# Presentation: 057606

## Worldwide Demand for Mobility and Petroleum  

**Presentation by George C. Eads**
**Vice President, CRA International**
**to the “Modeling the Oil Transition” Workshop**
**Washington, DC, April 20-21**

## Background

**Presentation today based on work of WBCSD’s Sustainable Mobility Project (SMP); also work by CRA for BP**
**Projections that you will see were generated using “spreadsheet model” developed by IEA and CRA for the SMP**
- Principal developer – Lew Fulton at IEA
- Model is an “accounting model”
- Is benchmarked to reference case in IEA’s *World Energy Outlook 2004 (WEO2004)*
- Projections in *WEO2004* extend through 2030; IEA/SMP model extrapolates through 2050
- Projections assume continuation of “current trends” (including policies in place as of 2002/3)
- Model and documentation available for downloading at _[www.sustainablemobility.org](http://www.sustainablemobility.org/)_

## Transport is overwhelmingly dependent on oil;Transport is also the largest user of oil

**Source: IEA *****WEO2004***** **
**Note: Shares do not add to 100% due to exclusion**
**of non-energy uses of oil  **

**Source: IEA/SMP Spreadsheet model calculations**

## Light-duty vehicles, freight trucks, and air transport (in that order) account for nearly all transport fuel demand

**Source: IEA/SMP Spreadsheet model calculations**

## Growth in transport energy use is largely driven by growth in transport demandDecomposition of projected average annual change in transport energy use (2000-2050)

**Notes:**
Rate of change in energy intensity of zero for mini-buses and large buses is an assumption.  We did not conduct a detailed analysis of technologies for these vehicles.

## Projected personal transport activity by region

## Projected personal transport demand growth by modeOECD and non-OECD countries

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## Projected goods transport activity by region

**Notes:**
Excludes air, waterborne, and pipeline.  

## Projected goods transport demand growth by modeOECD and non-OECD countries

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## What drives transport demand?

**Level and rate of growth of real per capita income**
**Demographic factors**
**Urban form**
**Transport costs**

## 1. Level and growth in real GDP per capitaActual 2000 and projected for 2025 and 2050, US$ (000), ppp basis

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## 1. Level and growth in real GDP per capitaActual 2000 and projected for 2025 and 2050, US$ (000), ppp basis

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## 1. Level and growth in real GDP per capitaActual 2000 and projected for 2025 and 2050, US$ (000), ppp basis

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## 1. Level and growth in real GDP per capitaActual 2000 and projected for 2025 and 2050, US$ (000), ppp basis

**Source: IEA/SMP spreadsheet model calculations**

## 2. Demographic factorsProjected total population and population growth rates

## 2. Demographic factorsProjected total population and population growth rates

## 2. Demographic factorsUrbanization

*Major trend in developed and, increasingly, in developing countries:*
* **urbanization combined with suburbanization*

## 2. Demographic factorsUrbanization

*Major trend in developed and, increasingly, in developing countries:*
* **urbanization combined with suburbanization*

## 3. Urban formBoth impacts and is impacted by transport demand

- Throughout history, the size of cities has been constrained by the ability of their transport systems to:
- Supply them with food and raw materials
- Enable their residents to congregate in numbers sufficient to transform raw materials into finished goods efficiently and/or to conduct other business requiring face-to-face interaction
- Transport their finished goods to distant markets
***	******The development of inexpensive waterborne transport eased the first and the third of these constraints, but until the mid- to late-1800s, cities were still severely limited in their ability to move people from their homes to work and back on a daily basis***
**	**

## 3. Urban formUntil the mid- to late-1800s, the population and area of cities such as London was constrained by the distance people could walk from home to work

***Beginning in the last half of the 19******th****** century, high-speed public transport ***
***enabled people to live much greater distances from their work;***
*** ******as a result, residential densities fell dramatically***

**Notes:**
The first systematic count of people entering and leaving the City of London each day (1854) showed that 44,000 traveled by omnibus, 30,000 traveled by rail, 26,000 came by private carriage or hackney cab, and 200,000 walked.

Source: Wolmar, The Subterranean Railway, p. 22.

## 3. Urban formBut most “daily” or “short distance” personal travel isn’t commuting

**82%**

**74%**

**82%**

**71%**

**The availability of high speed public transport didn’t **
**change the need for people’s activities **_**other than**_** commuting to be**
** ****located within a relatively short distance of where they lived**

## Widespread access to autos gave people a greater choice about where they could shop, be entertained, etc.

**Source: Jane Gould, Thomas F. Golob, and Patrick Barwise, “Why Do People Drive to Shop?”**
** ****Institute for Transportation Studies, University of California, Irvine, January 1998, UCI-ITS-AS-WP-98-1 **

**3. Urban form****Non-commuting trips**

**Notes:**
According to DfT Focus on Personal Travel 2005 edition, in 2002/2003, nearly 2/3 of all shopping trips (including trips of <1 mile) were made by car.  Only 1 in 10 shopping trips were made by public transport. 

## 3. Urban formCharacteristics of personal transport use in large monocentric cities in developed world

- Relatively high use of public transport to travel to the city center  regardless of where one lives
- Car ownership and use rates low among residents of city center
- Car ownership rates much higher outside the city center, but cars not used for commuting unless work outside city center
-  Low use of public transport to travel point to point within the “outer rings” of each city
- Relatively lower use of public transport for non-commuting personal transport activities everywhere
***	***

## 3. Urban formTravel to work data for London (2003)

**Notes:**
Greater London: the area administered by the Greater London Authority and the London boroughs.
Central London: the Greater London Conurbation Centre or Central Statistical Area – an area roughly rectangular in shape, bounded by Regent’s Park to
the north, Whitechapel to the East, Elephant & Castle and Vauxhall to the South, and Kensington Gardens to the West. It is a larger area than the Central
London Congestion Charging Zone, and includes the inner ring road and Paddington, Marylebone, Euston and King’s Cross rail stations.
Inner London: City of London, and the London boroughs of Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith and Fulham, Haringey, Islington, Kensington an Chelsea, Lambeth, Lewisham, Newham, Southwark, Tower Hamlets, Wandsworth, Westminster. A distinction is sometimes made between those parts of these boroughs in central London, and the rest of Inner London.
Outer London: the London boroughs of Barking and Dagenham, Barnet, Bexley, Brent, Bromley, Croydon, Ealing, Enfield, Greenwich, Harrow, Havering, Hillingdon, Hounslow, Kingston upon Thames, Merton, Redbridge, Richmond upon Thames, Sutton, Waltham Forest.

## 3. Urban formTravel to work data for London (2003)

## 3. Urban formTravel to work data for London (2003)

## 3. Urban formTravel to work data for London (2003)

## 3. Urban formDaily travel for Paris region – trips to, from, or within Central Paris

**Notes:**
Central Paris = ArrondissementsI-XX; First Ring = Departments of Hauts de Seine, Seine Saint Denis, and Val de Marne; Second Ring = Remainder of the Ile de France region

## 3. Urban formDaily travel for Paris region – trips to, from, or within Central Paris

**14.3% of daily trips**

**13.2% of daily trips**

**5.9% of daily trips**

**Share of total trips = 33.4%**
**Public transport share = 62.8%**

## 3. Urban formDaily travel – trips other than to, from, or within Central Paris 

**22.8% of daily trips**

**35.0% of daily trips**

**8.8% of daily trips**

**Share of total daily trips = 66.6%**
**Public transport share = 16.5%**

## 3. Urban formHow US personal transportation demand is influenced by urban form (I)

- Ewing, Pendall, and Chen develop a four component “sprawl index” for 83 U.S cities
**Residential density**
**Neighborhood mix of homes, jobs and services**
**Strength of activity centers and downtowns**
**Accessibility of the street network**

**(11% difference)**

**(22% difference)**

*Low index value indicates greater sprawl; index scaled so 25 units is equal to one*
* **standard deviation; index range is from 14.22 to 177.78*
* *

## 3. Urban formHow US personal transport demand is influenced by urban form (II)

***** “Typical individual” = person having average characteristics of respondents to 1990 US NPTS****** ***

**(25% difference)**

**Bento, Cropper, Mobarak and Vinhad – study of 114 urban areas**

## 3. Urban formRelationship between urban form and US personal transport demand (II)

***** “Typical individual” = person having average characteristics of respondents to 1990 US NPTS****** ***

## 3. Urban formRelationship between urban form and US personal transport demand (II)

***** “Typical individual” = person having average characteristics of respondents to 1990 US NPTS****** ***

**(19% difference)**

## 3. Urban formCities in less developed regions generally have much higher population densities than do cities in the more developed regions

**Shanghai – 286 people/hectare**

**Mumbai – 389 people/hectare**

## 3. Urban formPopulation density map for Shanghai metropolitan region – 2000 population 13 million (UN est.)

**Source: Edward Leman, “China Issues Note #4 – Metropolitan Regions: New Challenges for an Urbanizing China,”**
** ****Paper presented to World Bank/IPEA Urban Research Symposium 2005, Brasilia, Brazil, p. 34.**

## 3. Urban formWhy is Central Shanghai so dense?

**Until 1990, virtually all personal transport had to be by foot or bicycle**
- No suburban rail or subway system; public transport limited to buses

**Mode split by *****number of trips***** (1995)**

**Source: Zhou and Sperling, “Transportation in Developing Countries:**
**Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for Shanghai, China, Pew Center on Global **
**Climate Change, 2001, p. 6.**

**Mode split by *****passenger-kilometers traveled***** (2000)**

## 3. Urban formMumbai (Bombay) – 2000 population of 16 million (UN est.)

**Mumbai is built along its suburban railway lines**
- Carries six million passengers per day
**Mumbai bus services carry 4.5 million passengers per day**
- Sixty percent make transfer to rail
**Bus and rail together account for 88% of regions motorized personal trips.**

## 4. Transport costsComposition of household transport expenditures

## 4. Transport costsComposition of household transport expenditures

## 4. Transport costsComposition of household transport expenditures

## 4. Transport costsComposition of household transport expenditures

## 4. Transport costsTax as percentage of the net price of car in EU counties* – April 2001

- *Engine displacement: 2.0 L.

**Source: *****Study on Vehicle Taxation in the Member States of the European Union,***
*** ******Final Report*****, January 2002, p. 45.**

## 4. Transport costsVehicle Ownership per capita and GDP per capita EU and Accession Countries, 1998

**4. Transport costs****Vehicle Ownership per capita and GDP per capita EU and Accession Countries, 1998**

## 4. Transport costsSingapore’s position relative to EU member states and Accession Countries

**Singapore (approx.)**

**Notes:**
Import duty = 31% of open market value (OMV)
Annual registration fee = S$130
Additional Registration Fee = 110% of OMV
Annual or semi-annual road tax based upon engine capacity
Required to purchase Certificate of Entitlement (COE) auctioned by government
Mid-2003 price ≈ S$31,000

Audi A4 1.8L car costing about US$25,000 in the US would cost approximately US$182,000 (including COE) in Singapore

## Comparison of personal transport demand characteristics – London* and Singapore

*** ****Data for Central plus Inner London**** **

## Comparison of personal transport demand characteristics – London and Singapore

## Comparison of personal transport demand characteristics – London and Singapore

## Comparison of personal transport demand characteristics – London and Singapore

## Comparison of personal transport demand characteristics – London and Singapore

## Summary

**Have provided a very rapid and incomplete overview of projected demand trends and factors driving them**
**Main messages**
- Transport demand is a principal driver of oil demand
- Transport almost totally dependent on oil for fuel
- Transport demand driven by income, demographics, urban form, and cost of use
**In interest of time, have omitted discussion of several extremely important demand-related issues**
- Goods transport (“officially” responsible for 36% of transport energy demand, but actually somewhat more)
- Long-distance transport (for US, accounts for 0.6% of trips but about 30% of passenger-kilometers)
*Thank you for your attention*

## Backup slides

## Personal transport demand projections do not assume private motorized vehicle ownership rates typical of MDR countries

## 3. Urban formModal use for personal travel in central Paris and the first ring

**Source: Renault data**