IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v45y2011i8p707-720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas

Author

Listed:
  • Musti, Sashank
  • Kockelman, Kara M.

Abstract

In today's world of volatile fuel prices and climate concerns, there is little study on the relationship between vehicle ownership patterns and attitudes toward vehicle cost (including fuel prices and feebates) and vehicle technologies. This work provides new data on ownership decisions and owner preferences under various scenarios, coupled with calibrated models to microsimulate Austin's personal-fleet evolution. Opinion survey results suggest that most Austinites (63%, population-corrected share) support a feebate policy to favor more fuel efficient vehicles. Top purchase criteria are price, type/class, and fuel economy. Most (56%) respondents also indicated that they would consider purchasing a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) if it were to cost $6000 more than its conventional, gasoline-powered counterpart. And many respond strongly to signals on the external (health and climate) costs of a vehicle's emissions, more strongly than they respond to information on fuel cost savings. Twenty five-year simulations of Austin's household vehicle fleet suggest that, under all scenarios modeled, Austin's vehicle usage levels (measured in total vehicle miles traveled or VMT) are predicted to increase overall, along with average vehicle ownership levels (both per household and per capita). Under a feebate, HEVs, PHEVs and Smart Cars are estimated to represent 25% of the fleet's VMT by simulation year 25; this scenario is predicted to raise total regional VMT slightly (just 2.32%, by simulation year 25), relative to the trend scenario, while reducing CO2 emissions only slightly (by 5.62%, relative to trend). Doubling the trend-case gas price to $5/gallon is simulated to reduce the year-25 vehicle use levels by 24% and CO2 emissions by 30% (relative to trend). Two- and three-vehicle households are simulated to be the highest adopters of HEVs and PHEVs across all scenarios. The combined share of vans, pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), and cross-over utility vehicles (CUVs) is lowest under the feebate scenario, at 35% (versus 47% in Austin's current household fleet). Feebate-policy receipts are forecasted to exceed rebates in each simulation year. In the longer term, gas price dynamics, tax incentives, feebates and purchase prices along with new technologies, government-industry partnerships, and more accurate information on range and recharging times (which increase customer confidence in EV technologies) should have added effects on energy dependence and greenhouse gas emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Musti, Sashank & Kockelman, Kara M., 2011. "Evolution of the household vehicle fleet: Anticipating fleet composition, PHEV adoption and GHG emissions in Austin, Texas," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 707-720, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:45:y:2011:i:8:p:707-720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856411000760
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Small, K.A. & Kazimi, C., 1994. "On the Costs of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicules," Papers 94-95-3, California Irvine - School of Social Sciences.
    2. Molly Espey & Santosh Nair, 2005. "Automobile Fuel Economy: What Is It Worth?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(3), pages 317-323, July.
    3. Mannering, Fred & Winston, Clifford & Starkey, William, 2002. "An exploratory analysis of automobile leasing by US households," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 154-176, July.
    4. Fang, Hao Audrey, 2008. "A discrete-continuous model of households' vehicle choice and usage, with an application to the effects of residential density," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 736-758, November.
    5. Kenneth A. Small & Kurt Van Dender, 2007. "Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 25-52.
    6. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2004. "What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 201-222, March.
    7. Kurani, Kenneth S & Turrentine, Tom, 2004. "Automobile Buyer Decisions about Fuel Economy and Fuel Efficiency," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6zq891d1, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    8. Kenneth Train, 1980. "A Structured Logit Model of Auto Ownership and Mode Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(2), pages 357-370.
    9. Gallagher, Kelly Sims & Muehlegger, Erich, 2011. "Giving green to get green? Incentives and consumer adoption of hybrid vehicle technology," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 1-15, January.
    10. Kurani, Ken & Turrentine, Thomas, 2004. "Automobile Buyer Decisions about Fuel Economy and Fuel Efficiency," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5hh5k3j3, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    11. Axsen, Jonn & Kurani, Kenneth S, 2008. "The Early U.S. Market for PHEVs: Anticipating Consumer Awareness, Recharge Potential, Design Priorities and Energy Impacts," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt4491w7kf, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    12. Berkovec, James, 1985. "Forecasting automobile demand using disaggregate choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 315-329, August.
    13. Fred Mannering & Clifford Winston, 1985. "A Dynamic Empirical Analysis of Household Vehicle Ownership and Utilization," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 215-236, Summer.
    14. Ye Feng & Don Fullerton & Li Gan, 2013. "Vehicle choices, miles driven, and pollution policies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 4-29, August.
    15. Dubin, Jeffrey A & McFadden, Daniel L, 1984. "An Econometric Analysis of Residential Electric Appliance Holdings and Consumption," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 345-362, March.
    16. Puller, Steven L. & Greening, Lorna A., 1999. "Household adjustment to gasoline price change: an analysis using 9 years of US survey data," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 37-52, February.
    17. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sen, Sudeshna & Eluru, Naveen, 2009. "The impact of demographics, built environment attributes, vehicle characteristics, and gasoline prices on household vehicle holdings and use," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-18, January.
    18. Berkovec, James & Rust, John, 1985. "A nested logit model of automobile holdings for one vehicle households," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 275-285, August.
    19. Ashley Langer & Nathan H. Miller, 2008. "Automobile Prices, Gasoline Prices, and Consumer Demand for Fuel Economy," EAG Discussions Papers 200811, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Baltas, George & Saridakis, Charalampos, 2013. "An empirical investigation of the impact of behavioural and psychographic consumer characteristics on car preferences: An integrated model of car type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 92-110.
    2. Martin, Elliott William, 2009. "New Vehicle Choice, Fuel Economy and Vehicle Incentives: An Analysis of Hybrid Tax Credits and the Gasoline Tax," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5gd206wv, University of California Transportation Center.
    3. Martin, Elliot William, 2009. "New Vehicle Choices, Fuel Economy and Vehicle Incentives: An Analysis of Hybrid Tax Credits and Gasoline Tax," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6sz198c2, University of California Transportation Center.
    4. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sen, Sudeshna, 2006. "Household vehicle type holdings and usage: an application of the multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 35-53, January.
    5. Chen, Anning, 2011. "Reliable GPS Integer Ambiguity Resolution," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9gs0t2f9, University of California Transportation Center.
    6. Al-Alawi, Baha M. & Bradley, Thomas H., 2013. "Review of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicle market modeling Studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 190-203.
    7. Drebee, Hayder Abbas & Abdul Razak, Nor Azam & karim, mohd, 2014. "Is There an Overlapping Market between National Car Producers in Malaysia?," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 48(1), pages 75-85.
    8. Bhat, Chandra R. & Sen, Sudeshna & Eluru, Naveen, 2009. "The impact of demographics, built environment attributes, vehicle characteristics, and gasoline prices on household vehicle holdings and use," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-18, January.
    9. Ji, Wei, 2018. "Data-Driven Behavior Analysis and Implications in Plug-in Electric Vehicle Policy Studies," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6dw4d18t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    10. Tscharaktschiew, Stefan, 2014. "Shedding light on the appropriateness of the (high) gasoline tax level in Germany," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 189-210.
    11. Don Fullerton & Li Gan & Miwa Hattori, 2015. "A model to evaluate vehicle emission incentive policies in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(1), pages 79-108, January.
    12. Banzhaf, H. Spencer & Kasim, M. Taha, 2019. "Fuel consumption and gasoline prices: The role of assortative matching between households and automobiles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 1-25.
    13. West, Sarah E., 2004. "Distributional effects of alternative vehicle pollution control policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 735-757, March.
    14. Beser Hugosson, Muriel & Algers, Staffan & Habibi, Shiva & Sundbergh, Pia, 2014. "The Swedish car fleet model: evaluation of recent applications," Working papers in Transport Economics 2014:18, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 10 Nov 2014.
    15. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2004. "What type of vehicle do people drive? The role of attitude and lifestyle in influencing vehicle type choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 201-222, March.
    16. Yu, Biying & Zhang, Junyi & Fujiwara, Akimasa, 2011. "Representing in-home and out-of-home energy consumption behavior in Beijing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 4168-4177, July.
    17. Dimitropoulos, Alexandros & Oueslati, Walid & Sintek, Christina, 2018. "The rebound effect in road transport: A meta-analysis of empirical studies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 163-179.
    18. Liu, Yizao, 2010. "Gasoline Prices, Fuel Economy Efficiency And Automobile Replacement Dynamics," Working Paper series 148290, University of Connecticut, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    19. De Borger, Bruno & Mulalic, Ismir & Rouwendal, Jan, 2016. "Substitution between cars within the household," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 135-156.
    20. Liu, Yangwen & Tremblay, Jean-Michel & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2014. "An integrated model for discrete and continuous decisions with application to vehicle ownership, type and usage choices," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 315-328.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:45:y:2011:i:8:p:707-720. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.