Ride Substitution Using Electric Bike Sharing: Feasibility, Cost, and Carbon Analysis
Ride Substitution Using Electric Bike Sharing: Feasibility, Cost, and Carbon Analysis
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
John Wamburu
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
John Wamburu
虽然拼车因其按需便利而成为城市地区流行的交通方式，但它已成为碳排放的主要贡献者，最近的研究表明，它的碳强度比私家车出行高 47%。在本文中，我们研究了使用电动自行车共享（一种低碳的乘车共享形式）作为短途乘车共享出行的潜在替代品的可行性、成本和碳效益，总体目标是绿色化乘车共享生态系统。使用纽约市的公共数据集，我们的分析表明，纽约近一半的出租车和拼车出行都是 3.5 公里以下的短途出行，对于 2 公里或更短的超短途出行，骑自行车实际上比使用汽车更快。我们分析了不同场景下不同级别的乘车替代的成本和碳效益。我们发现，满足乘车替代日益增长的需求所需的额外自行车呈次线性增长，并且导致 10% 的出租车乘车替代减少 6.6% 的碳排放。此外，这种减少可以通过混合动力组合来实现，混合动力组合只需要四分之一的自行车是电动自行车，从而降低了系统成本。我们还发现，将自行车共享系统扩展到缺乏自行车共享覆盖范围的新地区需要额外投资，因为需要新的自行车站和自行车容量来满足需求，同时也可以大幅减少碳排放。最后，频繁的站点重新定位可以将系统中所需的自行车数量减少多达三分之一，而执行重新定位所需的卡车的碳排放量最少增加 2%，从而在资本成本和碳排放之间提供有趣的权衡。
While ride-sharing has emerged as a popular form of transportation in urban areas due to its on-demand convenience, it has become a major contributor to carbon emissions, with recent studies suggesting it is 47% more carbon-intensive than personal car trips. In this paper, we examine the feasibility, costs, and carbon benefits of using electric bike-sharing—a low carbon form of ride-sharing—as a potential substitute for shorter ride-sharing trips, with the overall goal of greening the ride-sharing ecosystem. Using public datasets from New York City, our analysis shows that nearly half of the taxi and rideshare trips in New York are shorts trips of less than 3.5km, and that biking is actually faster than using a car for ultra-short trips of 2km or less. We analyze the cost and carbon benefits of different levels of ride substitution under various scenarios. We find that the additional bikes required to satisfy increased demand from ride substitution increases sub-linearly and results in 6.6% carbon emission reduction for 10% taxi ride substitution. Moreover, this reduction can be achieved through a hybrid mix that requires only a quarter of the bikes to be electric bikes, which reduces system costs. We also find that expanding bike-share systems to new areas that lack bike-share coverage requires additional investments due to the need for new bike stations and bike capacity to satisfy demand but also provides substantial carbon emission reductions. Finally, frequent station repositioning can reduce the number of bikes needed in the system by up to a third for a minimal increase in carbon emissions of 2% from the trucks required to perform repositioning, providing an interesting tradeoff between capital costs and carbon emissions.