# Presentation: 710395

## Applying the CARB/EPA Ozone Action Program Quantification Methodology to the Bay Area Spare the Air ProgramNational Air Quality ConferenceFebruary 15, 2005 San Francisco Emily Hopkins, BAAQMDEric N. Schreffler, ESTC

## Sparing our air for a healthier future since 1955

## 9 Counties

- 5,340 Square Miles
- 22-member governing Board of elected officials

- S

**Santa **
**Clara**

**San**
**Mateo**

**Alameda**

**San**
**Francisco**

**Contra Costa**

**Solano**

**Napa**

**Sonoma**

**Marin**

## San Francisco 

- San Francisco
- Bay Area
- 

- 	1955				     2004
- 3 Million People			 6.7 Million People
- 1.7 Million Cars 			5.1 Million Cars
- 35 Million Vehicle			126 Million Vehicle
- Miles Driven Daily			Miles Driven Daily

## Sources of Bay Area Ozone Air Pollution

**Sources of ****Bay Area ****Ozone Air Pollution**

## Summer Daily Emissions Ozone Precursors

| Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) | 
528.35 |
| --- | --- |
| Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) | 
556.07 |
| Particulate Matter (PM10) | 
224.88 |

- BAAQMD Summer Emissions Year 2005 (Base Year 2002)

## Summer 

**Summer **
**Spare the Air Program**

-    Voluntary intermittent program to reduce      emissions on high ozone days, June 	through October
-   Originated in Bay Area in 1991
-   2005 is our 15th summer
-   Averages 6-7 days a year
-   Air pollution education and outreach tool for Air Districts
-   Primarily funded by federal Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ) 	grant

## Spare the Air Measurement & Evaluation

**Notes:**
4/26	Redwood City 	97
4/26	Sunnyvale		102
5/2	Livermore		101
8/11	Bethel Island	104
8/11	Livermore		113
8/28	Livermore		104
9/7	Concord		97
9/7	Livermore		106
TOTAL= 8 Stations, 5 Days

## Why Evaluate?

- To quantify program effects on behavior that reduces emissions
- Document results for CMAQ funding
- Quantify impacts for VMEP credit
- Satisfy local decision-makers and media
- Include programs in Early Action Compacts

**Notes:**
Motivation for Study...
Quantify the effects that Spare the Air PI&O program had on behaviors:driving – use of household products – emissions reductions
Did the program have any effects on residents? If yes, what types of residents were being influenced by the campaign? In what ways did they respond to the campaign? How large were the effects?

NEW in 2004 ADDED 
2. How can we make the campaign more effective in the future? 
What messages will resonate with the target market – those most likely to respond/reduce emissions?

we did this in two ways 
– collected new information about lifestyles and attitudes
-- analyzed historical data 

## Why Evaluate?

- To Provide Management Information
- How can we make the campaign more effective in the future?
- Who is most likely to respond and reduce emissions?
- Profile reducers
- What messages will resonate with target market?

**Notes:**
Motivation for Study...
Quantify the effects that Spare the Air PI&O program had on behaviors:driving – use of household products – emissions reductions
Did the program have any effects on residents? If yes, what types of residents were being influenced by the campaign? In what ways did they respond to the campaign? How large were the effects?

NEW in 2004 ADDED 
2. How can we make the campaign more effective in the future? 
What messages will resonate with the target market – those most likely to respond/reduce emissions?

we did this in two ways 
– collected new information about lifestyles and attitudes
-- analyzed historical data 

## Spare the AirMeasurement & Evaluation

- How can we make the leap from:
- 	*marketing and public education*
- 			to
- 	  *travel behavior and trip reduction*
- 				to
- 				*emission reduction?*

**Notes:**
4/26	Redwood City 	97
4/26	Sunnyvale		102
5/2	Livermore		101
8/11	Bethel Island	104
8/11	Livermore		113
8/28	Livermore		104
9/7	Concord		97
9/7	Livermore		106
TOTAL= 8 Stations, 5 Days

## Measurement in the Bay Area

-   Measure travel and emission impacts of Spare 	the Air program
-   BAAQMD has been measuring for over 10 	years
-   Methodology has evolved
- Can access data as it is being gathered
-   Have used CARB/EPA method since 2002
-   Performed by True North Research and ESTC

## CARB/EPA Methodology

-  Standard survey questions
-  Gauges self-reported trip reduction
-  Improved questions in 2004
-  Assesses trip purpose (for Vehicle Miles 	Traveled - VMT)
-  Adjusts self-reported reduction (50%)

## Outputs

- 	 Measures:
-  Level of awareness of program and air 	quality
-  Responses to call for action
-  Proportion of reducers
-  Average driving trips reduced                            	per reducer

## Outputs

- 	 Program Effectiveness
-  	Awareness of program and air quality
-  Responses to call for action
-  Reduced emissions

## Research Questions

- Did the program have any effects on residents?
- If yes, what types of people were influenced – who are the “reducers”?
- In what ways did they respond?
- How large were the effects?

## Reducer Profile

- Analyzed historical data

- Collected new information about lifestyles and attitudes in 2004

- Two approaches

## Bay Area Findings - 2004

- Actions
-   7.24% of residents reduced trips
-   Average self-reported reduction = 2.32
-   Adjusted net trip reduction = 1.16
-   Overall, 4.22% reduced usage of at least one 	product
- Garden equipment, lighter fluid, furniture polish most frequently mentioned

## Bay Area Findings - 2004

- Awareness & Attitudes
-   58% aware it was Spare the Air day
-   Most likely to reduce trips:
- 		- females
- 			- 45-64 years old
- 				- notified at workplace

## Bay Area Impacts - 2004

-   Almost 350,000 people reduced 	400,000 trips on Spare the Air days
-   Equates to almost 2.6 million miles reduced
-   Mostly reduced via linking and eliminating 	shopping and work trips
-   Reduced:
-  	-	2 tons of NOx
-  			- 2 tons of ROG
-  				- 0.6 tons of PM10

## Bay Area Impacts - 2004

-    4.2% of drivers also reduced consumer product use, resulting in a reduction of 0.23 tons of ROG per Spare the Air day

## Benefits of Measurement and CARB/EPA Method 

-   Affords standardized method
-   Available from CARB and EPA
-   Provides comparable results over years
-   Provides immediate results
- Access raw data in real time
-   Provides additional legitimacy

## Slide 23

## Lessons Learned

- Don’t change questions in the middle of the stream!
- E-mail survey can increase sample size
- Flesh-out reducer attitudes
- Qualitative – not quantitative
- Use a firm that specializes in opinion research
- Draw upon expertise in driving behavior and emissions calculation

## Benefits of Evaluation

- Documents results for CMAQ funding
- Informs local decision-makers
- Interests and satisfies media
- Educates public
- Provides management information
- improve program messaging and targeting
- Quantifies impacts for VMEP credit
- May use for programs in Early Action Compacts

**Notes:**
Initial survey results available early the following day for reporters

## Areas to Further Develop  

- Develop local adjustment factor
- Additional attitudinal results to feed 	campaign development
- Refinements for consumer products and wood burning
- Adopt standard questions & methods across  air districts
- to share information & results

## Questions?

**Questions?**