Appendix 9.19
MoSERS Methodology/
Calculation Description
This Appendix is also available in electronic format.
Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Planning Organization
North Central Texas Council of Governments
DRAFT
BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN PROGRAMS
MoSERS Chapter 11.0: Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs
Equation 11.1: Bicycle and Pedestrian Lanes or Paths
Strategy: Replacement of vehicle trips and VMT with bicycle and pedestrian travel.
Description A wide variety of bicycle and pedestrian projects are available to practitioners for
implementation in air quality mitigation efforts. Examples of such projects include
(but are not limited to): reallocation of right-of-way to accommodate bicycles and
pedestrians, new trails, median refuges at key intersections, improved connections
between residential areas and transit stops.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 1.8010: Denton Bike Lanes
Phase I & II (on-street
bikeways, citywide)
Application: Areas where travel distances (residential/work or retail sites, for example) are short
enough for bicycle/pedestrian travel to be practical.
Variables:
EFB: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor for participants' trip before
participating in the bike/pedestrian program (NO x or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
HHAREA: Number of households in the strategy area
HHAREA:
HHTRIPS: Average number of trips per household in strategy area
HHTRIPS:
PMS: Percentage mode shift from driving to bike/ped (decimal)
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
0.56
TLB:
3.50
3.50
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
0.00
0.00
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.00
0.00
Results:
(HHAREA * HHTRIPS * PMS * TL B * EFB)/ Conversion Factor
a parallel roadway)
VOC
1.00
PMS:
TLB: Average auto trip length before implementation (miles)
Daily Emission
Reduction =
NOx
(for a facility without
The number of households in the area affected by the strategy multiplied by the average number of
household trips in the strategy area multiplied by the percentage of drivers shifting to bike/ped multiplied
by the bicycle and/or pedestrian trip length multiplied by the speed-based running exhaust emission
factor for participants' trip before participating in the bike/ped program.
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, El Paso MPO,
August 2003
The above methodology has been simplified for this analysis (see below). HH AREA, HHTRIPS, and PMS, which calculates the trips removed due to
implementation of the bicycle/pedestrian facility, has been combined and quantified as facility users (N BW ). Quantification of this and other bike/pedestrian
variables are calculated from demographic and mode share data generated by the Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Travel Model. As a conservative approach,
this methodology only accounts for a one-way trip due to the uncertainty and lack of data regarding facility usage.
Results:
Daily Emissions Reduction = (N BW * TLB * EFB) / Conversion Factor
Where,
NBW : Number of trips utilizing the bike/pedestrian facility
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
8.93
5.00
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0045
0.0025
NBW :
1158.00
1158.00
NBW is calculated using bike needs indices (BNI) and pedestrian needs indices (PNI). The BNI is determined by the percentage of total trips that are five
miles or less, employment density, population density, and medium income. Each of the Transportation Analysis Process (TAP) zones within the DallasFort Worth Metropolitan Planning Area are ranked for each factor of the BNI and PNI. These rankings are compared against the regional value to generate
an "index-to-region" score. Index-to-region scores greater than 1.00 indicate higher than average levels, and scores lower than 1.00 indicate lower than
average levels. A ranking weight is then applied to each index-to-region score and summed for each TAP zone. The TAP zone area, population, and
scores are compared against a site-specific radius for each bike/pedestrian facility to quantify the number of facility users (N BW ) above, with exceptions.
Natural and manmade barriers are also considered, including rivers, highways, and other incompatible land uses and street patterns.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.1
1 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
GRADE SEPARATIONS (ROAD-ROAD)
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Equation 7.1: Traffic Flow Improvements: Grade Separation
Strategy: Traffic operation improvements reduce congestion in
corridors and intersections, improving traffic speeds and
reducing idling times, leading to lower emissions and
improved traffic system efficiency.
Description Traffic operation improvements focus on reducing congestion
by improving efficiency. Roadway grade separations remove
periodic delays by raising one roadway and permitting more
efficient traffic flow at major intersections. (See MoSERS
2003, page B.7.7 for more information.)
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 11222.0000: Dallas North
Tollway at SH 121 in
Frisco/Plano
Application: Arterials with delays caused by at-grade roadway
intesections.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
VDOP:
45.00
45.00
VDA,OP:
0.00
0.00
VDP:
45.00
45.00
VDA,P: Time delay after project implementation during peak period
(seconds)
VDA,P:
0.00
0.00
DROP: Estimated delay reduction during off-peak period (seconds)
DROP:
45.00
45.00
VDOP: Time delay before project implementation during off-peak
period (seconds)
VDA,OP: Time delay after project implementation during off-peak
period (seconds)
VDP: Time delay before project implementation during peak period
(seconds)
DRP:
45.00
45.00
EFI: Idling emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/hour) (equal
to the emission factor at 2.5 mph, multiplied by 2.5 miles
to get units of grams/hour)
EFI:
4.35
11.15
EFA,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
off-peak period after implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFA,OP:
0.83
0.56
EFA,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
peak period after implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFA,P:
0.83
0.56
EFB,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
off-peak period before implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFB,OP:
1.41
1.42
EFB,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
peak period before implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFB,P:
1.41
1.42
DRP: Estimated delay reduction during peak period (seconds)
IOP: Off-peak hour reduction in idling emissions (hours)
IOP:
192.79
192.79
IP: Peak hour reduction in idling emissions (hours)
IP:
164.23
164.23
L: Length of affected roadway (miles)
L:
0.25
0.25
NOPH:
18.00
18.00
NOPH: Number of off-peak hours
NPH: Number of peak hours
NPH:
6.00
6.00
VMTOP: Off-peak hour reduction in speed emissions
VMTOP:
3855.87
3855.87
VMTPH: Peak hour reduction in speed emissions
VMTPH:
3284.63
3284.63
V: Daily intersection volume
V:
28562.00
28562.00
VH,OP: Number of vehicles that pass through the intersection per
hour during the off-peak period
VH,OP:
856.86
856.86
VH,P: Number of vehicles that pass through the intersection per
hour during the peak period
VH,P:
2189.75
2189.75
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.2
2 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
Equation:
NOx
VOC
A:
1553.06
3980.83
B = (EFB,P - EFA,P) * VMT PH Change in running exhaust emissions from
improved traffic flow during the peak period
B:
1905.09
2824.78
C = (EFB,OP - EFA,OP) * VMT OP Change in running exhaust emissions from
improved traffic flow during the off-peak period
C:
2236.40
3316.05
A = (IP + IOP) * EFI Change in idling emissions from improved traffic
flow during the peak and off-peak periods
Where,
IP = (NPH * VH,P * DRP)/3600 seconds per hour
IOP=(NOPH*VH,OP*DROP)/3600 seconds per hour
Unit of measure: grams/day
reduction of idling in the peak
and off-peak periods
VMTPH = NPH * VH,P * L VMT affected by the strategy
in the peak and off-peak
periods
VMTOP = NOPH * VH,OP * L
IP:
164.23
164.23
IOP:
192.79
192.79
VMTPH:
3284.63
3284.63
VMTOP:
3855.87
3855.87
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
12.54
22.29
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0063
0.0111
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B + C) / Conversion Factor
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction
Strategies, Texas Transportation Institute (modified from CARB and FHWA
Southern Resource Center), August 2003
Delay reduction and vehicle speed before and after project implementation are considered equal for both peak and off-peak periods.
Local variable calculations utilize data from the Highway Capacity Manual, the Dallas-Fort Worth Travel Demand Model, and
professional judgment of NCTCOG planners and engineers.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.3
3 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
GRADE SEPARATIONS (ROAD-RAIL)
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Equation 7.5: Traffic Operations: Railroad Grade Separation
Strategy: Grade separation of rail lines and arterial streets reduces
congestion in corridors by reducing idling times and
leading to lower emissions and improved traffic system
efficiency.
Description Railroad grade separations remove periodic traffic delays
on major roadways by raising or lowering either the rail line
or the roadway and permitting more efficient flows of traffic
at major rail crossings. (See MoSERS 2003, page B.7.16
for more information.)
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 2.0006: BNSF RR at Grauwyler
in Irving
Application: Arterials with delays caused by at-grade rail crossings.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFI:
4.35
11.15
tC: Average amount of time rail crossing is closed due to train
crossing (hours/crossing)
tC:
0.35
0.35
tH: Duration of analysis period (hours)
tH:
24.00
24.00
tH,C:
0.35
0.35
V:
5824.00
5824.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
EFI: Idling emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/hour) (equal
to the emission factor at 2.5 mph, multiplied by 2.5 miles
to get units of grams/hour)
tH,C: Hours per analysis period roadway is closed due to train
crossing
V: Bi-directional arterial volume for analysis period
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Equation:
NOx
VOC
A = tH,C / tH * V The proportion of arterial traffic affected by rail crossing
delays
A:
83.72
83.72
B = tC / 2 * EFI The idling emissions resulting from affected traffic
assumed to be idling half of the average time the roadway
is closed per train crossing
B:
0.75
1.92
Results:
NOx
Daily Emission Reduction = (A * B) / Conversion Factor
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
0.14
0.35
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0001
0.0002
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction
Strategies, El Paso MPO, August 2003
Local variable calculations utilize data from the Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Travel Model, Federal Railroad Administration, Union
Pacific Railroad, the Association of American Railroads ("Railroad Facts" 1999 Edition, the Trinity Railway Express June 2003
Schedule, and the Regional Rail Corridor Study Consultant Team: URS Corporation, Carter-Burgess, and Lonnie Blaydes
Consulting.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.4
4 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
HOV/MANAGED FACILITIES
MoSERS Chapter 4.0: High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities
Equation 4.1: Freeway HOV Facilities
Analysis Year: 2007
Strategy: Reduction of emissions by decreasing VMT and increased average speeds on the lane.
Description Separate lanes on controlled access highways are created for vehicles containing a
specified number of passengers. The lane may be concurrent flow, barrier/buffer
separated, or have a separate right-of-way.
Project: IH 30 Eastern Extension from
Jim Miller to Northwest Dr
Application: Highways in areas of traffic congestion with sufficient available right-of-way.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
AVORS:
2.14
2.14
EFB:
1.22
0.53
EFH,A:
1.32
0.51
EFGP,A:
1.22
0.53
FRS:
0.83
0.83
FRS,SOV:
0.56
0.56
FT:
0.14
0.14
FT,SOV:
0.56
0.56
L:
4.90
4.90
NP:
13353.60
13353.60
NPH:
6.50
6.50
TEFAUTO:
0.39
1.25
TLW:
20.00
20.00
VGP,A: Average hourly volumes on general-purpose lanes during peak hours after
implementation of HOV facility
VGP,A:
11694.00
11694.00
VGP,B: Average hourly volumes on general-purpose lanes during peak hours before
implementation of HOV facility
VGP,B:
12232.56
12232.56
VH,A: Average hourly volumes on HOV lanes during peak hours
VH,A:
960.00
960.00
VTR: Reduction in number of daily automobile vehicle trips
VTR:
3890.96
3890.96
VMTR:
77819.23
77819.23
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
AVORS: Average vehicle occupancy of rideshare (persons/vehicle)
EFB: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor before implementation of HOV facility (NOx
or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFH,A: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor on HOV facility (NOx or VOC)
EFGP,A: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor after implementation of HOV facility (NO
or VOC) (general purpose lanes)
x
FRS: Percentage of people attracted to the HOV facility using ride share (decimal)
FRS,SOV: Percentage of people attracted to the HOV facility using ride share that previously were
vehicle drivers (decimal)
FT: Percentage of people attracted to the HOV facility using a transit vehicle (decimal)
FT,SOV: Percentage of people using a transit vehicle that previously were vehicle drivers (decimal)
L: Length of HOV facility (miles)
NP: Total number of expected people using the HOV lanes per day
NPH: Number of peak hours (AM and PM)
TEFAUTO: Auto trip-end emission factor (NO x or VOC) (grams/trip)
TLW: Average auto trip length (miles)
VMTR: Reduction in daily automobile VMT
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.5
5 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
Equation:
NOx
A = VH,A * (EFB - EFH,A) * NPH * L Change in running exhaust emissions from vehicles shifting from
general purpose lanes to HOV lanes
B = (VGP,B*EFB - VGP,A*EFGP,A) * NPH * L Change in running exhaust emissions of vehicles in general purpose
lanes as a result of vehicles shifted away from general purpose lanes
C = VTR * TEFAUTO Reduction in auto start exhaust emissions from trip reductions
D = VMTR * EFB Reduction in auto running exhaust emissions from trip reductions
VOC
A:
-3057.60
611.52
B:
20926.83
9091.16
C:
1505.80
4871.48
D:
94939.46
41244.19
VTR:
3890.96
3890.96
VMTR:
77819.23
77819.23
Where,
VTR = NP * (FT * FT,SOV + FRS * FRS,SOV) * (1 - 1/AVORS)
Number of HOV users multiplied by the sum of the fraction of users
selecting transit multiplied by the percentage that previously drove
single occupant vehicles added by the fraction of users selecting
ridesharing multiplied by the percentage that previously drove single
occupant vehicles multiplied by the percentage that do not rideshare.
VMTR = VTR * TLW
Number of vehicle trips reduced multiplied by the average auto trip
length
Results:
NOx
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B + C + D) / Conversion Factor
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
251.79
122.95
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.1259
0.0615
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction, CalTrans (adapted by Texas
Transportation Institute), August 2003
Speed on general-purpose lanes before and after implementation of the HOV facility are equal for part B. Local assumptions are calculated from the Dallas-Fort
Worth Regional Travel Model and data provided by the Texas Transportation Institute.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.6
6 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Equation 7.2: Traffic Operations: Intersection Improvements
Strategy: Traffic operation improvements reduce congestion in
corridors and intersections by improving traffic speeds and
reducing idling times, leading to lower emissions and
improved traffic system efficiency.
Description Traffic operation improvements focus on reducing congestion by improving efficiency. Many projects require only
signage and pavement marking changes with little new
construction and are relatively quick to implement. (See
MoSERS 2003, page B.7.7, for more information.)
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 11.0000: Bethany Dr and SH 5,
addition of right turn lanes
Application: Areas where changes in lane use are permitted; areas with
sufficient right-of-way for roadway widening; areas with
adequate right-of-way at corners
Variables:
NOx
VOC
VDOP:
31.00
31.00
VDA,OP:
25.00
25.00
VDP:
31.00
31.00
VDA,P:
25.00
25.00
DROP:
6.00
6.00
DRP:
6.00
6.00
EFI:
4.35
11.15
EFA,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the offpeak period after implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA,OP:
1.23
0.98
EFA,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
peak period after implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA,P:
1.23
0.98
EFB,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the offpeak period before implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFB,OP:
1.29
1.12
EFB,P:
1.29
1.12
VDOP: Time delay before project implementation during off-peak
period (seconds)
VDA,OP: Time delay after project implementation during off-peak
period (seconds)
VDP: Time delay before project implementation during peak period
(seconds)
VDA,P: Time delay after project implementation during peak period
(seconds)
DROP: Estimated delay reduction during off-peak period (seconds)
DRP: Estimated delay reduction during peak period (seconds)
EFI: Idling emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/hour) (equal
to the emission factor at 2.5 mph, multiplied by 2.5 miles
to get units of grams/hour)
EFB,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during the
peak period before implementation (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
IOP:
38.24
38.24
IP: Peak hour reduction in idling emissions (hours)
IP:
32.57
32.57
L: Length of affected roadway (miles)
L:
0.10
0.10
NOPH:
18.00
18.00
IOP: Off-peak hour reduction in idling emissions (hours)
NOPH: Number of off-peak hours
NPH: Number of peak hours
NPH:
6.00
6.00
VMTOP: Off-peak hour reduction in speed emissions
VMTOP:
2294.19
2294.19
VMTPH: Peak hour reduction in speed emissions
VMTPH:
1954.31
1954.31
V:
42485.00
42485.00
VH,OP: Number of vehicles that pass through the intersection per
hour during the off-peak period
VH,OP:
1274.55
1274.55
VH,P: Number of vehicles that pass through the intersection per
hour during the peak period
VH,P:
3257.18
3257.18
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
V: Daily volume of affected intersection approach(es)
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.7
7 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
Equation:
NOx
VOC
A:
308.02
789.51
B = (EFB,P - EFA,P) * VMT PH Change in running exhaust emissions from
improved traffic flow during the peak period
B:
117.26
273.60
C = (EFB,OP - EFA,OP) * VMT OP Change in running exhaust emissions from
improved traffic flow during the off-peak period
C:
137.65
321.19
A = (IP + IOP) * EFI Change in idling emissions from improved traffic
flow during the peak and off-peak periods
Where,
IP = (NPH * VH,P * DRP)/3600 seconds per hour
IOP=(NOPH*VH,OP*DROP)/3600 seconds per hour
Unit of measure: grams/day
reduction of idling in the peak
and off-peak periods
VMTPH = NPH * VH,P * L VMT affected by the strategy in
the peak and off-peak periods
VMTOP = NOPH * VH,OP * L
IP:
32.57
IOP:
38.24
38.24
VMTPH:
1954.31
1954.31
VMTOP:
2294.19
2294.19
Results:
NOx
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B + C) / Conversion Factor
32.57
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
1.24
3.05
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0006
0.0015
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, Texas Transportation Institute (modified from
CARB and FHWA Southern Resource Center), August 2003
Delay reduction and difference in vehicle speed before and after project implementation are assumed to be equal for peak and offpeak periods. Local variable calculations utilize data from the Highway Capacity Manual, the Dallas-Fort Worth Travel Demand
Model, and professional judgment of NCTCOG planners and engineers.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.8
8 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
PARK AND RIDE LOTS
MoSERS Chapter 8.0: Park-and-Ride/Fringe Parking
Equation 8.1: New Facilities
Strategy: Reduction of vehicle trips and VMT by enhancements of
transit system and ridesharing.
Description Construction of new park-and-ride facilities in locations
remote from the central city area or major business activity
centers or on the fringes of major employment centers.
Lots or garages are constructed adjacent to or very near
transit facilities or heavily traveled corridors. These lots
are designed to be conducive to several modes of
transportation including pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
New facilities will require coordination with other
transportation agencies, and political and citizen groups.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 12059: JB Jackson (MLK)
Transit Center
Application: Cities with a population density great enough to warrant
projects that encourage carpooling
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFB: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor before
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.00
0.56
NPK: Number of parking spaces
NPK:
200.00
200.00
UP:
0.85
0.85
TLW:
20.00
20.00
TLPR:
4.00
4.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
UP: Parking lot utilization rate (estimate)
TLW: Average auto work trip length (miles)
TLPR: Average auto trip length from home to parking facility
(miles)
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Results:
Daily Emissions
Reduction=
NOx
[NPK * UP * (TLW - TLPR) * EFB * 2 trips/day] / Conversion
Factor
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
11.98
6.71
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0060
0.0034
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction
Strategies, Texas Transportation Institute, August 2003.
Local assumptions are calculated from data generated by the Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Travel Model, and from professional
judgment of the North Central Texas Council of Governments staff.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.9
9 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
RAIL TRANSIT (LIGHT RAIL)
MoSERS Chapter 3.0: Improved Public Transit
Equation 3.1: System/Service Expansion
Strategy: Increase ridership by providing new rail system services and/or expanding bus
service.
Description Expansion of transit system or service can include the addition of rail services
through increased frequency or route extension. Bus or paratransit services can be
expanded with new vehicles and/or route extensions.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 7.3000: DART Light Rail Transit
from Union Station to E
Plano/Parker Rd
Application: Large cities or communities with enough population density to support reasonably
frequent transit service.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFB: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor for affected roadway before implementation
(NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.00
0.56
EFTV: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor for transit vehicle (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
EFTV:
0.00
0.00
FT, SOV:
0.40
0.40
FT, SOV: Percentage of people using a transit vehicle that previously were vehicle drivers (decimal)
NTR:
38580.00
38580.00
TEFAUTO:
0.39
1.25
TEFTV:
0.00
0.00
TLW: Average auto trip length (miles)
TLW:
8.00
8.00
VTTV: Daily vehicle trips by transit vehicle
VTTV:
15432.00
15432.00
VMTR:
123456.00
123456.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NTR: New transit ridership (total ridership)
TEFAUTO: Auto trip-end emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/trip)
TEFTV: Transit vehicle trip-end emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/trip)
VTR: Reduction in number of daily automobile vehicle trips
VTR:
VMTBUS: Vehicle miles traveled by transit vehicle
VMTTV:
VMTR: Reduction in daily automobile VMT
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
Equation:
NOx
VOC
A:
5972.18
19320.86
B:
123456.00
69135.36
C = VTTV * TEFTV Increase in emissions from additional train starts
C:
0.00
0.00
D = VMTTV * EFTV Increase in emissions from additional train running exhaust emissions
D:
0.00
0.00
VTR:
15432.00
15432.00
VMTR:
123456.00
123456.00
A = VTR * TEFAUTO Reduction in auto start emissions from trips reduced
B= VMTR * EFB Reduction in auto running exhaust emissions from VMT reductions
Where,
VTR = NTR * FT, SOV Number of new transit riders multiplied by the percentage of riders shifting from single
occupant auto use
VMTR = VTR * TLW Number of vehicle trips reduced multiplied by the average auto trip length
Results:
NOx
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B – C – D) / Conversion Factor
VOC
285.08
194.84
0.1425
0.0974
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, Texas
Transportation Institute, August 2003
Part C and Part D are both equal to zero because the DART system utilizes electric light rail, which has zero-emission train equipment. Local assumptions are
calculated from the Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Travel Model and professional judgment of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit and North Central Texas Council of
Governments staff.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.10
10 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
VANPOOL PROGRAM
MoSERS Chapter 5.0: Employer-Based Transportation Management Programs
Equation 5.1: Transit/Rideshare Services - Vanpools
Strategy: Reduction of vehicle trips and emissions through increased use of
transit, carpooling, or vanpooling.
Description Employers or groups of employers in activity centers provide
transportation service to and from the work site to transit facilities and
homes. The services can include subscription buses, midday and
park-and-ride shuttles, and Guaranteed Ride Home programs.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 11048: DART Vanpool Program
Application: Large companies or groups of cooperating businesses.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFA: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor after implementation
(NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.00
0.56
EFB: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor before implementation
(NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.00
0.56
NVA: Number of vehicles after implementation (equal to number
of vanpools)
NVA:
83.00
83.00
NVB: Number of vehicles before implementation (equal to
vanpool occupancy * number of vanpools)
NVB:
747.00
747.00
TEFAUTO: Auto trip-end emission factor (NOx or VOC) (grams/trip)
TLA: Average auto trip length after implementation (miles)
TEFAUTO:
0.39
1.25
TLA:
35.00
35.00
TLB: Average auto trip length before implementation (miles)
TLB:
35.00
35.00
VTA: Vehicle trips after implementation
VTA:
166.00
166.00
VTB: Vehicle trips before implementation
VTB:
1494.00
1494.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
Conversion Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
Factor:
Equation:
NOx
VOC
A = VTB * TLB * EFB Auto running exhaust emissions before strategy
implementation
A:
52290.00
29282.40
B = VTA * TLA * EFA Auto running exhaust emissions after strategy
implementation
B:
5810.00
3253.60
C:
513.94
1662.66
C = (VTB - VTA) * TEFAUTO Reduction in start exhaust emissions from reduction in
vehicle trips to/from employment center
Where,
VTA = NVA * 2 trips/day Number of vehicles before or after strategy implementation
multiplied by two trips per day (round trip).
VTB = NVB * 2 trips/day
VTA:
166.00
166.00
VTB:
1494.00
1494.00
Results:
NOx
Daily Emission Reduction = [(A - B) + C] / Conversion Factor
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
103.51
60.99
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0518
0.0305
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction
Strategies, Texas Transportation Institute, August 2003
Local assumptions for vanpool projects are calculated from monthly performance measures reported by the Dallas Area Rapid Transit and
the Fort Worth Transportation Authority for fiscal years 2000 to 2002. This analysis also incorporates an assumption of equal emission
factors, trips, and trip length before and after implementation of the vanpool programs.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.11
11 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
CLEAN VEHICLE PROGRAM
MoSERS Chapter 18.0: Vehicle Purchases and Repowering
Equation 18.1: Clean Vehicle Program
Strategy: Reduction of vehicle emissions through new vehicle
technology.
Description Public funding can be committed toward the incremental cost
of vehicles with lower emissions for public fleets. The
program aids in converting light-duty vehicles, buses, and
heavy-duty delivery trucks to natural gas and building a fleet
of lower emissions vehicles. Programs are open to all public
fleets, transit agencies, and private companies.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: FWTA: 162 CNG Buses
(formerly diesel)
Application: Cities, agencies, and employers with a large vehicle fleet.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFB:
1.00
0.56
VMT:
35191.00
35191.00
F:
0.48
0.63
EFA: Emission factor after implementation (either of
replacement vehicle or of same vehicle after
repower/repair) (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile) (not used for
alternative fuel vehicles)
EFA:
EFB: Emission factor before implementation (either of
retired/replaced vehicle or of same vehicle before
repower/repair) (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
VMT: Annual vehicle miles traveled (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
(assume no activity changes before and after
implementation)
F: Fuel factor for alternative fuel (if applicable) (represents %
emission reduction of alternative fuel as compared to
conventional gasoline)
N: Number of affected vehicles
N:
162.00
162.00
D: Days of Use (weekdays only)
D:
260.00
260.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
10524.82
7735.74
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
23.18
17.04
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0116
0.0085
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Equation:
For Alternative Fuel Vehicles Only:
A=N*VMT*(EFB*F)/D Change in exhaust emissions due to cleaner fuel
and/or engine technology
A:
OR
For Non-Alternative Fuel Vehicles:
A=N*VMT*(EFB- Change in exhaust emissions due to cleaner fuel
EFA)/D and/or engine technology
A:
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = A/Conversion Factor
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, FHWA Southern Resource Center (modified
by Texas Transportation Institute), August 2003
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.12
12 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
EMPLOYEE TRIP REDUCTION (ETR) PROGRAM
MoSERS Chapter 5.0: Employer-Based Transportation Management Programs
Strategy: Reduction of vehicle trips and emissions through increased
use of transit, carpools/vanpools, and other forms of
alternative commutes.
Description Employers or groups of employers may encourage
participation in alternative commute forms by offering transit
passes or carpool/vanpool services to employees. Such
programs may also offer financial incentives for alternative
commute forms.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: D/FW Employer Trip Reduction
(ETR) Program (Regional
Benefit)
Application: All employers with a sizable employee base
Variables:
EF: Speed-based auto running emission factor (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
N: Number of participating employees
AVO: Average vehicle occupancy (used to determine previous
single-occupant-vehicle (SOV) drivers)
TLHBW: Average commute trip length from Home to Work
VMT: Daily vehicle miles traveled reduced (NOx or VOC)
(grams/mile)
P: Percent of HBW trips being taken during the peak
commute period
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
NOx
VOC
EFA:
1.00
0.56
N:
126273.00
126273.00
AVO:
1.14
1.14
TLHBW:
13.28
13.28
VMT:
1470969.68
1470969.68
P:
0.40
0.40
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
588387.87
329497.21
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
1296.01
725.76
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.6480
0.3629
Equation:
A=(N/AVO)*TLHBW*P*EF
Reduction in exhaust emissions due to number of ETR
participants who were once SOV drivers, multiplied by
HBW trip length, multiplied by the percent of trips taken in
the peak commute period, multiplied by the emission
f
A:
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = A/Conversion Factor
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.13
13 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
AIRCHECK TEXAS REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
MoSERS Chapter 18.0: Vehicle Purchases and Repowering
Equation 18.1: Clean Vehicle Program
Strategy: Reduction of vehicle emissions through new vehicle
technology.
Description Public funding can be committed toward the incremental cost
of vehicles with lower emissions for public fleets. The
program aids in converting light-duty vehicles, buses, and
heavy-duty delivery trucks to natural gas and building a fleet
of lower emissions vehicles. Programs are open to all public
fleets, transit agencies, and private companies.
Analysis Year: 2003
Project: AirCheck Texas Repair and
Replacement Assistance
Program (Regional Program)
Application: Cities, agencies, and employers with a large vehicle fleet.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFA: Emission factor after implementation (replacement vehicle)
(NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.63
2.92
EFB: Emission factor before implementation (retired/replaced
vehicle) (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.84
5.79
VMT: Annual vehicle miles traveled (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
(assume no activity changes before and after
implementation)
VMT:
14542.00
14542.00
N: Number of affected vehicles
N:
102.00
102.00
P: Percentage of replacement vehicles still in use
P:
0.90
0.90
D: Days of Use (weekdays only)
D:
260.00
260.00
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
A:
1086.16
14718.85
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of
emissions
Equation:
A=(N*P)*VMT*(EFB- Change in exhaust emissions due to cleaner fuel
EFA)/D and/or engine technology
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = A/Conversion Factor
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
2.39
32.42
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0012
0.0162
Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, FHWA Southern Resource Center (modified
by Texas Transportation Institute), August 2003
The AirCheck Texas Program has been providing vehicle replacement assistance for 4 years, beginning in 2003. The emission
benefit of each year of the program was determined by finding the average model year of the engine replaced and the average
model year of the replacement engine for that particular year and using these engine ages to get the EF B and EFA, respectively.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.14
14 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS)
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Strategy: ITS attempts to improve traffic speeds and reduce idling
time through advanced traffic control systems and more
efficient incident and corridor management.
Description ITS combines the strengths of regional transportation
planning models and traffic simulation models with overall
transportation management strategies. It applies
information technologies to the effective management of a
traffic system. Examples of ITS projects include
transportation management centers. These centers
contain closed circuit monitors and many other data
Application: Controlled-access highways and arterials.
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: Regional Program Benefit
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EP:
31.30
15.16
EOP:
64.41
22.86
FOPH:
0.50
0.50
FITS:
0.68
0.68
FNR,P: Percent of roadway system emissions caused by nonrecurring congestion in the peak period
FNR,P:
0.049
0.049
FNR,OP: Percent of roadway system emissions caused by hour
non-recurring congestion in the off-peak period
FNR,OP:
0.049
0.049
FEN,P: Percent of non-recurrent congestion eliminated on
roadways with ITS deployment, peak period
FEN,P:
0.50
0.50
FEN,OP: Percent of non-recurrent congestion eliminated on
roadways with ITS deployment, off-peak period
FEN,OP:
0.50
0.50
FER,P: Percent of recurrent congestion eliminated on roadways
with ITS deployment, peak period
FER,P:
0.05
0.05
FER,OP: Percent of recurrent congestion eliminated on roadways
with ITS deployment, off-peak period
FER,OP:
0.05
0.05
Conversion
Factor:
2000.00
2000.00
A:
NOx
0.521
VOC
0.253
B = EOP * FOPH* FNR,OP * FITS * Estimated NOx emissions reduced by alleviating offFEN,OP : peak hour non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
B:
0.537
0.190
C = EP * FER,P * FITS * (1-FNR,P) : Estimated NOx emissions reduced by alleviating peak
hour recurrent congestion (that is, improving overall
traffic flow) (tons/day)
C:
1.012
0.490
D = EOP * FOPH * FER,OP * FITS * Estimated NOx emissions reduced by alleviating off(1-FNR,OP) : peak hour recurrent congestion (that is, improving
overall traffic flow) (tons/day)
D:
1.041
0.370
NOx
6222.73
VOC
2605.50
3.1114
1.3028
EP: Emissions (in tons) generated by congestion on the
affected roadway system during the peak period for
each pollutant
EOP: Emissions (in tons) generated by congestion on
affected roadway system during the off-peak period for
each pollutant
FOPH: Percent of off-peak hours/emissions affected by ITS
deployment
FITS: Percentage of roadway system coverage with ITS
deployment
Conversion Factor: Convert tons to pounds
Equation:
A = EP * FNR,P * FITS * FEN,P : Estimated NOx emissions reduced by alleviating peak
hour non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
Results:
Emission Reduction = A + B + Estimated NOx emissions reduced by alleviating both
C + D peak and off-peak freeway congestion
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day):
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day):
Total emissions (NOx and VOC) generated in the four county areas are developed through the Texas Mobile Source Emission Software.
Percentage of freeway coverage with ITS deployment is obtained from Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) ITS Map (total centerline miles with ITS
deployment/total centerline miles). Percentage of freeway emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion = 0.049 (49% of
urban freeways are congested due to an incident).
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.15
15 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
TEXAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION PROGRAM (TERP)
Default to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality methodology and requirements.
Results:
Emission Emission Reduction generated in accordance with the 5% Increment-ofReduction Progress Plan.
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day):
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day):
9.19.16
NOx
10,800.00
VOC
NA
5.4000
NA
DRAFT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS (CORRIDOR PROGRESSION)
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Equation 7.1: Traffic Signalization
Strategy: Traffic signalization projects can measurably reduce CO and HC emissions by
decreasing vehicular stops and idling, which would in turn reduce travel times
and traffic delays.
Description Traffic signalization increases the efficiency of traffic flow at intersections by
improving interconnection and coordination of signals, leading to reductions in
travel times, delays, and stop-and-go driving. Traffic signalization can be as
simple as updating the equipment and/or software or improving the timing
plan. Because signal improvements reduce travel times and stop-and-go
driving conditions, they can measurably reduce CO and HC emissions as well
as reducing fuel consumption. (See MoSERS 2003, page B.7.4 for more
information.)
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: TAP Corridor 662: FM 157
(Cooper St) from Debbie
Ln to Park Row (includes
25 locations) (Level 2
improvement)
Application: Major arterials or high capacity roadways with uncoordinated traffic signals.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFA,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during peak hours after
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.23
0.98
EFB,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during peak hours before
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.35
1.27
EFA,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during off-peak hours after
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.23
0.98
EFB,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during off-peak hours before
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.35
1.27
L: Length of roadway affected by signalization project (miles) (for a corridor,
use the length of the entire corridor being retimed in progression, from limit
A to limit B) .
L:
9.40
9.40
V: Bi-directional arterial volume for analysis period (average corridor volume)
V:
46940.00
46940.00
VD,P:
21592.40
21592.40
VD,OP:
25347.60
25347.60
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
A:
24356.23
58860.88
B:
28592.09
69097.56
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
116.63
281.85
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0583
0.1409
VD,P: Average daily volume for the corridor during peak hours
VD,OP: Average daily volume for the corridor during off-peak hours
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
Equation:
A = VD,P * (EFB,P - Change in exhaust emissions from improved speed
EFA,P) *L during the peak and off-peak periods.
B = VD,OP * (EFB,OP - Change in idling exhaust emissions from improved traffic flow during the
EFA,OP) * L peak and off-peak periods.
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B) /Conversion Factor
Modified from the following Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, FHWA Southern Resource
Center (modified by Texas Transportation Institute), August 2003
Before speeds and after speeds are assumed to be the same during peak and off-peak hours. Local variable calculations utilize data from the
Highway Capacity Manual, and the Dallas-Fort Worth Travel Demand Model.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.17
17 of 18
11/27/2006
DRAFT
TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS (INDIVIDUAL LOCATIONS)
MoSERS Chapter 7.0: Traffic Flow Improvements
Equation 7.1: Traffic Signalization
Strategy: Traffic signalization projects can measurably reduce CO and HC
emissions by decreasing vehicular stops and idling, which would in turn
reduce travel times and traffic delays.
Description Traffic signalization increases the efficiency of traffic flow at intersections
by improving interconnection and coordination of signals, leading to
reductions in travel times, delays, and stop-and-go driving. Traffic
signalization can be as simple as updating the equipment and/or
software or improving the timing plan. Because signal improvements
reduce travel times and stop-and-go driving conditions, they can
measurably reduce CO and HC emissions as well as reducing fuel
consumption. (See MoSERS 2003, page B.7.4 for more information.)
Analysis Year: 2007
Project: 9970.0000: Central Dr and
Shumac in Bedford (Level 1
Improvement)
Application: Major arterials or high capacity roadways with uncoordinated traffic
signals.
Variables:
NOx
VOC
EFA,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during peak hours after
implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.29
1.12
EFB,P: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during peak hours
before implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.35
1.27
EFA,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during off-peak hours
after implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFA:
1.29
1.12
EFB,OP: Speed-based running exhaust emission factor during off-peak hours
before implementation (NOx or VOC) (grams/mile)
EFB:
1.35
1.27
L: Length of roadway affected by signalization project (miles) (0.1 mile
on each affected approach)
L:
0.10
0.10
V: Bi-directional arterial volume for analysis period
V:
29419.00
29419.00
VD,P:
13532.74
13532.74
VD,OP:
15886.26
15886.26
Conversion
Factor:
454.00
454.00
NOx
VOC
A:
81.20
202.99
B:
95.32
238.29
NOx
VOC
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(lbs/day) =
0.39
0.97
Daily
Emission
Reduction
(tons/day) =
0.0002
0.0005
VD,P: Average daily volume for the corridor during peak hours
VD,OP: Average daily volume for the corridor during off-peak hours
Conversion Factor: Convert grams per mile of emissions to pounds per mile of emissions
Equation:
A = VD,P * (EFB,P - Change in exhaust emissions from improved speed
EFA,P) *L during the peak and off-peak periods.
B = VD,OP * (EFB,OP - Change in idling exhaust emissions from improved traffic flow during
EFA,OP) * L the peak and off-peak periods.
Results:
Daily Emission Reduction = (A + B) /Conversion Factor
Modified from the following Source: The Texas Guide to Accepted Mobile Source Emission Reduction Strategies, FHWA Southern Resource
Center (modified by Texas Transportation Institute), August 2003
Before speeds and after speeds are assumed to be the same during peak and off-peak hours. Local variable calculations utilize data from the
Highway Capacity Manual, and the Dallas-Fort Worth Travel Demand Model.
Shading denotes variables that must be input to individual projects. Other variables are either standard to the program area or are calculated
off of these inputs.
9.19.18
18 of 18
11/27/2006
Measure Title And Reference No:
Category Type: Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
Narrative Description
The Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan area is currently involved in the planning,
programming, and implementation of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) programs
and projects. Using the National ITS Architecture as a model, the region is defining a
Regional ITS Architecture to guide future deployment and to build consensus for multiagency systems integration. Traffic monitoring and incident detection and response
systems are operating on portions of the freeway system in Collin, Dallas, Denton and
Tarrant Counties.
Methodology For Analysis
Emissions
Estimated NOx Emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total NOx generated in tons per day x Percentage of freeway
emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion x
Percentage of freeway coverage with ITS deployment x Percentage
of non-recurrent congestion eliminated on freeways with ITS
deployment
Estimated NOx Emissions caused by peak hour recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total NOx generated in tons per day x Percentage of improved
traffic flow for recurrent congestion x Percentage of freeway
coverage with ITS deployment
Estimated Total NOx Emissions caused by peak hour congestion (tons/day)
= Estimated NOx Emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
+
Estimated NOx Emissions caused by peak hour recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
Estimated VOC Emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total VOC generated in tons per day x Percentage of freeway
emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion x
Percentage of freeway coverage with ITS deployment x Percentage
of non-recurrent congestion eliminated on freeways with ITS
deployment
Estimated VOC Emissions caused by peak hour recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total VOC generated in tons per day x Percentage of improved
traffic flow for recurrent congestion x Percentage of freeway
coverage with ITS deployment
Estimated Total VOC Emissions caused by peak hour congestion (tons/day)
= Estimated VOC Emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
+
Estimated VOC Emissions caused by peak hour recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
Estimated NOx Emissions Reduced caused by non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total NOx emissions x Percentage of freeway emissions caused by
non-recurrent congestions x Total percentage of freeway coverage
with ITS deployment x Total percentage of non-recurrent congestion
eliminated on freeways with ITS deployment
Estimated NOx Emissions Reduced caused by recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total NOx emissions x Total percentage of improved traffic flow for
recurrent congestion x Total percentage of freeway coverage with
ITS deployment
Estimated Total NOx Emissions Reduced (tons/day)
= Estimated NOx Emissions Reduced caused by non-recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
+
Estimated NOx Emissions Reduced caused by recurrent congestion
(tons/day)
Estimated VOC Emissions Reduced caused by non-recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total VOC emissions x Total percentage of freeway emissions
caused by
non-recurrent congestions x Total percentage of freeway coverage
with ITS deployment x Total percentage of non-recurrent congestion
eliminated on freeways with ITS deployment
Estimated VOC Emissions Reduced caused by recurrent congestion (tons/day)
= Total VOC emissions x Total percentage of improved traffic flow for
recurrent congestion x Total percentage of freeway coverage with
ITS deployment
Estimated Total VOC Emissions Reduced (tons/day)
= Estimated VOC Emissions Reduced caused by non-recurrent
congestion (tons/day)
+
Estimated VOC Emissions Reduced caused by recurrent congestion
(tons/day)
Assumptions:
Total emissions (NOx and VOC) generated in the four county areas are developed
through the Texas Mobile Source Emission Software.
Percentage of freeway coverage with ITS deployment is obtained from DFW ITS
Map (total centerline miles with ITS deployment / total centerline miles).
Percentage of freeway emissions caused by peak hour non-recurrent congestion =
0.049 (49% of urban freeways are congested due to an incident and 10% of daily
traffic is assumed to occur during the peak hour)
Percentage of non-recurrent congestion eliminated on freeways with ITS deployment
= 50%
Percentage of recurrent congestion eliminated on freeways with ITS deployment =
5%
Exhbit-2 and 3 provides more information on the estimation of ITS benefits shown on the
Page 5.7, Exhibit 5.5.1 of the conformity document.
EXHIBIT-2 ITS BENEFITS CALCULATION
County
Collin
Dallas
Denton
Tarrant
Total
NOx
VOC
% ITS
(tons/day) (tons/day) Coverage
5.55
43.05
7.83
27.85
84.29
2.23
19.89
2.72
11.50
36.33
88
87
89
88
88
%
Emission
(Nonrecurrent)
0.049
0.049
0.049
0.049
0.049
%
% Non% Improved
Recurrent
recurrent
Traffic Flow
(Recurrent Congestion Congestion
Congestion) Eliminated Eliminated
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
EXHIBIT-3 ITS BENEFITS CALCULATION
Four County
Total
Estimated Total NOx Emissions Reduced
Non-Recurring Congestion (tons/day)
Estimated Total NOx Emissions Reduced
Recurring Congestion (tons/day)
Estimated Total NOx Emissions Reduced
(tons/day)
Estimated Total VOC Emissions Reduced
Non-Recurring Congestion (tons/day)
Estimated Total VOC Emissions Reduced
Recurring Congestion (tons/day)
Estimated Total VOC Emissions Reduced
(tons/day) (Four Counties)
[lbs/day]
1.82
3.71
5.53
11,066.93
0.78
1.60
2.39
4,770.08