage tank from which the fuel
was pumped. This is accomplished by making a tight seal
at the interface between the fill nozzle and the fuel
nozzle and the fuel tank fill pipe. The fill nozzle is
designed such that there is a space around the nozzle
through which the displaced vapors can be directed to a
vapor return line. This line directs the vapors displaced
from the vehicle fuel tank back to the undeground storage
tank from which the fuel is pumped. The volume of the
vapors displaced equals the volume of the fuel pumped from
the storage tank. The vehicle fuel tank vapor in the under-
ground storage tank is displaced back to the fuel supply
truck at each delivery.... Any excess vapors generated at
the service station due to temperature conditions is vented
to the atmosphere (L-8).
Case 4 - Vapor Displacement to Underground Storage with
Recovery of Excess Vapors by Refrigeration
This control scheme is based on displacing vehicle fuel
tank vapors during refueling back to the storage tank
from which the fuel was pumped. This is accomplished
by making a tight seal at the interface between the fill
nozzle and the fuel tank fill pipe. The fill nozzle is
designed such that there is a space around the nozzle
L-6
-------
through which the displaced vapors can be directed to a
vapor return line. This line directs the vapors displaced
from the vehicle fuel tank back to the underground storage
tank from which the fuel was pumped. The volume of the
vapor displaced equals the volume of the fuel pumped into
the vehicle fuel tank. The vapor in the underground
storage tanks is displaced back to the fuel supply truck
at each delivery.... Any excess vapors generated at the
service station due to temperature conditions are vented
to a two-stage vapor compression system with intermediate
cooling and final condensation by refrigeration. Condensed
vapors consisting of propane and heavier hydrocarbons are
returned to the underground storage tanks. The refrig-
eration unit is of 1.0 ton capacity at -lOoF, and it is
started and stopped on suction pressure sensing in a vapor
holder (L-8).
Case 5 - Vapor Displacement
Recovery of Excess
Adsorption
This control scheme is based on displacing vehicle fuel
tank vapors during refueling back to the storage tank
from which the fuel was pumped. This is accomplished by
making a tight seal at the interface between the fill
nozzle and the fuel tank fill pipe. The fill nozzle is
designed such that there is space in the nozzle through
which the displaced vapors can be directed to a vapor
return line. This line directs the vapors displaced from
the vehicle fuel tank back to the underground storage
tank from which the fuel was pumped. The volume of the
vapors displaced equals the volume of the fuel pumped
into the vehicle fuel tank.... Any excess vapors gen-
erated at the service station due to temperature con-
ditions are vented to an activated carbon adsorption
unit. All of the hydrocarbonds are adsorbed in this
unit. The activated carbon unit consists of 4 trans-
portable canisters containing 25 lbs. of activated
carbon each. These canisters are regenerated about
four times per month during the summer .and considerably
less during the rest of the year. The canisters are
regenerated at the fuel supply terminal and their con-
tained vapors are covered in the terminal vapor recovery
system. The canisters are hauled to and from the supply
terminal on trucks fitted specifically for this purpose
(L-8) .
to Underground Storage With
Vapors by Activated Carbon
The effectiveness of the "Case 3" method was approximated
to be 71% recovery assuming service station conversions
were initiated in 1975 and completed by 1977. Eventually,
a 94% recovery could be expected when all automobiles were
fitted with standarized fill pipes. This maximum control
L-7
-------
woul d not occur until about 1985 due to the 1 ead ti me for
normal attrition of older vehicles. Cases 4 and 5 are
estimated to have about a 4% better vapor recovery (i.e.,
initially approximately 75% and ultimately approximately
98% by 1985.) The improved recoveries are due to the
condensation or absorption of the vapors escaping from
the storage tanks.
The costs of each case were estimated as follows:
Case 3 - Vapor Displacement to Underground Storage With No
Recovery of Excess Vapors (L-8)
Capital Installed Cost Per Station
Ma te ri a 1
Labor*
Piping & Fittings (screwed)
(6) Tight fill nozzles at $37 each
$ 418
222
$ 640
$1 .438
48
$1.486
Contingency at 20% material,
10% labor
130 149
$ 770 $1 ,635
2,500
$ 770 $4,135
Concrete removal & repair
and tank purging
New Station Cost = $770 + 1,630 = $2,400
Revamp Station Cost = $770 + $4,135 = $4,905
*Labor costs at $16/hour
Operating Costs to Service Station
Incremental additional replacement cost of nozzles and hoses at
$36/year.
L-8
-------
Case 4 - Vapor Displacement to Underground Storage With
Recovery of Excess Vapors by Refrigeration (L-8)
Capital Installed Cost to Service Station
The capital costs show breakout for new and revamp stations.
Capital Installed Cost Per Station
Material
Labor *
-
Piping & Fittings (screwed)
(6) Tight fill nozzles at $37 each
$ 833
222
$1 ,896
48
Condensation & Refrigeration
Package Unit (Ref. 8)
5,000
$6,105
64
$2,008
Contingency at 20% material
10% labor
1 ,195 195
$7,300 $2,200
2,500
$7,300 $4,700
Concrete removal, repair, and
tank purging
New Station Cost = $7,300 + $2,200 = $9,500
Revamp Station Cost = $7,300 + $4.700 = $12,000
*Labor costs at $16/hour
Operating Costs to Service Station
Incremental additional replacement cost of nozzles and hoses at
$36/year.
Cooling water at 3 gpm at $0.20/M gallons, say $6/year.
Power supply for 3 HP motor at $0.30/KWH, say $ll/year.
Maintenance and inspection cost, use 3%/year installed equipment
cost = $7,100 x 0.03/year = $213/year.
L-9
-------
Case 5 -
Vapor Displacement of Underground Storage With
Recovery of Excess Vapors by Activated Carbon
Adsorption (L-8)
Capital Installed Cost Per Station
Piping & Fittings (screwed)
(6) Tight fill nozzles at $37 each
(8) Carbon canisters at $80 each
Material Labor*
$ 638 $2,096
222 48
640 32
Regeneration facilities at fueling
termi na 1 **
25
$1 ,525
Contingency at 20% materials,
10% labor
300
$1 ,825
Concrete removal, repair, and
tank purging
$1 ,825
New Station Cost = $1,825 + $2,412 = $4,237
Revamp Station Cost = $1,825 + $4,912 = $6,737
* Labor costs at $16/hour
** Regeneration facilities for 167 stations per each fueling
terminal as follows:
Ma te ria 1
35 hookup point manifold
(1) vacuum pump (29" Hg.)
$1 ,500
2,700
$4,200
12
$2,188
224
$4,912
2,500
$4,912
Labor*
$1 ,700
300
$2,000
Operating Costs to Service Station
Incremental additional replacement cost of nozzles and hose at
$36/year.
Power supply for 5 HP motor at $0.03/KWH, say $17/year.
(1) laborer at fueling terminal at $10,000/year,
L-10
-------
Operating Costs to Service Station, cont.
4 hours per day, for 167 stations.
($5,000/year)/(167 stations) = $30/year/station.
Truck hauling at $0.25 mile at 30,000 mile/year,
($0.25) (30,000)/(167) = $45/year/station.
Truck driver at $18,OOO/year for 167 stations,
($18,000/year/167 stations) = $108/year/station.
Assume operating costs at fueling terminal equal
fue 1 recovery.
For the South Coast Air Basin in 1977, assume all future stations
will require the installation of one of these methods upon construction
and all others will be retrofitted.
On this basis the approximate total
costs for each method are given in Table L-2.
--
Table L-2
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH VARIOUS VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEMS
(South Coast Air Basin - 1977)
Case 3 -
Case 4 -
Case 5 -
$ 25 Mi 11 ion
$178 Million
$ 72 ~1illion
--
Annualized costs of a capital asset at 8 per cent with a twenty-year
life is approximately 10 per cent of the capital expenditure.
Under such
a financing arrangement and including the estimated annual operating
expenses, the costs and recoveries of the various systems are as follows
(Table L-3):
Table L-3
ANNUALIZED COSTS FOR VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEMS
Cost/Year Recovery in 1977 (Tons/Day)*
Case 3: 3 t1ill ion ~ 71 Tons/Day
Case 4: 21 Million ~ 75 Tons/Day
Case 5: 11 Mi 11 ion ~ 75 Tons/Day
* During the peak smog season -- April through October.
L-ll
-------
Using the projected increase of gasoline consumption, the recovery
for each system after they achieve maximum effectiveness in 1985 is
shown in Table L-4.
Table L-4
VAPOR RECOVERIES FROM VARIOUS SYSTEMS
(South Coast Air Basin - 1985)
_.-- _. ..u -- ---- - Recovery in 1985 (Tons/Day)*
Case 3: 90 Tons/Day
Case 4: 97 Tons/Day
Case 5: 97 Tons/Day
I * Apri 1 through October months.
On this basis, the relative cost-effectiveness ranking of the
systems reviewed are:
1)
2)
3)
Case 3 (lowest cost per ton of emissions recovered)
Case 5
Case 4 (highest cost per ton of emissions recovered)
Cases 4 and 5 offer additional recoveries but the incremental costs
associated with these recoveries is very high.
In light of these in-
creased costs, it becomes very questionable whether such programs should
be implemented.
Evaporative Emission Controls - Automobile Oriented Modifications
The American Petroleum Institute report (L-8) reviewed several
possible automotive control systems which were capable of handling the
included:
evaporative emission from fuel tank refilling.
The methods investigated
1)
2)
3)
a collapsible bladder fuel tank
a flexible diaphragm tank
activated carbon system within the vehicle.
L-12
-------
The activated carbon system looks promising with a cost-effectiveness
ranking with the service station absorption system.
It is, however,
another control valve-orifice system with another system for the re-
generation of the activated carbon and would probably require a nationwide
change.
This may lead to inspection and maintenance requirements for
all vehicles.
Retrofitting older cars is not considered practical, so
total implementation would require 12 to 15 years.
This system, as well
as all others oriented either to the automobile or service station, will
require the development of a vapor tight fill nozzle and a standardized
automobile fill pipe.
Some of the elements of the nozzle
which must be considered in its development are (L-9):
1)
2)
Automatically provide a seal.
Interlocking nozzle valve to prevent ope~ing until seal
is in place.
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Venting of vehicle tank back through nozzle and hose.
No significant increase of weight of safety nozzle.
Satisfy safety requirements with Underwriters Laboratories.
Limitations on tank pressurizations.
Prevention of blockage of return vapor line, i.e., splash-
back or kinks in vapor line.
8)
Automobile fuel tank vents differ. Some are vented by
vent tube external to the fuel tank; Others are vented
through the fill cap. In the first case, a large per-
centage will be displaced through the external vent tube.
The standardized fill pipe would constitute a total change for all
automobile manufacturers.
The change is, however, a relatively minor
design requirement to place on manufacturers and will be required for
any method of evaporative control which might later be necessary
nationwide.
The estimates of evaporative emissions used in the derivation
L-13
-------
of effectiveness of the API Case 3 control method should be verified
in the field.
On January 17, 1972, The Board of Supervisors of the County of
San Diego, acting as Directors of the San Diego County Air Pollution
Control District, passed two new rules, 61 and 63 which will affect
all service stations and associated support facilities.
These two
rules, quoted in part below, are designed to control the evaporative
emission elements of concern.
The counties in the South Coast Air
Basin should adopt (if they have not already) regulations similar to
the ones adopted by San Diego County.
(NOTE:
The estimates of the evaporative losses made in this
appendix were made independent of the estimates given
by the Air Resources Board and consequently, differ
from evaporative loss figures which appear in their
emission inventory. The important point is not exactly
how many tons are being emitted into the atmosphere
but rather that these sources will be a significant
air pollution problem by 1977 and that they can be
effectively controlled.)
L-14
-------
REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
( J a n u a ry 1 7, 1 972 )
RULE 61. STORAGE OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS. (a) A
person sholl not hold or store any volatile organic compound having avapor
pressure of 1.5 pounds per square inch absolute or greater, under actual storage
conditions, in any stationary tank, reservoir or other container of more than
250 gallons capacity unless such tank', reservoir or other container is a pressule
tank maintaining, at all times, working pressures sufficient to prevent hydro-
carbon vapor or gas loss to the atmosphere, or is designed and equipped with
one of the following vapor loss control devices or systems, properly installed,
in good working order, and in op'~ration:
(1) A flooting roof, consisting of a pontoon type or double-deck
type roof, or internal floating cover, resting on the surface of the liquid
contents and equipped with a closure seal, or seals, to close the space
between the roof edge and tank wall. (This control equipment is not ap-
propriate if the volati Ie 0 r g ani c compound has a vapor pressure of 11
pounds per square inch absolute or greater under actual storage conditi ans.)
All tank gauging and sampling devices shall be gas-tight except when
gauging or sampling is taking place.
(2) A vapor collecti on and di sposal system, consi sti ng of a vapor
gathering system capable of collecting tne volatile organic compound va-
pors and gases di scharged, and a vapor di sposal system as prescribed in
Rule 63. All tank gauging and sampling devices shall be gas-tight except
when gauging or scmpling is taking place.
(3) Other equipment of at least equal efficiency to the equipment
specified in (1) and (2) above, provided plans for such equipment are sub-
mitted to and approved by the Air Pollution Control Officer
Pressure tanks required by this rule may be equipped with one-way automatic
pressure relief valves necessary to meet any other requirements of law.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (0) of this rule, a person holding crstor-
ing the above specified compounds in a stationary tank, reservo;r or other
container of more than 250 gallons capacity whicn was either in existence on
June 30, 1972, or in the process of being installed on said June30, 1972,on the
premises where they were to be used, shall not be subject to the provisions of
subdivision (a) of this rule until January 1, 1974, provideci, however, that such
person is hereby required to file on or before July 1,1972, a compliance sched-
ule with the Air Pollution Control Officer showing how the person will bring
his operations into compliance with subdivision (a) of this rule on or before
said January I, 1974. Failure to file such compliance schedule or abide by its
terms shall render the prohibition contained in subdivision (0) of this rule im-
mediately applicable to such person on July 1, 1972, or on the date of said
person's failure ta abide by said compliance schedule.
L-15
-------
REGULATIONS ADOPTED BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(January 17, 1972)
RULE 63. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND LOADING FACILITIES.
(0) A person sholl not load or allow the loading of volatile organic com-
pounds having a vapor pressure of I. 5 pounds per square inch absolute or great-
er, under actual storage conditions, into any tank truck or trailer, railroad tan~
car, locomotive, aircraft, stationary storage tank with a capadty of more than
250 gallons, or boat or motor vehicle fuel tank having a capacity greater thoi-:
5 gallons from any loading facility unless such tank or loading facility is
equipped with a vapor collection and disposal system, or its equivalent, prop-
erly installed, in good working order, and in operation. Loading shall be ac-
complished in such a manner that 011 displaced vapor and air will be vented
only to the vapor disposal system. A means shall be provided to prevent liquid
organic compound drainage from the loading device when it is removed fro~
the hatch, or to accomplish complete d,ainage before such removal.
The vapor disposal portion of the system sholl consist of one of the Foll:...,,-
ing:
(1) An absorber system or condensation system with a minimum re-
covery efficiency of 90 percent by weight of all the volatile organic com-
pound vapors and gases entering such disposal system
(2)
system
A vapor handling system which directs all vapors to a fuel gas
(3) Other equipment of at least 90 percent efficiency, provided
pions for such equipment are submitted to and approved by the Air Pollu-
tion Control Officer
Intermediote storage vessels may be used prior to disposal of vapors under
1, 2 or 3 above, provided they are so designed as to prevent releose of vapors
at any time during use.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (0) of this rule, a person loading or al-
lowing the loading of the above specified compounds in the above specified
storage vessels from the above specified loading facilities, eitherof which were
in existence on June 30, 1972, or in the process of being installed for use on
said June 30, 1972, shall not be subject to the provisions of subdivision (0) of
this rule until January 1, 1974, provided, however, that such person is hereby
requilcd to file on or before July 1, 1972, a compliance schedule with the Air
Pollution Control Officer showing how the perso'1 will bring his operation into
compliance with subdivision (a) of this rule on or befo.e January 1,1974.
Failure to file such compliance schedule or abide by its terms shall render the
prohibition contained in subdivision (a) of this rule immediately applicable to
such person on July 1, 1972, or on the date of said person's failure to abide by
said compliance schedule.
L-16
-------
L-l.
References
L-2.
L-3.
L-4.
L-5.
L-6.
L-7.
L-8.
L-9.
California Air Resource Board, Los Angeles County Air Pollution
Control District, Western Oil and Gas Ass~ciation, Gasoiine
Modification -- Its Potential as an Air Pollution Control Measure
in Los Angeles County, November, 1969.
Nelson, E. E., "Hydrocarbon Control for Los Angeles by Reducing
Gasoline Volatility." presented at the International Automotive
Engineering Congress, Detroit, Michigan, January 13-17, 1969.
Projections of gasoline consumption for the South Coast Air
Basin; adapted from Branch, M. C. and E. Y. Leong (eds.),
Research Investigation, Air Pollution and City Planning,
Environmental Science and Engineering, University of California,
Los Angeles, 1972, Appendix G.
Ca 1 iforn-j a Ai r Resources Board, "Standards for Motor Vehi cl e
Fuels," Subchapter 5, Section 2251, from Register 72, No. 31,
July 29, 1972.
Trijonis, J. C., An Economic Air Pollution Control Model Application:
Photochemical Smog in Los Angeles County in 1975, Ph.D. Thesis,
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, 1972.
"Statement on Cost of Changing Fuel Composition," November 10,1969.
"Effect of Changing Gas Volatility on Refining Costs," Chemical
Engineering Progress, ~:51-58 (1969).
Refinery Management Services Co., Motor Fuel Va or Emission Control
Study for American Petroleum Institute Preliminary Draft Report,
October, 1972.
"Control of Hydrocarbon Emissions from San Diego County Service
Station," private communication from J. O. Dealy to S. T. Cuffe,
July 27-28, 1972.
L-17
-------
APPENDIX ~1
CONVERSION OF FLEET VEHICLES TO GASEOUS FUELS
Hi story
In June, 1972, the City of Riverside sent a resolution to the
Governor of California requesting he declare a "State of Emergency" in
the South Coast Air Basin due to the air pollution.
Concurrently. they
submitted a plan which called for "the conversion of all vehicles in this
basin to gaseous fuels which will reduce their emissions by 90% and will
effect an 35% reduction in air pollution." (M-l)
They further claimed,
"Conversion to gaseous fuels is within our grasp.
It relies upon present
technology at minimal cost and inconvenience.
The results of conversion
programs of the type we propose have been tested and proven in the
laboratory and in actual useage in everyday 1 ife".
On August 17 and 18, 1972, the ARB
held public hearings to obtain
information on the availability of gaseous fuels, conversion equipment,
adequacy of existing fuel distribution facilities, etc.
Their conclusion
was, "The evidence given at the hearing showed that implementation of the
entire Riverside proposal is not feasible. However, conversion of some
fraction of the Basin's motor vehicle population is possible". (M-2)
In a later release(M-13), the Air Resources Board concluded that
it might be possible to convert approximately 275,000 vehicles to LPG
and CNG.
This conversion program would be dependent on refinery modificat-
ions to increase the LPG supply and a diversion of natural gas from power
pl ant users.
The ARB summary also pointed out the necessity to complete
the gaseous fuel conversion program within two years in order to achieve
M-l
-------
a significant impact from the emission reductions.
Thus, conversion of fleet vehicles to gaseous fuels is a practical
air pollution strategy which the State of California has investiaated.
This Appendix covers various aspects of conversion to gaseous fuels
including supply, distribution, availability of certified equipment, main-
tenance, insurance, reactivity, costs, legal problems and constraints.
The conclusions and recommendations of the report have heen based on these
discussions as well as practical considerations.
Introduction
Presently, the conversion of vehicles to burn gaseous fuels is most
applicable to fleet vehicles becau~e of problems encountered in fuel avail-
abil ity.
Fleet operators generally buy fuel in bulk and can afford to have
the special equipment to store and handle gaseous fuels.
In addition, fleet
operators frequently have their own garages and mechanics available for the
proper maintenance of the fleet vehicles.
In terms of costs, conversions
are an economic trade-off between lower fuel and maintenance costs versus
a high initial capital outlay.
To date, the majority of conversions to
gaseous fuels have been justified primarily on the economic benefits
derived from such conversions.
The air pollution reductions have been an
added bonus.
Depending on the mileage driven, the capital costs for most
conversions can be recovered in two to five years.
Gaseous fuels are cleaner burning than gasoline due to their lower
molecular weight and carbon content; they ignite more rapidly and combustion
proceeds more nearly to completion.
Usually. the combustion products of
gaseous fuels are less reactive in forming photochemical smog.
Modification to gaseous fuels is considered a fairly simple, straight.
forward operation requiring the installation of a carburetor, fuel tanks,
M-2
-------
pressure regulating devices~ shut-off valves and fuel lines.
The cost
ranges from around $350 to $500.
Gasoline is liquid at room temperature and pressure.
Liquified
petroleum gas (LPG) is liquified at a pressure of about 125 psi and room
tempe ra tu re .
Natural gas cannot be 1iquified at normal temperatures.
When it becomes a liquid at -278°F and high pressures~ it is called
1iquified natural gas (LNG).
Natural gas is normally stored under pressure
and termed compressed natural gas (CNG).
Currently, only CNG and LPG conversions have been seriously marketed.
In terms of implementing short range strategies, only CNG and LPG are con-
sidered in the present analysis.
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
Natural gas is primarily methane.
It is compressed to high pressures
(1,000 - 2,000 psi), and stored in high pressure fuel tanks.
This necessitates
a compressor at the refueling stations.
Natural gas is relatively safe
(odorants are available and should be added), although the high pressures
used require leak-free fuel lines and fittings.
The typical travel range
of CNG vehicles is 70 miles.
By sacrificing more storage space for
additional fuel tanks, the range can be extended.
Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG)
LPG is a mixture of propane and butane with vapor pressures ranging
from 100 to 300 psi at normal temperatures.
It is transported in liquid form
and transferred to pressure storage tanks.
LPG is also relatively safe
(odorants are available and should be added), and handlinq procedures
are well established.
The typical travel range of LPG vehicles is 220 miles.
M-3
-------
Supply
The supply of CNG and LPG for the South Coast Air Basin requires con-
siderations of present firm demands, fluctuations in demand during the sum-
mer and winter months, needs and requirements of power plants, present
supply, possibilities for augmentation; diverting a portion of the present
demands to fleet vehicles requires an investigation of the advantages of
switching from power plants to fleets and also the costs associated with
modifying some of the refinery processes.
The Pace Company report concludes that supplies of CNG and LPG are
adequate to replace up to 33 per cent of the gasoline consumed in the Basin
provided the combination consists of 25 per cent CNG and 8 per cent LPG.
A 25 per cent conversion to CNG is equivalent to 250 million cubic
feet per day.
Figure M-l shows firm demand for natural gas during the
summer months is around 600 million cubic feet per day.
This leaves about
2 billion cubic feet per day as the interruptable supply which would have
to be diverted from power plants and industrial users in order to supply
this need to motor vehicles.
An 8 per cent conversion to LPG is equivalent to about 10 million
barrels per year, which was the total consumption of LPG in California in
1970 (Figure M-2)
The supply of LPG is increasing rapidly and projected
requirements for fleet vehicles would not place a great strain on refineries
and other sources.
CNG Supply
The relatively small amount of natural gas needed for the conversion
cited above, 250 million cubic feet per day, can be taken from "interruptiblel
users and would not affect the firm customers.
Such a diversion can be
accomplished at a reasonable price.
M-4
-------
5.0
>
«
o 4.0
I-
w
w
U.
tJ
CD
:J
tJ 3.0
u.
o
en
Z
2
-I
-I
CD 2.0
en
«
"
-I
«
a:
:J
I-
«
z
Figure M-l
SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF NATURAL GAS IN
AUGUST 1975 FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
--------
----
Peak Supply level
25% Auto---R
Conversion Other -
/ Interruptible
I
---
__r-
---
_. Other Internl tible-
- Electric Power - (Interruptible) -
~
1.0
- Firm- -Firm - -Firm-
1969 1975
Actual low High
Use Projection Poojection
Source:
See Reference M-4, p. 142.
M-5
Average
Supply
level
---
-------
Figure M-2
SUMMARY OF PROPANE SUPPLY AND DEMAND
ANNUAL AVERAGES FOR CALIFORNIA
i? Present
< 25
w Demand + 8%
>
a: Conversion
w --------
a..
CI)
...I 20
w
a:
a:
<
CD
""
0 15
CI)
z
Q
....I
...I
~ 10
w
z
<
:1.
0
a:
a..
1968
80
70
76
72
74
YEAR
Source:
See Reference M-4. p. 143.
M-6
78
-------
Dr. List concludes that the use of natural gas in motor vehicles
"results in emission reduction more than ten times greater per kilowatt
hour of energy produced than the use of the gas in place of residual crude
in industrial and power plant boilers". (M-5) Long flame residence times in
power plant furnaces permit the use of gasoline as a fuel with sUbstantially
reduced hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions when compared to vehicle
use of gasoline.
Figure M-3 illustrates the naturJl gas supply and demand situation for
the winter months.
During this period the "firm" demand is considerably
higher.
During these months it would be difficult to divert natural gas
into fleet vehicle uses.
Hence, converted vehicles should probably be
equipped with dual-fuel systems.
In view of the seasonal nature of maximum
oxidant pollution, this appears to be a reasonable option.
Of primary
concern is the use of cleaner burning fuels durin9 the summer season.
This estimate is somewhat lower than the previous estimate but still.
shows the potential supply for meeting the demands for several hundred
thousand fleet vehicles.
LPG Supply
The existing market for LPG in South Coast Air Basin is small
relative to CNG.
As seen in Figure M-3, an 8 per cent conversion of
gasoline to LPG involves doubling the supply from 12.5 million barrels a
year in 1971 to 26.1 million barrels by 1975.
On a national scale the
supply of LPG is projected to increase by 27% in 1975(M-3~ The shortage
of LPG supply in California by 1975, due in part to conversions of fleet
vehicles, could conceivably be made up by attracting additional suppliers
from California refineries and field producers or from producers in heavy
surplus areas such as west Texas, the Rocky Mountain region, and Western
M-7
-------
Canada.
Current consumption of LPG in the South Coast Air Basin is about
600 million gal. (14 million barrels) per year, of which 50 million
gal. (1.2 million barrels) are used as vehicle fuel.
Fi gure M-3
SUPPLY AND DEMAND OF NATURAL GAS
IN FEBRUARY 1975 FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
5.0 ...
): Peak SIII)ply level
« - - ----------
C
--
to-
w 4.0 I
w -
~ I ,
u Partial Electric Power (lnterruptible)-
en / I I ;/"!~"~t~'\
:;)
u Average Supply level
~ --
0 3.0
CI) -- I I
z / -25% Auto COl1versiol1-
0
...J
...J
~ "
CI) 2.0
« -
c.:J
...J
«
ex;
:;)
to-
« 1.0 -Firm- -Firm-
Z - -F irnt-
.
1969
Actual Use
1975
low
Projection
High
Projection
Source:
See Reference M-4, p. 162
M-8
-------
Distribution
Present distribution facilities for CNG and LPG are inadequate to
handle a large increase in gaseous fueled vehicles.
Given the demand for
such facilities, however, a large number of these facilities could become
available in a relatively short time period.
Commercial fleets using CNG
would very likely have their own fueling facility.
Since natural gas is
readily available in the South Coast Air Basin, the only require~ent for a
fueling facility is a compressor and storage tank.
Every service station
is a potential outlet for LPG.
At present, LPG is available at about 64
stations in the Los Angeles area; its distribution poses much less of a
problem.
Once the market is developed sufficiently, it should not be
difficult to recover the capital costs of the tank and dispensing equipment.
Here again, commercial fleets could have their own fueling facility.
Conversion Equipment
There are a number of companies which manufacture and/or distribute
CNG or LPG conversion equipment.
Estimates of production capabilities for
the type of equipment seem to indicate several hundred thousand fleet
vehicles could be converted to run on CNG or LPG within a period of two
years.
The maximum benefit to be derived from a conversion program is
obtained from the earliest possible implementation time schedule.
Since
newer, more controlled vehicles are constantly enterin~ the market, air
quality improvements from conversion to gaseous fuel decrease with the
simple passage of time.
Dual Fuel Systems, a subsidiary of Pacific Lighting, produces CNG
conversion equipment.
Given sufficient demand, they have stated that they
could produce 100,000 carburetors per year The limiting factor in a massive
~9
-------
conversion program appears to be the present manufacturers' capabilities
for high pressure tanks, which is approximately 36,000 per year.
LPG
carburetors are currently produced at the rate of 18,000
per year.
The present production LPG fuel tanks for motor vehicles is around 24,000
tanks per yea~(M-2) Here again, the limiting factor would be the production
and supply of LPG fuel tanks.
A frequently asked question is why the major auto manufacturers
do not produce cars with dual fuel systems or gaseous fuel systems.
Detroit
has expressed its inability to manufacture these 1973 and 1974 model vehicles
beca~se of the lead time requirements for making engine and body modificat-
ions (estimated at about two years .minimum).
an equally important consideration.
The limited demand is certainly
California presently exempts vehicles using gaseous fuels from the
fuel tax if the conversion equipment installed is approved by the Air
Resources Board (ARB).
The ARB approves all fuel conversion systems which
meet or exceed the 1974 California emission standards.
As of July 10, 1972,
the following systems were approved for tax-free use of CNG or LPG.
Figures M-4 through M-6 show several typical conversion systems.
M-10
-------
Table M-l
Gaseous Fuel Conversion Systems
Approved for Tax Free Use
By the Ai~ Resources Board
(The following systems are approved for all gasoline motor vehicles)
1.
Impco - Liquefied Petroleum Gas and Dual Fuel (LPG or Gasoline)
Impco Carburetor Model
Engine Size
Class
Engine Size Displacement
Cubic Inches
CA-100 (with or without
turbocha rger)
B,C
140 through 250
o through 375
140 and over
300 and over
under14Q
CA-125
CA-225
CA-425
CA-300A
(LPG plus super-
cha rger)
CA-300A (Dual Fuel-LPG or A through F
Gasoline)
CAG-225 and CAG 425 are governed versions of
acceptable.
A through E
B through F
E,F
A
All
CA225 and CA425 and are
Natural Gas (Dual fuel - natural gas or gasoline)
CA-300 AN (Dual fuel)
E
300 through 375
2. Marvel - Schebler - Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Century Carburetor Model
Engine Size
Class
Engine Size Displacement
Cubic Inches
3C-705-LE
3C-706-LE
3C-706-LE
3C-705-DTLE
3C-706-DTLE
A,8
A
C,D
o through F
E,F
o through 200
under 140
250 through 300
250 and over
300 and over
Imperial 300-same as CA300A.
3C prefix and is acceptable.
3. San Diego Gas & Electric - Natural Gas
The 3CG prefix is the governed version of the
CA-125
CA-225
Engine Size
Class
A through C
o , E M- 11
Engine Size Displacement
Cubic Inches
a through 250
250 throuqh 375
Impco Carburetor Model
-------
Table M-l (Continued)
Dual Fuel - Natural Gas plus Gasoline (Dual Fuel)
4.
Carburetor Model
Engine Size Classes
Engine Sizes-Cubic Inches
1.25
A through F
All
5. Algas Industries - Liquefied Petroleum Gas
PCA 500C
Engine Size Classes
E,F
Engine Sizes-Cubic Inches
300 and over
Carburetor Model
6.
Beam - Liquefied Petroleum Gas
Carburetor Model
Engine Size Classes
Engine Sizes-Cubic Inches
5C-100
5C-200
B
E,F
300 through 375
300 and over
Pneumetrics - Natural Gas (Dual Fuel)
7.
Carburetor Model
Engine Size Classes
Engine Sizes-Cubic Inches
Imperial 300 AN
E
300 through 375
M-12
-------
~
I
2
"
Ii"
Jfl
w
1.
2.
Fuel Cylinder
Positive Fuel Shut Off Solenoid
Primary Regulator
Primary Regulator Test Point
Natural Gas Fill Val,e and Pressure
Cylinder Refill Line
Natural Gas Solenoid Valve
Secondary Regulator
Secondary Regulator Vent Line
Accelerator Vacuum Line
Vapor Hose
Dual Fuel Systems Gas Air Mixer
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
6
\.
.~
20 .
13.
Safety Valve 14.
15.
16.
17 .
18.
19.
20.
21.
Source:
F U E l S Y S T EMS, INC.
Gas System Schematic
II
green
Mixer Adapter
Carburetor
Gasoline Solenoid
Wiring Harness
Vacuum Swi tch
Fuel Selector
Natural Gas Gauge
Fuel Selector Indicator Light
Fuel Pressure Safety Restrictor
Fi tUng
See Reference M-12.
to battery
-------
~CiY
rp}~}RBURETION
o
3:
I
--'
~
Fi gure ~1-5
SC'iEMATIC DIAGRAM FOR
IMPCO LP-GAS OPERATION
o lPG~S '.I,)TOR Fl!a TANK
(A) Filler YJlve- (A) Vzpl)r rptum .....Ive
lC) 10°0 01lI?gc veil",. (D) Vapor vent
ll) cr-h." v;:!lv~' FI I/prot Irne to Quts.rle
of vehicle (G) LP Ga~ valve (1-1) LP Gas
t,'gh p'cssure h':'<:'f~ 'me (I<) f'IE" gauge
o IMPCO fll rr~ AND VACUUM FUEL
lOCK MODElJO
Prpvpnt'" flow 0' fUo:'l when (.r'f!lnl! SlOP!
"""111 l,'::III')" 5wlt,:,", ('11"1 (H) lP Ga!llnlet hne
(l) Connl"l> 10 I"lak'! mant!old YKuum
o IMPCO MODEl EBP CONVERTER
Two Sti!lg~ r(.cu1ator and converter
(M) Water Inlet or outlet from en_1M
(Brass FrU.r,s)
(P) Hand Primer (Q> B<5lance Ime
ccnnectlOn
o IMPeO AFI.7 AIR CLEANER
Low prohle- des'En, LPI-type
(fl) PCV Connef"hon
CV IMPeO MODEL 'CA225 CARBURETOR
. ,Accepted by California Air Resources
Board - Resolull(ln No 7Q.9A
(T) Idle adlustmenl screw (5) Balance 11I'te
connectIon
o CONTROl 'ANEl
(W) rush button pnmer sWitch
M 12 VOlt battery connection
o
\
~NSTAlLATtON CH[CK LIST
II) L". 'UU '~IUI
,.I, ~~::,I :'~:hD:r~:~:,r,"' O' '''(IUS
~I ~P[~,~~;~i~,~;~.i~~::;;F~t~
...., ~,., I O~ ,......, ,,'" "'''\t 1" ."
~t~~;',~,.::I"lrTlr '''1'' II{.. !ND
rcJ ~t~~:;~:F,~~~;',~T\\":~;,~ '::~
,., ~,:..:::.~,~,~7, ';";:.U~..,. .".. UIIII
I ,...,' <"'" ., "" ~.,~, ....,,, R
~~{,;(~;':'j:~~:)7: (~,~~.. :;J~'
1 :~:I .7,~~:\, ~ ~,~':~~r::'::.~"
'1' ~:.¥~?~~.~'~',~,~ ';,',';..'-:-..;~~.
I fIIlJ-"U"'";-;'."fIM'11I'()fII
~-:I . 0\\'''(,:11 C' ""'.1"',,,,
1 ""',1\ ""1'1 ,,"""", ""H I'
1'1.""'" II '0 ... .... nt"~'Uf
1.., "",n ~..,,( "''''C'' .'Il
~1{ :;::r,~~Jlrj...'s:~:,,'~g:
) ..Ill \\U.' .'''f' ~.lVl IIIUS'
v"" 0\11\01'" """" IHtIl
.-.,.- ,..u... .0t0''''
~$tIlOGIIIlOlllr..n",",
., .U "'U.I'''('; SoH.'lll tll.trUHY
CH(CIIIO'()II\(MIIG( "'M~kIO&
08 f1otI: IOtl"UlUfIT
Source:
See Reference M-12
o
o
00
'- fOlUIIIttftC.."."l'
"'1~t?~:;j\~':~:F:~U::;iL
1""',""<,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "'h"
'"'' .", ~.... '.. A"""", ,n
h," p,.. """ "", ".',,,,,
""'""""",,,,"'.,.,..t...,..
III' ,II ,",.',
, L.~r,\:;/')::'~;:~.ni
~. ~g}:~:~/)~; D:~'.E':~~:,;('~
tel ii'<:>,::::.:: .~i",",:, r~:~.~;\ ~~::: :'~~
.DO Q:::.. .,\;:;::'.T!32:;;,~;
.. ~~t;~:;:;~~(;,E~;:~:'~12~
'" ""I v...'...""," .'.. ~...'u "UA,r,
~~:ii:~~;~r:~::i'~~::~,:(:.i~f
MO~I rn.,...,o("lo~, 'lJl' .., .... ..
"'''1 If" ''''10 'VI. 't"f ,~......, ..., ~
M
::'~, ~~~, -;:,":,:~ ""'.i,~:,'",~,~.;,L',:'
~:~:"~..',::~ ;;~;'..~~:"" "
. ""'".!'\HIII'II".
iAJ~:',';.\"'U,-""(J'''''",I\jl''''
~1 ~:,-.t'./i,':,',"~:~ t~~;':"~'~':;;~':'L'~
te, ..-1>1 .v.. ""''''''''.' ".."[\
,,,,,,.....','",,..,,,..'......,
(,.'\I("'''''''''."...r,''''l\''''''''
""-"I.II'r"'l.IIIOOICC:_""11
lA' ~~.~:' 1<1 U l .P"", 0) "II I C' "W.
III :~',X~,:;~~:;:'~X;i':"~~;~r}:~~
. U"'."I}II
'" ~::~:.:: ::~~'!.~;t .1.U~~~.~~;~ ..~..~'~
'11,,,.,,,,,,....,,,,,,,,,.,,,.,,,,.,r....,
1'''''V'''',\I\rr'''\r''''If'''',''''
."""'."'''''''.f'' ("....,,,
~~;,':." I",.. 'u I"l IOC-11> "'I'''
fll'-"(>""U""II"l"IlI"I'I'I'''''.''1
~~~;:;:;~<\ ~~~~ ~'~~"f '~~
~, '''I "" ''''''~'I('.'.r-''CIII''' "''''1
"',,', """.'.I'''''''''O''.'It..",
f ,,- 'to .., ,"'.'''' 1(1" '.... ..
r"I.'.ln
IMP CO.. O''''IS'O'' 0'" J 'NOUSU"S .NC
"... g....., "'"C" . C.",'"' c.......... '0'0'
-------
3:
I
......
(}'1
Figure M-6
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM FOR IMPCO DUAL FUEL OPERATION
LP-Gas and Gasoline...
USING IMPCO 'CA300A CARBURETOR
AND AIR CLEANER ATT,lCHfD TO
EXISTING GASOLINE CAnaURfTOR
FOR EASY CHANGEOVER OF FUELS
0~ ~ --CiJ
H
~)
CD LP GAS MOTOR fUEL TANK
(A) Filler valve (B) Vapor return val'Je
(C) 10 S0 Outage vill"e ([:) Vapor vent
tE) kel,cf valve (F) Vt'nt hne to ouU.de
c..f y(:h,cle (G) lP C~35 valve (H) lP Gas
hli!J:h prcs~ure hO$e line (K) Fuel eauie
o FUEl filTER AND SOLENOID VALVE,
12 VOLT
CC'ltr::IS 110.... of lut!I
o I"'PeO MODEl EOP lP GA:i CONVERTER
T "'-0 !>!.J~f' reful~!or an,1 c.onvener
(l) ,',o1H 8nl!:1 "f (.1...11"1 [rCom t:'ng1ne
rc.OIl(,g ~,.stl:;fl1 (Use E:lrass rlllincs)
f4\ IMPtn .CA100.\ CARBURETOR AND
~ AIR CLE,ANH:
. A:::c..p:l-r! tv l,d.t"rn'J A,r R",'ources
Bo",J n. k.-.r,I,j ,un I~() 709A
(M) PlV (UI,I,c..I,')(\ \I\j) l~...p"ratjv~
(cnlrul y\:,[
o ADAPTER TO GASOLINE CAR'URETOR
Supplied by Impc;o as specified
o EXISTING GASOLINE CARBURETOR
Slralshl or ofhet ad.-pte( aviulable
(£) GASOLINE SOLENOID VALVE
Opera!es horn control panel 10ggle SWitch
o VACUUM CONTROL SWITCH
Preverl!S flow 01 fuel wht-n engine stops
with Ignition SWitch on
(Q) Connects to Intclke manIfold vacuum
(R) Connects to lP CdS ~olenOld hot hne
(5) ConneL!s 10 loggle SWitch hOI hne
o CONTROL PANEL
CP) Bud~n wIre cable opE:ns aIr valve 'Nhen
enr,ne IS to run on Casohne (f) Tc.r.'gle
::,,,,1<.11 ,Jel'ia!t.s soll;'lIold IIdlves 2 &. 7 for
Iud conlrul (U) [1('elrIC fJrIIlwr SWItch for
ImpL"f:I ~0rIVI.:r1er (W) 12 Vall bdlt~ry
conn~cl,url
&
1!t
IMP C 0 A DIWIS,QtII Of' A J I..OUUInU. IJrtC
1.916 G'.
-------
Maintenance
Gaseous fuels do not cause deposits in the engine and fuel system
thereby extending the time between oil and filter changes and tune-ups.
Engine life is generally increased.
There is no need for a choke and the
engine starts up reasonably quick even at low temperatures.
Unlike
vehicles fitted with add-on equipment, the gaseous fueled vehicles do not
require emission checking, replacement of reactors, cleaning of emission
control valves, etc.
However, they do require proper tuning to maintain
their low-emission characteristics.
The General Services Administration's report on their Sawtelle Fleet
gives the following cost figures for use of CNG (Table M-2).
The GSA is
involved in an ongoing program to test conversion to gaseous fuels; they are
currently in the midst of evaluating results from 1200 of their fleet
vehicles.
Table M-2
Report of the GSA Sawtelle Fleet Experience
Maintenance Cents Per Mi 1 e
Miles Vehicle Routinea Vehicle
Automobiles Total Total Routinea
Gas 60,960 $1 t 193 $169 1.96 0.28
CNG 62,835 1 ,529 156 2.43 0.25
Light Trucks
Gas 30,869 514 156
CNG 21 ,388 247 44
Medium Trucks
Gas 14,140 1 ,296 109
CNG 17,684 911 62
1.66
1.15
0.50
0.20
9.17
0.77
5.15
0.35
aRoutine maintenance includes, Oil, Oil Filters & Tuneups
Source: See Reference M-6 M-16
-------
Fleets using LPG have several similar cost savings.
To date,
comprehensive data has not been generated.
However, the police fleet at
Chandler, Arizona had the following figures for routine maintenance tests:
0.511 cents/mile for gasoline and 0.13 cents/mile for LPG.
The sample size
was two cars each.
Safety
Several properties inherent in gaseous fuel systems make them as safe
as present motor vehicle systems.
The EPA position paper on gaseous fuel
conversion states, "Enough experience has now been accumulated with gaseous
fuel vehicles to demonstrate that under closely controlled fleet-operation,
the fuels can be used safely.II(M-7) Gaseous fueled vehicles, when used in
strict compliance with applicable standards and regulations, and maintained
by qualified repairmen are as safe as conventional gasoline powered
automobiles.
The lower flash point of gaseous fuels and sturdy construction
of storage tanks, makes fire accidents very infrequent.
Gas leaks in enclosed spaces are the principal fire hazard
associated with gaseous fuels.
Natural gas rises and dissipates as a vapor
unless it is confined..
Both CNG and LPG contain odorizers which reveal
their presence in the event
of a leak.
R. H. Eshelman, Detroit Technical editor for automotive industries
recently wrote, "Evi dence from many fl eet type operati ons to date suggest
f f h to 1 ,,(M-8)
LPG fuel systems may prove as sa e or sa er t an conven lona ones.
The General Services Administration (GSA) recently tested a fleet of dual-
fuel vehicles using gasoline and CNG.
The GSA report stated liThe first
year's experience with these dual-fuel vehicles has resulted in an enviable
safety record. None of the data studies, or the people consulted indicates any
safety problem when these vehicles were used under normal conditions...II(M-6)
M-17
-------
Insurance
The insurance companies do not distinguish between gaseous fueled
vehicles and gasoline powered vehicles in their rate structures.
only requirement is that conversions meet applicable standards.
Their
A common
standard is IINational Fire Protection Association Standard No. 58-Storage
and Handling of Liquid Petroleum Gases". (~-9) Gaseous fuel conversions in
the city must meet the strict standards laid down by the Los Angeles City
Fire Department.
The insurance industry underwrites both policies but differentiates
between gaseous fuels and gasoline refueling stations, as well as parking
garages, in their rate structure.
Fleet operators have not encountered any difficulty in insuring
their LPG fueled vehicles at normal rates.
At present, some difficulties
may be encountered in insuring CNG fueled vehicles since no standard
procedure has been established by the insurance companies for insuring
these vehicles.
The following are some of the national companips which insure
gaseous fueled vehicles:
.
Allstate Insurance Company
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty
Insurance Company of North
Hartford Insurance Group
Company
America
.
.
.
Driver Reaction
According to General Services Administration's report(M-10), the
driver acceptance of gaseous fueled vehicles is very good.
While driving
in heavy smog areas, drivers take pride in operating a vehicle conspicuously
identified as running on a clean-burning, low polluting fuel.
There is
M-18
-------
considerable dedication to the program and its objectives
Continued driver acceptance requires that components have high
rel i abil ity.
Problem areas include leaks, misfiring, missing controls
or inconspicuous identification on control panels.
Ori vers di d not
detect a performance loss in well-tuned gaseous fueled vehicles.
In the South Coast Air Basin fleet owners are well organized in
various associations, and their ability to forestall regulation is
significant.
The Yellow Taxi Cab association of L.A. has already
registered public opposition to any mandatory program of conversion to
gaseous fuels.
Experience from other government regulation indicates that
industry resistance would be expressed in many forms.
They may use
"expert witnesses" or special studies to prove that regulations would
be so cumbersome as to be impractical.
They may prolong public hearings
by raising new issues, each time.
Or they will wait for all public
proceedings to be completed and then file for a court injunction.
Reactivity
The reactivity of hydrocarbons emitted by gaseous fueled vehicles
is considerably less than from gasoline fueled vehicles.
The EPA positions
paper states that IIGaseous fuels have an additional advantage over a gasoline
fuel in the form of significantly less photochemical reactivity of the
hydrocarbons in the exhaust gases.
Natural gas consists primarily of
methane and produces less reactive exhaust gases than does LPG which is
largely composed of propanell. (M-7)
Exhaust hydrocarbon emissions from CNG fueled vehicles are composed
of methane and ethane.
These compounds are less reactive compared to the
olefinic and aromatic compounds of burned gasoline in producing photochemical
M-19
-------
smog.
Methods of evaluating reactivity of the hydrocarbon are under
development.
The California Air Resources Board adopted on November 19.
1972, a reactivity factor, R = 0.5 for natural gas emission data as an
interim measure.(M-6) This means measured hydrocarbon values from gaseous
fueled vehicles must be multiplied by a factor of 0.5 to arrive at their
corrected "photochemica1 potentia1".
Figure M-7 compares the reactivity of exhaust produced from
Even though the
propane/propylene mixtures to gasoline and natural gas.
absolute reactivity of the 20 per cent propylene and 80 per cent propane
is higher than gasoline, when combined with the total mass HC emissions,
the reactivity of the mixture is lower than gasoline.
Figure M-7
Reactivity of exhaust produced from propane/propylene
mixtures compared to gasoline and natural gas
> .; ::1
~ aJ ~
.....
> u
. r- :.c
'0 4- 0.4
((j 0
aJ
~ E
c ~ 0.3
o o.
..a '-
~ Q.)
((j C
U QJ 0.2
o r-
~ >,
-0 ..c
>, +->
:J.: aJ 0.1
(j')
E
ru
~
0,
-----
CJ
C4
(.
r:
o -',-
Source:
'"
~
I I
I
- I
-
'" '"
c c
,., I "
0. 0.
2 2'
0. a.
t.~~ ~
0 0
C\ C)
c;; .; -
c: c
'" '"
>. '" V>
~ CL '"
2 0- Co)
a. C\. ~
t-Z 'Co. ~ ~
0 ." " r.;
'" co z
~-_.
See Reference M-11
M-20
-------
Time Limi tati ons
Detroit presently limits the engine warranty on vehicles converted
to operate on gaseous fuels.
Since production models after 1975 are
expected to have emission levels substantially lower than vehicles con-
verted to operate on gaseous fuels~ engine manufacturers are not ready to
make adjustments which would optimize existing engines for gaseous fuel
operation.
The EPA position paper states that~ "Because future gasoline power~d
vehicles (1976) will have lower emissions than current vehicles converted
to operate on gaseous fuels~ after 1974 an accelerated program of vehicle
replacement would be more efficient in reducing emissions from State
vehicles than a large gaseous fuel conversion programll.
Thus any conversion
to gaseous fuel programs should be implemented as soon as possible to derive
the maximum air quality improvements.
Some Constraints
Due to absence of lead in LPG~ valve recession has been experienced.
Vehicles used for long distances at high speeds would need hardened valve
seats.
In genera1~ fleet vehicles should not develop this problem because
of the short range distances they usually drive.
CNG has serious range 1imitations~ and could be a constraint for
certain fleet operations.
Also CNG tanks weigh 40 pounds for each gallon
equivalent of fuel.
Even though gaseous fueled vehicles may be safer than gasoline
vehicles when all pertinent codes and regulations are adhered to~ they are
"new" and hence~ subject to restrictive safety regulatio.ns.
Public reaction~
lower costs and reliability should more than compensate for the various
disadvantages mentioned above.
M-2l
-------
Costs
Costs for conversion to fleet-owners can be divided into two
categories:
(1)
capital costs for vehicle conversion (fuel tanks and
liners, carburetors, etc.) and fueling stations, (2)
changes in current
operational procedures including new maintenance techniques, fueling
patterns, etc.
Benefits from conversion include longer engine component life, less
maintenance costs, lower fuel costs (as long as state tax exemption is
enforced) and significantly lower pollutant emissions.
Costs of equipment and installation to burn CNG or LPG is around
$350-500.
CNG fuel compressors cost in excess of $10,000.
Storage
facilities for LPG at fueling stations cost approximately $3200 per tank.
Experience to date indicates savings in maintenance costs.
It is imperative,
however, that gaseous fueled vehicles be properly maintained to achieve
their low emission characteristics.
Recovery of capital expenditures, involved in fleet conversion to
gaseous fuels, depends on the fleet size and mileage travelled.
New cars
converted to burn gaseous fuels have 'limited' manufacturer's warranty.
Small fleet operators may not have the financial capability to install CNG
fueling facilities.
Most fleet owners purchase new cars each year and may resist spending
considerable sums of money for the interim period till 1916.
There is no
Federal tax on natural gas and a 7i/100 cubic feet California State tax.
Again, exemptions from state tax are available for CARB approved systems.
There is a 4i/gal Federal tax on LPG and a 6i/gal California State tax.
Exemptions from the state tax are available for CARB approved systems.
M. 22
-------
If the fleet vehicles. are driven sufficient distances each day.
the cost savings are sufficient to justify conversion to gaseous fuels.
Each fleet will experience a different set of costs for conversion and
different amount of savings; the economics of converting fleet vehicles
has to be studied on an individual basis.
Range of costs for conversion of each fleet car is as follows:4
Equipment
Fuel tankage
CNG
$300
LPG
$300
$20-40 per gallon
$3.50-10 per gallon
Installation $100-300 $100-300
Cost per 100 cubic feet for CNG are as follows:(2)
NG cost
6-8~/100 std. cubic feet
3-4~/100 std. cubic feet
Compressing costs
State tax
7~/100 std. cubic feet
Assuming 15 miles per 100 standard cubic feet of NG, estimated
costs for fleets is 9-12~ without tax and 16-19~ with tax, for
100 SCF of natural gas (100 SCF of NG is assumed equivalent to
1 gallon of gasoline).
LPG retails for 13-20~ per gal without tax.
Costs for fleet
vehicles per equivalent gallon of gasoline is l5~ without tax and 25~
with tax.
M-23
-------
References
M-l.
M-2.
M-3.
M-4.
M-5.
M-6.
M-7.
M-8.
M-9.
r~-l O.
M- 11 .
M-12.
M-13.
City of Riverside, California, Air Pollution Smog - An Existing
Health Hazard, An Imminent Disaster, Office of Disaster
Preparedness, June 1972 (A resolution, report and proposed
emergency plan from the Mayor and Council of the City of Riverside
to the Governor of the State of California).
State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
"Summary of Hearings on the Feasibility of Converting Gasoline
Powered Vehicles in the South Coast Air Basin to Gaseous Fuels",
August 17-18, 1972.
The Pace Company, Evaluation of Gaseous Fuels Supply for
Motor Vehicle Usage in the Los Angeles Basin, prepared for the
EQL-Caltech, Februa~y 15, 1971.
Lees, L., et. al., Smog: A Report to the People, Environmental
Quality Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. 1972.
List, E. J., "Energy and the tnvironment in Southern California",
California Institute of Technology, 1971.
"Pollution Reduction with Cost Savings- A Report on the General
Services Administration's Dual Fuel Experiment", U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1971.
Environmental Protection Agency. "Conversion of Motor Vehicles to
Gaseous Fuel to Reduce Air Pollution", (position Paper), 1972.
Eshelman,R.H., "LP-Gas Conversion", Automotive Industries,
May 15, 1970.
NFPA No. 58, copies available from the National Fire Protection
Association (60 Battlerymarch Street, Boston, Mass. 02110).
Foote, W. B., "Compressed Natural Gas Experience", presented at the
GSA Sponsored Symposium, Gaseous Fueled Vehicles and the Environment,
Washington, D. C., May 24-26, 1972.
Fleming, R. D., et. al., "Propane as an Engine Fuel for Clean Air
Requirements", Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 22(6):
455 (1972).
Environmental Quality Laboratory - California Institute of Technology,
Caltech Clean Air Car Project Gaseous Fuels Manual, November 1,1971.
Air Resources Board Informational Release, "Item: Control Measures for
Reducing Photochemical Air Pollution in the South Coast Air Basin,
including the Proposal by the City of Riverside to Convert Vehicles
to Gaseous Fuels", September 12-13,1972.
M-24
-------
APPENDIX N
EMISSION INVENTORY REVISION - EPA (DECEMBER 1972)
This appendix presents a portion of the California emission inven-
tory revision compiled by EPA personnel with assistance from the Air
Resources Board staff.
The modifications deal primarily with motor
vehicle emission contributions for 1970 and 1977 in the South ~oast Air
B as in.
Section I briefly explains the EPA rationale for the determina-
tion of a maximum allowable emission level required to achieve the
photochemical oxidant standard.
1.
Determination of Maximum Allowable High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Emissions to Meet .08 ppm l-hour Oxidant Standard
The oxidant control strategy discussed in this report involves the
control of high reactive organic gases (hydrocarbons) as defined by the
Los Angeles APCD Rule 66.
This control approach was used in the State
Air Implementation Plan, and has been tentatively accepted by EPA.
As
a result of this approach, some hydrocarbons considered to be reactive
by EPA, are not considered in this control strategy.
The high yearly ambient oxidant reading is considered to be direct-
ly proportional to the amount of high reactive hydrocarbon emissions
for that year.
In other words, straight line proportional roll back
of high reactive hydrocarbon emissions is used to predict the emissions
reduction needed to meet the oxidant standard.
The base year of 1970 is used to make this prediction.
On August
6, 1970, the yearly l-hour high oxi dant readi ng of .62 .ppm was recorded
at Riverside.
The .67 ppm year high oxidant reading used by the Cali..
fornia Air Resources Board (ARB) in the air implementation plan has
N-l
-------
since been rejected by the ARB.
The State Plan showed a total of 195
tons/day of stationary source high reactive hydrocarbon emission, and
33 tons/day from aircraft in 1970.
The 1970 emissions from other mobile
sources (i .e., on-highway light and heavy duty gasoline vehicles and
motorcycles) are calculated in Appendix A, and these emissions are 1023
tons / day.
As indicated this number does not include the emissions from
off-highway gasoline usage.
However, this usage is considered negligible
on the basis of data obtained from the ARB staff, which showed that
current off-highway gasoline usage accounts for only sl ight1y more than
2% of gasoline sales.
Based on the federal .08 ppm maximum 1-hour oxidant standard, the
1970 high l-hour ambient oxidant reading of .62 ppm, and the 1970
emissions are determined as follows:
(195 + 33 + 1023) :~~ = 161 tons/day
II.
Discussion of a Control Strategy Package to Meet the Federal .08
ppm l-hour Oxidant Standard in July 1977
The strategies discussed in this package include those for which it
was felt that sufficient information existed to claim or estimate emis-
sions reductions.
The exceptions to this are the VMT reduction strate-
gies evaluated by TRW and De Leuw Cather.
No VMT reductions are claimed
in this report from these measures. Any VMT reduction that these
strategies might produce, would lessen the amount of gas rationing that
would be needed as a final last resort measure to meet the standard.
N-2
-------
Aircraft emissions and their control are based on the State Plan
emission inventory and an EPA estimate of 30% aircraft emissions-reductions
determined as a result of conversations with EPA personnel. These
emissions in 1977 are calculated to be
35 x .7 = 24 tons/day
The June 1977 emissions from light and heavy duty vehicles and
motorcycles when taking into account only the emissions reduction that
would result from present and proposed factory installed control devices,
are determined in Appendix B.
Using these emissions as a baseline in
Appendix C, control strategies are applied to various segments of the
light and heavy duty vehicle population and the resulting emissions
reductions calculated.
Gas rationing is the final strategy that is
evaluated, and is used as a last resort to attain the standard.
Gas
rationing not only affects the emission from mobile sources, but also
affects the emissions from gasoline marketing operations.
This is
discussed and reflected in the calculations of Appendices C and D.
Appendix D contains the evaluation and discussion of stationary source
control strategies.
A compilation of the strategies and their step-by-step reductions
are shown in the following Table 1.
The emissions reductions that are
shown for each mobile control strategy b. thtu g., are the reductions
that can be expected by the addition of each strategy only after the
strategies listed prior to it have been implemented.
In other words,
the emissions reductions are determined from an emissions base that has
been altered by the strategies previously evaluated. As a result of this
N-3
-------
then, the reductions in ton/day of one strategy cannot be compared to
the reductions obtained by another strategy because the emissions base
is altered (i.e., lowered) after each strategy is applied.
N-4
-------
Table 1
COMPILATION OF CONTROL STRATEGY AFFECTS
ON JUNE 30 t 1977
Tons/Day
Allowable Emissions + 161
Stationary source emissions considering
no additional controls since 1970 and + 153
considering 83% gas rationing
Stationary Control Strategy Reductions
a. Gasoline marketing control (considering
83% gas rationing) - 11
b. Dry cleaning vapor control - 6
c. Degreaser substitution - 25
d. Rule 66 strengthening (50%) - 45
Stationary Emissions Remaining + 66
Mobile source emissions from aircraftt on-
highway light and heavy duty vehiclest and + 477
motorcycles
Mobile Control Strategy Reductions
a. Aircraft emission reductions - 11
b. VSAD and PCV State retrofit - 19
c. Inspection and maintenance - 39
d. Vehicle evaporative control retrofit - 26
e. Gaseous fuel conversion - 12
f. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit - 84
g. VMT reduction by gasoline rationing - 191
Mobile Emissions Remaining + 95
Total Mobile and Stationary Emissions
Remaining + 161
N-5
-------
IIEPA-APPENDI X All
1970 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN ON-HIGHWAY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE
HYDROCARBON EMISSION INVENTORY
This appendix details the information and calculations involved in
determining the above mentioned inventory for light and heavy duty gaso-
line powered motor vehicles and 2 and 4 stroke motorcycles.
The following data were obtained from the California Department of
Motor Vehicles (DMV), the California Highw~ Patrol, and the California
Air Resources Board (ARB), and were supplied to EPA by the ARB:
Average vehicle age
Age di s tri buti on
Vehicle population
Miles driven per vehicle year
The emission factors and deterioration factors are from the EPA
draft report IIInterim Report on Motor Vehicle Emission Estimation.1I
(1) The reactivity factors (i.e., fraction of hydrocarbon vapor that
is highly reactive per LAAPCD Rule 66) for gasoline exhaust and gaso-
line evaporative and crankcase emission are obtained from the California
Ins titute of Technology - Envi ronmental Qual ity Laboratory Report IISt()G
a Report to the People. II
(2) The miles traveled per vehicle years are
obtained from the publication 111971 Motor Trunk Facts.1I
(3) The
motorcycle emi ss ion factors ,',ere obtai ned verbally from EPA sources
Armstrong and Kircher.
The age distribution for heavy duty vehicles ~s assumed to be the
same as that for light duty vehicles.
N-6
-------
TABLE A-1
Oecerrber 31, 1970
LI GHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Total Convers ion
Bas in Mi 1es Ori ven Emission Deteri or- Factor Emi s s ions
Model Average Vehi c1e Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor atior. ( ton - yr.) Reactivity (ton)
Year Age(yr.) Di s t ri b uti on Population Year (gm./mi) Factor (gm. -day) Factor (day)
1971 1/8 .023 5.6 x 106 2,000 2.9 1.01 3.02 x 10-9 .8 1.8
1970 3/4 .090 5.6 x 106 11 ,600 3.6 1.04 3.02 x 10-9 .8 52.9
1969 1 3/4 .106 5.6 x 106 11 ,500 4.4 1. 15 3.02 x 10-9 .8 83.5
1968 2 3/4 .0971 5.6 x 106 10,200 4.5 1. 21 3.02 x 10-9 .8 73.0
:z
I 5.6 x 106 3.02 x 10-9
'-I 1967 3 3/4 .0847 9,000 4.6 1. 14 .8 54.1
1966 4 3/4 .0898 5.6 x 106 7,700 6.0 1. 29 3.02 x 10-9 .8 72.4
1965 5 3/4 .0948 5.6 x 106 7,000 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 79.0
1964 6 3/4 .0838 6 6,000 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 59.9
5.6 x 10
1963 7 3/4 .0723 5.6 x 106 5,000 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 31. 3
1962 8 3/4 .0597 5.6 x 106 4,400 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 31. 3
1961 9 3/4 .0409 5.6 x 106 3,900 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 19.0
1960 10 3/4 .0367 6 3,800 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 16.6
5.6 x 10
1959 11 3/4+ .1212 5.6 x 106 3,300 8.8 1.00 3.02 x 10-9 .8 47.6
& earlier
Total 634.1
-------
TABLE A-2
December 31, 1970
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSION INVENTORY
Total Basin Miles Dri'Jen Emission Conversion Emissiom
Hodel Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor Factbr Reactivity (Tons/Da~
Yr. Distribution Population Yr. (gm/mi) (Ton/yr.) Factor
(qm/day)
1971 .023 5.6 x 106 2,000 .5 3.02 x 10-9 .67 .3
1970 .090 6 11,600 3.02 x 10-9
5.6 x 10 .5 .67 5.9
1969 .106 5.6 x 106 11,500 3.0 -9
3.02 x 10 .67 41.4
1968 .0971 5.6 x 106 10,200 3.0 3.02 x -9 .67
10 33.7
1967 .0847 5.6 x 106 9,000 3.0 3.02 x 10-9 .67 25.9
z 10.6 ..9
I
co 1966 .0898 5.6 x 7,700 3.0 3.02 x lC .67 23.5
1965 .0948 5.6 x 106 7,000 3.0 -9 .67
3.02 x 10 22.6
1964 .0838 5.6 x 106 6,000 .3.0 3.02 x 10-9 .67 17.11
1963 .0723 5.-6 x 106 5,000 3.8 3.02 x 10-9 .67 15.6
1<162 .0597 5.6 x 1{)6 4,400 3.8 -9 .67
3.02 x 10 11.3
5.6 x 106 -9
.d61 .0409 3,900 3.8 3.02 x 10 .67 6.9
1960 .0367 5.6 x 106 3,800 7.1 3.02 x -9 .67 11.2
10
1959 .1212 5.6 x 106 3,300 7.1 3.02 x 10-9 .67 32.2
& earlier
Total 247.6
-------
TABLE A-3
December 31,1970
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Conversion
Total Basin Miles Driven Emission Deterior- Factor Emissions
Model Average Vehicle Age Vehicle Per Vehicle ;'actor ",tion * (ton-yr.) Reactivity ( ton)
Year hge(yr.) Distribution Population Year (grn. /rni) Factor (grn. -day) Factor (di'\Y~
--
1971 1/8 .023 2.f32 x 105 1,300 15 1.02 -9 .8 .3
3.02 x 10
1970 3/4 .090 2.n x 105 7,500 15 1.09 3.02 x 109 .8 6.2
1969 1 3/4 .106 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 109 .8 11.3
1968 2 3/4 .0971 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 109 .8 10.3
1967 3 3/4 .0847 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3."2 x 109 .8 9.0
~ 1966 4 3/4 .0898 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 X 109 .8 9.6
I
\0
1965 5 3/4 .0948 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 109 .8 10.1
1964 6 3/4 .0838 2. 32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 109 .8 8.9
1963 7 3/4 . 0'7 2 3 ~.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 109 .8 7.7
105 -9
1962 8 3/4 .0597 2.32 x 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 10 .8 6.4
1961 3/4 2.32 x 105 -9
9 .0409 10.,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 10 .8 4.4
1960 10 3/4 .0367 2.32 x 105 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x -9 .8
, 10 3.9
105 -9
1959 11 3/4+ .1212 2.32 x 10,000 19 1.00 3.02 x 10 .8 12.9
& earlier
101. 0
. Based on recommendation of EPA interim emission factor report, Pg. 8 (l)
-------
TABLE A-4
December 31, 1970
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSION INVENTORY
Total Basin Miles Driven Emission Conversion Emission!
Model Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor Factbr Reactivity (Tons/Da~
Yr. Distribution Population Yr. (gm/mi) (Ton/yr. ) Factor
(gm/
-------
TABLE
A-5
December 31, 1970
2 Stroke Motorcycle React:i.ve Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
107,500
3,900
Emission
Factor
(qm/mi)
15
Convelsion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(qm-day)
-9
3.02 x 10
Reactivity
Factor
Ton
Day
Vehicle
Population
r-1iles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
.8
15.2
:z
I
--'
--'
TABLE
A-6
December 31, 1970
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Invehtory
Conversion
Miles' Driven. Emission Factor
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor. (ton-yr) Reactivity Ton
Population Year '( qm/mi) (qm-day) Factor Day
175,500 3;900 3.3 3.02 x 10-9 .8 5.5
-------
TABLE
A-7
December 31, 1970
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase Emission Inventory
Conversion
Miles Driven Emission Factor
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (ton-yr) Reactivity
Population Year (gm/mi) (gm-day) Factor
-9
175,500 3,900 .7 3.02 x 10 .67
Ton
Day
1.0
TABLE
A-a
December 31, 1970
..
....
N
2 -Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Evaporative Emission Inventory
3,900
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
.32
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(qm-day)
-9
3.02 x 10
Reactivity
Factor
Ton
Day
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
107,500
.67
.3
TABLE
A-9
December 31, 1970
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbons
Evaporative Emission Inventory
Conversion
Miles Driven Emission Factor
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (ton-yr) Reacti v.i ty Ton
Population Year (gm/mi) (gm-day) Factor Day
175,500 3,900 .35 3.02 x 10-9 .()7 .s
-------
liEPA-APPENDIX B"
JUNE 30, 1977 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
ON-HIGHWAY GASOLINE VEHICLE
HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION INVENTORY
(Based on the emissions control produced by new car
(i.e., factory installed) emission control devices)
This appendix details the information and calculations involved in
determining the above mentioned inventory for light and heavy duty gasoline
powered motor vehicles and two and four stroke motorcycles.
The following data were obtained from the California Department of
Motor Vehicles (DMV), the California Highway Patrol, and the California
Air Resources Board (ARB), and were supplied to EPA by the ARB:
Average vehicle ag~
Age distribution
Vehicle population
Miles driven per vehicle year
The emission factors and deterioration factors are from the EPA draft
report "Interim Report on Motor Vehicle Emission Estimation."
(1) The
reactivity factors (i.e., fraction of hydrocarbon vapor that is highly
reactive per LAAPCD Rule 66) for gasoline exhaust and gasoline evaporative
and crankcase emission are obtained from the California Institute of
Technology - Environmental Quality Laboratory Report "MSOG A Report to the
People. II
(2) The miles traveled per vehiele year are obtained from the
pub 1 i cati on "1971 Motor Truck Facts. II
(3) The motorcycle emission factors
were obtained verbally from EPA sources Armstrong and Kircher.
The age distribution for heavy duty vehicles is assumed to be the
same as that for light duty vehicles.
N-13
-------
The vehicle population in the South Coast Air Basin on June 30, 1977
is estimated by multiplying the statewide vehicle population in 1970 by a
population growth factor that is adjusted to reflect the June 30 inventory
date. This product is then multiplied by the adjusted 1977 South Coast
Air Basin fraction of statewide vehicle population in the Basin on June 30,
1977 is shown below.
1970 Statewide Vehicle Population x (1 + 1970 to 77 Growth
Factor x (June 77/Dec. 77) adjustment) x South Coast Basin
Vehicle Population Factor = Basin Vehicle Population
11,250,000 (1+.104 x 6]5) .4918 = 6,070,000
The vehicle age distribution was adjusted to reflect the June 30
inventory by eliminating the .023 fraction of IInext year" model vehicles,
and also eliminating an estimated .017 fraction of present year model
vehicles. The age distributions for the remaining years were then adjusted
(i.e., increased) to reflect this change.
The calculation for determining the heavy duty vehicle population in
the Basin in July 1,1977 is shown below.
466,300 (1+.104 x 6]5) .4918 = 252,000
The calculation for determining the motorcycle population in the Basin
in 1977 is shown below, using a DMV prediction for statewide motorcycle
population and the same vehicle population fraction used in the previous
two calculations.
771,800 x .4918 = 380,000
N-14
-------
TABLE B-1
June 30, 1977
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Conversion'
Total Basin Miles Driven Emission Deterior- Factor Emission~
!Ojodal Average Vehicle Age Vehicle Per vehicle Facto:::, ation (ton-yr.) Reactivity (ton)
Yeat' Age (yr. ) Distribution Population Year (qm.0i) Factor (c;:.-.. -c "y) Factor ~~:t:L
1977 1/2* .076* 6.07 x 106 5,800 .23 1. 23 3.02 x 10-9 8 1.8
1976 1 1/2 .110 " 11,500 .23 1.7 " " 7.3
1975 2 1/2 .101 " 10,200 .23 1.23*** " " 4.3
1974 3 1/2 .0883 " 9,000 2.7 1.14 " " 39.5
1973 4 1/2 .0936 " 7,700 2.7 1.16 " " 33.5
:z 1972 5 1/2 .0988 " 7,000 2.7 1.18 " " 32.3
I
--' 1971 6 1/2 .0873 " 6,000 2.9 1. 21 " " 26.9
U'1
1970 7 1/2 .0753 " 5,000 3.6 1. 28 " " 24.5
1969 8 1/2 .0622 " 4,400 4.4 1.30 " " 22.9
1968 9 1/2 .0426 " 3,900 4.5 1. 35 " " 14.7
1967 10 1/2 .0382 " 3,800 4.6 1.21 " " 11.8
1966 11 1/2 .0312** " 3,3.00 6.0 1. 35 " " 12.2
1965 12 1/2 .095 " 3,300 8.8 1.0 " " 40.5
and
earlier Total 272.2
*These data were changed and adjusted to reL~ect the fact that the inventory is for June 30,
and not Dec. 31.
**An estimation made to allow for the application of a 1966 emission factor.
***This deterioration factor was changed (i.e., lowered) to reflect the fact that catalysts in
1975 can be changed after 25,000 miles, or approximately 2 years service.
-------
TABLE B-2
June 30, 1977
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSION INVENTORY
Total Basin Miles Driven Emission Conversion Emissions
~.1odel Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor Factbr ~eactivity (Tons/Day)
Yr. Distribution Population Yr. (gm/mi) (Ton/yr. ) Factor
(gm/day)
1977 .076 6.07 x 106 5,800 .2 '3.02 x 10-9 .67 1.08
1976 .110 11,500 .2 II II 3.39
:z 1975 .101 II 10,200 ..2 II II 2.52
I 1974 .0883 II 9,000 .2 II II /./ -2.15
.....
0\ 1973 .0936 II 7,700 .2 II " 1.77
1972 .0988 II 7,000 .2 II II 1. 70
1971 .0873 II 6,000 .5 II II 3.21
1970 .0753 II 5,000 .5 II " 2.31
1969 .0622 II 4,400 3.0 " II 10.10
1968 .0426 " 3,900 3.0 II " 6.12
1967 .0382 " 3,800 3.0 " 5.35
1966 .0312 II 3 , 3 00 3.0 II " 3.79
1965 .095 " 3,300 3.4* " 13.10
and
earlier
Total 56.59
*An estimate to reflect the 1965 and earlier average emission f ac.tor .
-------
TABLE B-3
June 30, 1977
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Conversion
Total Basin giles Driven E..':'lissio!1 Deterior- Factor E!:1issions
l-jodel Average Vehicle Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor ation (ton-."E..:..) Reactivity iton)
Year ]I.,e (vr. ) Di str i-bution Population Year (q:n./Mi) Factor (q!:l. -d,w) Factor (day)-
1977 1/2 .76 2.52 x 105 5,000 2.4 1. 06 3.02 x 10-9 .8 .59
1976 1':'1/2 .110 " 10,000 2.4 1.15 " " lo6/)
=f 1975 2-1/2 .101 " " " 1.20 " " 1.77
-'
'-J
1974 3-1/2 .0883 " 7.8 1. 32 " " 5.55
1973 4-1/2 .0936 " " 1.25 " " 5.56
1972 5-1/2 .0988 " 9.9 1. 27 " " 7.55
1971 6-1/2 . 0873 " " 15.0 1. 29 " " 10.30
1970 7-1/2 .0753 " " 15.0 1. 31 " " 9.05
1969 8-1/2 .0622 " " 19.0 1.0 " " 7.22
) 968 & 9-1/2+ .2070 " " 19.0 1.0 " " 24.00
Earlier 73.2
-------
TABLE B-4
June 30, 1977
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSION INVENTORY
Total Basin Miles Driven Emission Conv~rsion Emissions
:'lodel Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor Factor 'Reactivi ty (Tons/Day)
Yr. Distribution Population Yr. (gm/mi) (Ton/yr. ) Factor
(gm/day)
1977 .76 2.52 x 105 5,000 .8 3.02 x 10-9 .67 .16
1976 .HO " 10,000 .8 " .45
1975 .101 " " . 8 " " . 41
1974 .0883 " " . 8 " " .36
:z 1973 .936 " " .8 " .~8
I
~
00 " "
1972 .988 3.0 " " 1.52
1971 .0873 " " 3.0 " " 1. 34
197(' .0753 " " 3'.0 " " 1.16
1969 .0622 " " 3.0 " " .96
1968 .0426 " " 3.0 " " .66
.
1967 .0382 " " 3.0* " " .58
1966 .0312 " " 3.0* " " .48
1965 + .095 " " 3.4* " ." 1. 66
*These heavy duty vehicle hydrocarbon emission factors of Ref. (1), Table 16, were changed in order Total
to reflect the fact that PCV devices were installed on heavy duty gasoline vehicles on the same 10.10
schedule as the light duty vehicles.
-------
:z
I
.....
\0
TABLE
B-5
June 30, 1977
2 Stroke Motorcycle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
Conversion
Miles Driven Emission Factor
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (ton-yr) Reactivity
population Year (qm/mi) (gm-day) Factor
144,000 3,900 15.0 3.02 x 10-9 .8
20.4
Emissions
Ton
Day
TABLE
B-6
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(qm-day)
3.02 x 10-9
.8
7.36
Reactivity
Factor -
Emissions
Ton
Day
Emis!;;ion
Factor
'( gm/mi )
3.3
236,000
3,900
TABLE
B-7
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase Emission Inventory
Conversion
Miles Driven Emission Factor Emissions
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (ton-yr) Reactivity Ton
Population Year (qm/mi) (qm-day) Factor Day
236,000 3,900 .7 3.02 x 10-9 .67 1.3
-------
TABLE
B-8
June 30, 1977
2 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Evaporative Emission Inventory
Emission
Factor
(qm/mi)
.32
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(qm-day)
3.02 x 10-9
Reactivity
Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
144,000
3,900
.67
.36
:z
I
N
o
TABLE
B-9
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Evaporative Emission Inventory
Conversion
Miles Driven Emission Factor Emissions
Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (ton-yr) Reactivity Ton
Population Year '(qm/mi) (qm-day) Factor Day
236,000 3,900 .35 3.02 x 10-9 .67 .65
-------
EPA-APPENDI X C
June 30, 1977 EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM VARIOUS CONTROL STRATEGIES
IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN FOR ON-HIGHWAY GASOLINE VEHICLES -
HIGH REACTIVITY HYDROCARBONS
1.
Strategy Bas is and Background
The 1970 and 1977 high reactive hydrocarbon emissions from light
and heavy duty vehicles and from 2 and 4 stroke motorcycles when
considering emissions control based only on control devices installed
on new vehicles, are shown in Table C-l.
This table is a compilation
of Appendix A and B calculation results.
Using the emissions shown in the 1977 column as a base, various
control strategies are applied, and the emissions reductions obtained
by these control strategies are shown in the various subsections of
Secti on 11.
It should again be pointed out and emphasized that the
emi ss ion reducti ons in Tons/Day that are cal cul ated for each strategy,
are the reductions that can be expected by the addition of a particu-
lar strategy only after the strategy or strategies previously evalua-
ted have been implemented.
In other words, the emission reductions
are determined from an emission base that has been reduced by the
strategies previously evaluated.
As a result of this then, the re-
duction in Ton/Day of one strategy cannot be compared to the re-
duction obtained by another strategy because the emission base is
altered (i .e., lowered) after each strategy is applied.
The total emissions remaining and the emissions remaining for
each model year after implementing each strategy on the two types
N-21
-------
of vehicles (light and heavy duty) and on the two sources of
emission from these vehicles (exhaust and crankcase and evaporative
emissions), are shown in Tables C-2, C-3, C-4 and C-S in the
following section.
N-22
-------
TABLE C-1
HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM LIGHT
AND HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES AND t1::JTORCYCLES
(A Compilation of Appendix A and B Results)
Reacti ve Hydrocarbon Tons/Day
Exhause Emissions 1970 1977
a. Light duty vehicles (considering 634.1 272.0
only factory installed control
devices)
b. Heavy duty vehicle (considering 101.0 73.2
only factory installed control
devi ces)
c. 2-Stroke Motorcycle (no controls) 15.2 20.4
d. 4-Stroke Motorcycle (no controls) 5.5 7.4
Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emi ss ions
a. Light duty vehicle (considering 247.6 56.6
only factory installed control
devices)
b. Heavy duty vehicle (considering 18.0 10. 1
only factory installed control
devices)
c. 2 and 4 Stroke Motorcycl e 1.8 2.3
(no controls)
Total 1023.2 442.0
N-23
-------
TABLE C-2
June 30, 1977
STRATEGY RUNNING INVENTORY
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
Emissions (Tons)
Day
Appendix B
Emiss ions VSAD & Inspec- Evapora- Saseous
with New PC V tion & tive Fue~ Oxi di zing
Model Car Con- Ret ro- Mainten- Control Conversion Catalyst 82.4% Gas
Year trols Only fit ance Ret rofi t Retrofit Retrofi t Rationing
1977 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.60 .28
1976 7.3 7.3 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.40 1. 13
1975 4.3 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.80 .67
:z 39.5 39.5 34.8 34.8 30.2 18.90 3.30
~ 1974
~
1973 33.5 33.5 29.5 29.5 27.0 16.90 3.00
1972 32.3 32.3 28.4 28.4 26.6 16.60 2.92
1971 26.9 26.9 23.7 23.7 22.1 13.70 2.41
1970 24.5 22.0 19.4 19.4 19.4 12.10 2.13
1969 22.9 20.6 18.1 18.1 18.1 11. 30 1.97
1968 14.7 13.2 11.6 11.6 11.6 7.25 1.28
1967 11.8 10.6 9.3 9.3 9.3 5.81 1.02
1966 12.2 11.0 9.7 9.7 9.7 6.06 1.07
1965 & 40.5 33.7 29.7 29.7 29.7 29.70 5.13
Earl ier
TOTAL 272.2 256.7 226.0 226.0 215.5 150.12 26. 31
-------
TABLE C-3,
June 30, 1977
STRATEGY RUNNING INVENTORY
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
EXHAUST EMISSIONS
Emissions (Tons)
Day
Appendix B
Emi ss ions VSAD & Inspec- Evapora- Gaseous
With New PCV tion & tive Fuel Oxidizing
Model Car Con- Retro- Mainten- Control Conyers ion Catalyst 82.4% Gas
Year tro1s Only fi t ance Retrofit Ret rofi t Retrofi t Rationing
1977 .59 .59 .52 .52 .52 .52 .09
1976 1.60 1.60 1.41 1.41 1.41 1.41 .25
1975 1. 77 1. 77 1.56 1.56 1.56 1.56 .27
:z 1974 5.55 5.55 4.88 4.88 4.88 3.05 .54
I
N
C1I 1973 5.56 5.56 4.89 4.89 4.89 3.06 .54
1972 7.55 7.55 6.64 6.64 6.64 4.15 .73
1971 10.39 10.30 9.06 9.06 9.06 5.66 1.00
1970 9.05 9.05 7.96 7.96 7.96 4.98 .88
1969 7.22 7.22 6.35 6.35 6.35 3.97 .70
1968 & 24.00 22.10 19.40 19".40 19.40 15.50 2.73
Earl ier
TOTAL
73.19
71.29
62.67
62.67
62.67
43.86
7.73
-------
TABLE C-4
June 30, 1977
STRATEGY RLNNING INVENTORY
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON
CRANKCASE AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS
Emissions (Tons)
Day
Appendix B
Emi ssi ons VSAD & Inspec- Evapora- Gas eous
wi th New PCV t i on & tive Fuel Oxidizing
Model Car Con- Retro- Mainten- Control Convers i on Catalys t 82.4% Gas
Year trols Only fit ance Retrofit Retrofit Retrofi t Rationing
1977 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 .19
1976 3.39 3.39 3.39 3.39 3.39 3.39 .60
1975 2.52 2.52 2.52 2.52 2.52 2.52 .44
1974 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 1. 78 1. 78 .31
:z
I> 1973 1.77 1.77 1.77 1.77 1.56 1.56 .27
N
0\
1972 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.50 1.50 .26
1971 3.21 3.12 3.12 3.21 2.87 2.87 .51
1970 2.31 2.31 2.31 2.31 2.31 2.31 .41
1969 10.10 10.10 10.10 1. 70 1. 70 1. 70 .30
1968 6.12 6.12 6.12 1.04 1.04 1.04 .18
1967 5.35 5.35 5.35 .91 .91 .91 .16
1966 3.78 3.78 3.7~ .64 .64 .64 .11
1965 & 13.10 11. 90 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 2.10
Earlier
TOTAL 56. 59 55 . 39 1)5.39 34.32 33.20 33.20 5.84
-------
Heavy
T1\BLE C-5
Ju..c.30, 1977
Strategy ,Running Inventory
Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emi~sions
Emissions (~)
r-~od e 1
Appendix B
Emissions
With Ne\V'
Car Con-
YSAD &
?CV
Retro-
Inspec-
tion &
Hainten-
Evapora-
tive
Control
Gaseous
Fuel
Conversion
Oxidizing
Catalyst
82.4% Gas
R t' .
:z
I
N
.......
Year troIs Only fit ance Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit a ~on~ng
1977 .16 . ).6 16 .16 .16 .16 ... .03
1976 .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 - ~ .08
1975 .41 .41 .41 .41 .41 .41 - -f>- .07
1974 .36 .36 .36 .36 ..36 .36 - .06
1973 .38 .38 ..38 .38 .38 .38 - .07
~
1972 1.52 1.52 1.52 - -!> .41 .41 .41 .07
1971 1.34 1.34 1.34 - -1> .36 .36 .36 - --t>" .06
1970 1.16 1.16 1.16 - --t:- .31 .31 .31 --- -po. .05
1969 .96 .96 .96 .26 .26 .26 ~ .05
1968 .66 .66 .66 - -t> .18 .18 .18 l> .03
1967 .58 .58 .58 - -I> . 16 .16 .16 - ----po .03
1966 .48 .48 .48 - ~ .13 .13 .13 - --p .02
1965 1.66 -of 1.46 1. 46 '1.46 1.46 1.46 ~ .26
.EARLI~ I I I '
I I I
I 19.92 I
TOTAL 10.11 9.92 5.03 I 5.03 15.03 .88
I I
1 I J
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 11. Report No. 12. 3. Recipient's Accession No.
SHEET APTD- 1372
4. TItle and Subtitle 5. Re port Date
Transportation Control Strategy Development for the December 1972
Metropolitan Los Angeles Regi on 6.
7. A uthor(s) Land Use Plannin9 Branch 8. Performing Organization Rept.
NO'
9. Performing Otganization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
TRW Transportation and Environmental Operations DU-72-B895
One Space Park 11. Contract/Grant No.
Redondo Beach, California 90278 68-02-0041
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Rep13/,I!r2'd
Environmental Protection Agency Pi'tla'fd .
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Report 12/1~?72
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711 14.
~. StfflemenS'1? ~oteG Pre~arlg ~o 8SHSh~R t~h ~e~eiogme9tAo6' tr~nA~orQat~Qn cgntr~l Hlans
y ose a e overn en em n r g a a 1 na m len r ua lty tan ar s
cannot be attained by implementing emission standards for stationary sources only.
16. Abstracts
The document demonstrates the nature of the Air Quality problem attributed to motor
vehicle operation, the magnitude of the problem and a strateqy developed to neutralize
these effects in order that National Ambient air quality standard may be attained and
maintained.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 170. Descriptors
Motor Vehicle emitted pollutants - air pollutants originatinq within a motor vehicle
and released to the atmosphere.
National Ambient Air ~uality Standards - Air Quality Standards promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency and published
as a Federa 1 Requlation in the Federal
Register.
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
VMT - Vehicle Miles Traveled
Vehicle Mix - distribution of motor vehicle population by age group.
LDV - light duty vehicle - less than 6500 lbs.
HDV - heavy duty vehicle - greater than 6500 lbs.
17c. COSA TI Field/Group Environmental Quality Control of Motor Vehicle Pollutants
18. Availability Statement 19. Security Class (This 21. No. of Pages
Re~~~,t), all
For release to public 20. Security Class (This 22. Price
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
FORM NTIS-3S tREY. 3-721
USCOMM DC 14QS2 P72
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for the Federal Government,
PB-180 600).
1. Report Dumber. Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation selected by the performing
organization or provided by the sponsoring organization. Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only. Examples
FASEB-NS-87 and FAA-RD-68-09.
2. Leave blank.
3. Recipient's Accession Number. Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4- Title and Subtitle. Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed promi-
nently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more
than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number and include subtitle for the specific volume.
5. Report Date. Ivnch report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected
(e.g., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation.
6. Performing Organization Code. Leave blank.
7. Author(»). Give name(s) in conventional order (e.g., John R. Doe, or J.Robert Doe). List author's affiliation if it differs
from the performing organization.
8. Performing Organization Report Number. Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9* Performing Organization Name and Address. Give name, street, city, state, and zip code. List no more than two levels of
an organizational hierarchy. Display the name of the organization exactly as it should appear in Government indexes such
as USGRDR-I.
10. Project/Tosk/Work Unit Number. Use the project, task and work unit numbers under which the report was prepared.
11. Contract/Grant Number. Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. Sponsoring Agency Nome and Address. Include zip code.
13. Type of Report and Period Covered. Indicate interim, final, etc., and, if applicable, dates covered.
14> Sponsoring Agency Code. Leave blank.
15. Supplementory Notes. Knter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with . . .
Translation of ... Presented at conference of . . To be published in ... Supersedes . . . Supplements
16. Abstract. Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report.
If the report contains a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis, (a). Descriptors. Select from the Thesaurus of Kngineering and Scientific Terms the
proper authorized terms that identify the major concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
as index entries for cataloging.
(b). Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms. Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use
open-ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c). COSATI Field/Group. Field and Group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List.
Since the majority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignments) will be the specific
discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary
Field/Group assignments that will follow the primary posting(s).
18. Distribution Statement. Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Re-
lease unlimited". Cite any availability to the public, with address and price.
19 & 20. Security Classification. Do not submit classified reports to the National Technical
21. Number of Pages. Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but excluding distribution
list, if any.
22. Price. Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
FORM NTIS-35 (REV. 3-72> — — - USCOMM-DC 14D62-P72
i &I7. S, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973—746-768/4148—Retfm. '
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN(
Technical Publications Branch
Office of Administration
Research Triangle Park, N C 27711
OFFIC I AL BUSINESS
FEES PAID
3TECTION AGENCY
35
SPECIAL FOURTH CLASS RATE
BOOK
If you do not desire to continue receiving this technical report
series, please CHECK HEREO, tear off this label, and return
it to the above address. Your name will then be promptly removed
from the appropriate mailing list.
PUBLICATION NO. APTD-1372
------- |