## 4 Results
### Energy Consumption and Emissions Avoided from Private Vehicles
The average daily net CO2 emission savings are around 4.9 to 6.0 kg/day in the United States, in winter and summer respectively, and 3.1 to 4.9 in the European Union in the same seasons. The study also remarks that the average one-way commute is 18 km in the US and 15 km in the EU, and that the average car in the US consumes around 45% more fuel than the average in the EU for a trip of the same length. Thus, the results of this study for CO2 emission savings are comparable to those found in the literature. The data used in this work are a selection of a larger dataset collected during an ENEA survey of the public administration. The dataset shows considerable variability in the calculation of avoided emissions, which deserves an explanation. The key concept to understand to interpret the savings data is the variability of the configurations that the variables used can assume. The amount of km travelled, the type of route, and the vehicle parameters generate a significant variability of the results. The results of our study are appreciably close to those of the reference study. Our methodology, as shown in the graph, can produce strong variability in the average daily data of CO2 saved among samples, and considering the inevitable inhomogeneities between the used sample, the results show good agreement with [PERSON]. An alternative aggregation can be performed on the kind of fuel or technology, as reported in Table 6. The results highlight the different average distances based on the type of fuel. Although two-wheelers are generally chosen for short distances (although the absolute number of people is very low and may not be statistically significant), it is interesting to remark that petrol and hybrid cars show shorter distances compared to the other three fuels (i.e. diesel, CNG, and LPG). These fuels are in fact often chosen by people travelling on average longer distances, because they show a the higher upfront investment cost and lower fuel costs, representing an advantage for users with high annual mileage. Higher average distances for the workers with these cars also lead to higher daily emission and fuel savings when they opt for remote working. In addition to GHG emissions, an estimation of the total emissions of several local pollutants has been performed. The main pollutants are reported in Table 7. As already mentioned in the methodology section, it is important to remember that the actual damage \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Fuel**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Workers**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Remote Days** \\ **per Week** \\ \end{tabular} } & \begin{tabular}{c} **Avoided** \\ **Distance by Car** \\ **(km/day)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Avoided CO2** \\ **Emissions** \\ **(kg/day)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Avoided Fuel** \\ **(MJ/day)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
2-wheeler & 12 & 2.2 & 18.2 & 1.7 & 23.8 \\ CNG & 89 & 2.0 & 42.6 & 6.4 & 108.9 \\ Diesel & 505 & 2.2 & 42.0 & 6.9 & 92.6 \\ LPG & 197 & 1.9 & 42.1 & 7.2 & 108.6 \\ Petrol & 438 & 2.1 & 24.3 & 4.7 & 64.3 \\ Hybrid & 28 & 2.3 & 26.2 & 4.0 & 55.2 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Selected average indicators for remote workers travelling exclusively or partially by car for each fuel. of local pollutants is related to their dispersion in the surrounding atmosphere and their concentration in the air. For this reason, the total amount of pollutant emissions can only provide a preliminary indication, but more precise analyses would be needed to estimate the actual damage to the affected population, as well as a meaningful comparison across the cities considered in this study.