Vehicle emissions in congestion: Comparison of work zone, rush hour and free-flow conditions

Atmospheric Environment

Volumn 45, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1929-1939

  Zhang, Kai ^a   Batterman, Stuart ^a   Dion, François ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Air quality; Comprehensive Modal Emissions Model; Congestion; Fuel consumption; Vehicle emissions; Work zone

Indexed keywords

ACCELERATION DATA; AIR QUALITY IMPACTS; COMPREHENSIVE MODAL EMISSIONS MODEL; CONGESTION; EMISSION DENSITY; EMISSION RATES; EMISSIONS MODEL; FIELD EXPERIMENT; FLOW CONDITION; FUEL CONSUMPTION RATES; HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES; LOW SPEED; RISK EVALUATION; TRAFFIC CONDITIONS; TRANSITIONAL PERIOD; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING; VEHICLE EMISSION; VEHICLE EMISSIONS; VEHICLE SPEED; WORK ZONE; WORK ZONES;

AIR QUALITY; CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON MONOXIDE; FUELS; HEALTH RISKS; HYDROCARBONS; MOTOR TRANSPORTATION; NITRIC OXIDE; NITROGEN OXIDES; STEEL METALLURGY; VEHICLES;

TRAFFIC CONGESTION;

CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON MONOXIDE; FUEL; HYDROCARBON; NITROGEN OXIDE;

AIR QUALITY; ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION; CARBON EMISSION; CARBON MONOXIDE; DATA SET; ESTIMATION METHOD; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FUEL CONSUMPTION; HEALTH RISK; HYDROCARBON; NITROGEN OXIDES; NUMERICAL MODEL; TRAFFIC CONGESTION; TRAFFIC EMISSION;

ACCELERATION; AIR QUALITY; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXHAUST GAS; FIELD EXPERIMENT; FREE FLOW TRAFFIC; HEAVY DUTY VEHICLE; LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE; MOTOR VEHICLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE SURFACE METHOD; RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL MODEL; TRAFFIC; UNITED STATES; VELOCITY; WORK ZONE TRAFFIC;

EID: 79952247416     PISSN: 13522310     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.01.030     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Anderson W.P., Pavlos S.K., Miller E.J., Buliung R.N. Simulating automobile emissions in an integrated urban model. Transportation Research Record 1996, 1520:71-80.
2. Barth M., Boriboonsomsin K. Real-World carbon dioxide impacts of traffic congestion. Transportation Research Record 2008, 2058:163-171.
3. Boulter P.G., McCrae I.S. The Links Between Micro-scale Traffic, Emission and Air Pollution Models 2007, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge_compendium/assets/documents/Portfolio/The%20links%20between%20micro-scale%20traffic,%20emission%20and%20air%20pollution%20models%20-%20936.pdf.
4. National Transportation Statistics 2006, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2006/html/table_01_33.html&http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2006/html/table_01_06.html.
5. Bushman R., Berthelot C., Taylor B., Scriba T. Probabilistic evaluation of a smart work zone deployment. Proceedings of the 87th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC 2008.
6. Cappiello A. Modeling Traffic Flow Emissions 2002, MS dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 15.
7. Chevallier E. A Microscopic Modeling Framework for Estimating Emissions from Traffic Management Policies 2005, MS dissertation, University of London, pp. 19-24.
8. De Vlieger I., De Keukeleere D., Kretzschmar J. Environmental effects of driving behavior and congestion related to passenger cars. Atmospheric Environment 2000, 34(27):4649-4655.
9. Comparative Vehicle Emissions Study 2001, Department of Transport and Regional Services (DoTRS), Australia, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/environment/emission/pdf/cvestudy.pdf.
10. Dion F. Methodology for travel time data collection in the SEMCOG region. Project report for Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 2007, 39-40. (SEMCOG).
11. Eliasson J., Hultkrantz L., Nerhagen L., Rosqvist L.S. The Stockholm congestion - charging trial 2006: overview of effects. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2009, 43(3):240-250.
12. Federal and California Exhaust and Evaporative Emission Standards for Light-duty Vehicles and Light-duty Trucks 2000, EPA, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P1001YG5.PDF.
13. EPA, 2000b. U.S. EPA Finalizes Tier 2 Standards and Limits on Gasoline Sulfur.
14. Diesel Exhaust in the United States 2002, EPA, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/documents/f02048.pdf.
15. EPA. 2003. User's Guide to MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2.
16. MOVES2010 Policy Guidance 2009, EPA, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/420b09046.pdf.
17. Frey H.C., Rouphail N.M., Unal A., Colyar J.D. Emissions Reduction through Better Traffic Management: An Empirical Evaluation Based upon On-road Measurements 2001, FHWY/NC/2002-001, Prepared by NC State University for NC Department of Transportation, Raleigh, NC: 28.
18. Gouge B., Ries F.J., Dowlatabadi H. Spatial distribution of diesel transit bus emissions and urban populations: implications of coincidence and scale on exposure. Environmental Science and Technology 2010, 44(18):7163-7168.
19. Hao J., Hatzopoulou M., Miller E. Integrating an activity-based travel demand model with dynamic traffic assignment and emission models. Transportation Research Record 2010, 2176:1-13.
20. Jones A.M., Harrison R.M. Estimation of the emission factors of particle number and mass fractions from traffic at a site where mean vehicle speeds vary over short distances. Atmospheric Environment 2006, 40(37):7125-7137.
21. Joumard R., André M., Vidon R., Tassel P., Pruvost C. Influence of driving cycles on unit emissions from passenger cars. Atmospheric Environment 2000, 34(27):4621-4628.
22. Kendall A. A Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Comparing Bridge Deck Designs 2004, MS Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 59-61.
23. Lee G., You S., Ritchie S., Saphores J., Sangkapichai M., Jayakrishnan R. Environmental impacts of a major freight corridor: a study of the I-710 in California. Transportation Research Record 2009, 2123:119-128.
24. Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), 2008 & (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://mdotwas1.mdot.state.mi.us/public/maps_adtmaparchive/pdf/2008cadt/annarbor.pdf.
25. Pierce T., Isakov V., Haneke B., Paumier J. Emission and Air Quality Modeling Tools for Near-roadway Applications 2008, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://www.epa.gov/airscience/pdf/Pierceetal_EPA2008.pdf.
26. R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2006, R Development Core Team, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, ISBN 3-900051-07-0, (Accessed December 2, 2008). http://www.R-project.org.
27. Rakha H., Ahn K., Trani A. Comparison of Mobile5a, VT-Micro, and CMEM models for estimating hot-stabilized light duty gasoline vehicle emissions. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 2003, 30(6):1010-1021.
28. Schrank D., Lomax T. The 2007 Urban Mobility Report 2007, (Accessed November 2, 2010). http://financecommission.dot.gov/Documents/Background/Documents/mobility_report_2007_wappx.pdf.
29. Scora G., Barth M. Comprehensive Modal Emission Model (CMEM) Version 3.01 User's Guide 2006, University of California, Riverside, California.
30. Sjodin A., Persson K., Andreasson K., Arlander B., Galle B. On-road emission factors derived from measurements in a traffic tunnel. International Journal of Vehicle Design 1998, 20(1-4):147-158.
31. Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Conformity Analysis for the Proposed Amendment of the 2030 Regional Transportation Plan for Southeast Michigan Draft 2006, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG).
32. Smit R. An Examination of Congestion in Road Traffic Emission Models and Their Application to Urban Road Networks 2006, Doctoral Dissertation, GriffithUniversity, pp. 12.
33. Smit R., Brown A.L., Chan Y.C. Do air pollution emissions and fuel consumption models for roadways include the effects of congestion in the roadway traffic flow?. Environmental Modelling and Software 2008, 23(10-11):1262-1270.
34. Stevanovic A., Stevanovic J., Zhang K., Batterman S. Optimizing traffic control to reduce fuel consumption and vehicular emissions: an integrated approach of VISSIM, CMEM, and VISGAOST. Transportation Research Record 2009, 2128:105-113.
35. Tonne C., Beevers S., Armstrong B., Kelly F., Wilkinson P. Air pollution and mortality benefits of the London congestion charge: spatial and socioeconomic inequalities. Occupational Environmental Medicine 2008, 65:620-627.
36. The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, Assessing 10 years of Experience. Special Report 264 2002, Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C, pp. 60-64.
37. Health Effects of Transport-related Air Pollution 2005, World Health Organization, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, 125-165.
38. Zhang K., Batterman S. Time allocation shifts and pollutant exposure due to traffic congestion: an analysis using the national human activity pattern survey. Science of the Total Environment 2009, 407:5493-5500.