National Case Study[LAName] – 03 Jul 2013
An invented case study - intended to demonstrate aspects of Hub functionality.
Mixed use edge of town development comprising community facilities, retail and residential units. Total area 35,000 m2.
Without Measures, site impacts for base year (2016) were estimated at: 5,600 t (CO2), 4.7 t (NOx), 0.9t (PM), which translates to an overall social damage of £650,000 per year.
6 broad mitigation options:
1) Electric charge points
2) Low emission service vehicles
3) Zero emission service vehicle shift
4) Home delivery
5) No staff parking
6) All travel plan measures
If all measures were applied emission annual emission reduction are estimated at:
2,500t (CO2), 2.0t (NOx )and 0.23KG (PM). This equates to £290,000 SDC avoided or 45% of base impacts.
Action: (1) Electric Charge Points [ACName]
Intervention: Introduce 30 electric car/bike/scooter charge points at the site.
Model: In order to model this, high capacity Electric Charging infrastructure was added to each of the Site components. The LES toolkit does not apply an emissions reduction to implementing charging infrastructure. Instead the toolkit applies a cost estimate of implementing this charging infrastructure. An assumption has to be made about the number or proportion of trips that would switch from conventional to electric vehicles. It has been assumed that 1% of the vehicle fleet would transfer to small Electric vehicles (less than 1.4 litres) in order to estimate a corresponding emissions reduction. Based on the total vehicle trip generation, accounting for linked trips, this equates to circa 130 two way electric car movements or 65 electric vehicles per day. If the site was to provide 30 electric charging points then this would assume that each point is used around twice a day. This measure would primarily target the visitor trips due to the parking restrictions imposed on staff parking.[ACDescription]
Action: (2) Low Emission Service Vehicles [ACName]
Intervention: Impose a ban on goods, service and delivery vehicles with an emission standard of less than EURO 5 from serving the site.
Model: For each of the uses with goods, service and delivery vehicles a low emission zone has been implemented in the model which substitutes all service vehicles with emissions standards of EURO 4 or less with newer vehicles with emissions standard of EURO 5 or 6.[ACDescription]
Action: (3) Zero emission service vehicle shift [ACName]
Intervention: Establish green fleet agreement, which shifts 25% of service fleet to zero emission technology.
Model: It was assumed that 25% of goods, service and delivery vehicles with an emission standard of less than EURO 5 would transfer to zero emissions vehicles: half as electric 3.5-7.5 tonne HGVs and half as 14-20 tonne bio-methane HGVs.[ACDescription]
Action: (4) Home delivery [ACName]
Intervention: Introduce a home delivery service for the retail outlets
Model: Since, at the time of writing, it has not proved possible to identify clear research evidence on the effects of this form of home delivery, for the purpose of this assessment it has been assumed that the offer of home delivery would result in a 5% shift in car drivers to walking and cycling and a 10% shift in car drivers to public transport. This constitutes in a reduction in car trips of 15%, as people who drive may be inclined to change their mode if they do not need to transport bulky goods home. In addition to this it is assumed that there would be a 10% increase in goods, service and delivery vehicles to account for the home delivery vehicles. These percentages have been applied to the trip rates within the model in order to estimate what impact this would have on the costs and emissions.[ACDescription]
Action: (5) No parking [ACName]
Intervention: Impose a ban on staff parking.
Model: Emissions outputs of all the staff vehicle trips were estimated (and then then removed from the baseline).[ACDescription]
Action: (6) Travel plan measures [ACName]
Intervention: Implement all travel plan measures
Model: Assessment used LET travel plan defaults, assuming: travel plan co-ordinator, promotion and monitored. The scenario incorporates the various walking, cycling, public transport and car sharing travel plan measures that the Travel Plans outline. In addition to this it accounts for the effects of local recruitment, personalised travel planning and the parking restraints.[ACDescription]
Approach: Emissions assessment using LET (v1.1) model of site (WOM), agreed measures (WM) and supplementary LES measures (WAM). (Method Ref: LET/RPS1)
Method Outline: A site model was developed using LET (v1.1), which comprised 9 non-residential components (reflecting land uses within the TA). Further input definitions/assumptions included base year (2016), type (Edge of Town / Large Urban Area, 100k Population), journey type for all components (set as urban). Calculated emissions are footprint for all destination journeys.
- PM emissions combine exhaust and brake/tyre wear.
- Combined damage costs combine CO2, PM and NOx.