Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Atmospheric Environment
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv
Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China
Center of Environmental Research & Technology, University of California at Riverside, CA 91765, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 12 July 2010
Received in revised form
28 October 2010
Accepted 30 October 2010
To better understand how the trafc control can affect vehicle emissions, a novel TRafc And Vehicle
Emission Linkage (TRAVEL) approach was developed based on local trafc activity and emission data.
This approach consists of a two-stage mapping from general trafc information to trafc ow patterns,
and then to the aggregated emission rates. 39 trafc ow patterns and corresponding emission rates for
light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles considering emission standards classication are generated. As a case
study, vehicle activity and emissions during the Beijing Olympics were simulated and compared to BAU
scenario. Approximately 42e65% of the gaseous pollutants and 24% of the particle pollutants from cars,
taxies and buses were reduced. These results are validated by trafc and air quality monitoring data
during the Olympics, as well as other emission inventory studies. This approach improves the ability to
fast predict emission variation from trafc control measurements in several typical Chinese cities.
Comments related to application of this approach with both advantages and limitations are included.
2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords:
Trafc ow
Vehicle emission
Simulation
Olympic case
1. Introduction
Transportation has become a major source of air pollution in
Chinese cities (Streets and Waldhoff, 2000; Yi et al., 2007).
Increasingly strict vehicle emission regulations and the low sulfur
fuel program have reduced vehicle emission factors in China (Hao
and Wang, 2005; Cai and Xie, 2007). Nevertheless, there is
a concern that these strategies are not enough to curtail emissions,
considering the Chinas strong economic growth and continued
expansion of the transportation system. Therefore, government is
also seeking transportation system solutions. As such, better tools
are needed to evaluate vehicle emissions for different transportation system scenarios. These tools should include not only
emission models, but also corresponding vehicle activity models.
Traditional vehicle emission models can be classied into two
major types: top-down and bottom-up. Well known Top-down
models, such as MOBILE (Robinson et al., 1996), COPERT (Kouridis
et al., 2000; Ntziachristos, 2000), EMFAC and ARTEMIS (Keller and
Kljun, 2007), are widely used for transport environment planning
with static approaches to estimate total trafc emission, especially
scenarios analysis for future (Buron et al., 2005; Lumbreras et al.,
2008; Zhang et al., 2008). However, reliance on travel forecasting
models that are based on steady state hourly averages is incapable
1155
1156
Traffic Volume
(Vehicle/Lane/h)
City group I
1400
Hwy
Art
Res
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
2.3. The linkage: vehicle running patterns
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Hour of Day
Traffic Volume
(Vehicle/Lane/h)
City group II
1400
Hwy
Art
Res
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Hour of Day
roads are very low and can be treated as free ows. Trafc ow
variation through dynamic trafc control is more related to day
time trafc. Basically, roads are dened as one of the three types:
highway (Hwy), arterial (Art) and residential (Res). Vehicles are
classied into either light-duty or heavy-duty in all cities. Then the
diurnal patterns (6 am to 10 pm) are divided into hourly segments
to provide multiple trafc ow patterns. Trafc ow classication is
Table 1
39 trafc ow patterns in Chinese cities.
City
Vehicle
Roads
Flow patternsa
Group I
Light-duty vehicle
Freeway
Volume
Congestion
Free
Volume
Congestion
Free
Volume
Congestion
Free
Volume
750e950
H1
H5
250e350
A1
A4
250e350
R1
R3
250e350
B1
950e1150
H2
H6
350e450
A2
A5
350e450
R2
R4
350e450
B2
Volume
Congestion
Free
Volume
Normal
Volume
Normal
Volume
Normal
450e550
h1
h4
200e300
a1
<100
r1
200e300
b1
550e650
h2
h5
300e400
a2
100
r2
300e400
b2
Arterial
Residential
Group II
Heavy-duty vehicle
Arterial
Light-duty vehicle
Freeway
Arterial
Residential
Heavy-duty vehicle
a
Arterial
Flow patterns refer to a classication of different trafc ow types in this research, represented by H1-b4.
1150e1250
H3
H7
450e550
A3
A6
450e550
1250e1350
H4
H8
550e750
R5
450e550
B3
550e750
B4
650e800
h3
h6
400e500
a3
500e600
a4
400e500
b3
500e600
b4
PVRB30
BERP
VRB1
1157
Ei t i;P
(1)
SP
Table 2
Basic emission rates (g km1) for 39 different ow patterns.
HC
H1b
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
h1
h2
h3
h4
h5
h6
a1
a2
a3
a4
r1
r2
B1
B2
B3
B4
b1
b2
b3
b4
a
b
CO
PM
NOx
E0a
E1
E2
E3
E0
E1
E2
E3
E0
E1
E2
E3
E0
E1
E2
E3
1.88
1.87
2.16
2.17
1.38
1.50
1.56
1.92
3.39
2.92
3.17
2.20
2.51
2.49
2.98
3.53
2.16
2.47
2.65
1.92
2.14
2.42
1.60
1.67
1.61
2.13
2.53
2.67
2.96
3.40
3.67
2.81
3.26
3.75
4.57
3.23
3.46
3.65
3.87
0.27
0.27
0.31
0.31
0.21
0.22
0.23
0.28
0.47
0.41
0.44
0.32
0.35
0.35
0.42
0.49
0.30
0.34
0.37
0.27
0.31
0.35
0.23
0.24
0.23
0.31
0.37
0.38
0.43
0.50
0.53
2.45
2.79
3.11
3.68
2.82
3.04
3.15
3.29
0.13
0.13
0.15
0.15
0.10
0.11
0.11
0.14
0.23
0.20
0.22
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.21
0.24
0.15
0.17
0.18
0.13
0.15
0.17
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.15
0.18
0.19
0.21
0.25
0.26
1.80
2.06
2.30
2.73
2.07
2.24
2.34
2.44
0.12
0.12
0.14
0.14
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.13
0.20
0.18
0.19
0.14
0.16
0.16
0.19
0.22
0.13
0.15
0.17
0.12
0.13
0.15
0.10
0.11
0.10
0.14
0.16
0.17
0.19
0.22
0.23
1.32
1.48
1.64
1.94
1.52
1.65
1.71
1.76
15.50
15.20
17.02
16.78
11.89
12.47
12.99
15.55
25.40
22.25
23.89
16.51
19.63
19.55
22.85
26.90
16.63
18.71
20.16
14.67
16.84
19.03
11.63
12.86
11.80
14.81
17.87
19.07
20.79
23.84
25.96
19.13
20.96
23.63
28.78
21.41
21.63
22.32
23.84
2.24
2.15
2.35
2.25
1.92
1.86
1.87
2.26
2.91
2.74
2.84
2.07
2.46
2.45
3.05
3.52
2.16
2.38
2.53
1.67
2.13
2.46
1.44
1.65
1.40
1.82
2.15
2.22
2.38
2.86
2.99
5.92
6.22
6.74
8.01
6.75
6.95
6.84
7.05
1.33
1.31
1.47
1.45
1.02
1.09
1.12
1.35
2.14
1.89
2.03
1.46
1.67
1.66
1.98
2.29
1.40
1.59
1.72
1.25
1.46
1.65
1.06
1.13
1.04
1.38
1.64
1.71
1.88
2.20
2.34
3.70
4.14
4.60
5.49
4.21
4.40
4.54
4.77
1.37
1.37
1.56
1.57
1.02
1.12
1.15
1.41
2.33
2.03
2.18
1.58
1.77
1.76
2.11
2.46
1.50
1.72
1.85
1.33
1.53
1.75
1.16
1.20
1.14
1.56
1.85
1.92
2.14
2.53
2.65
2.36
2.69
3.00
3.58
2.72
2.95
3.06
3.18
0.012
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.012
0.017
0.016
0.017
0.013
0.014
0.014
0.017
0.019
0.012
0.013
0.014
0.010
0.013
0.015
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.012
0.014
0.015
0.016
0.019
0.020
0.702
0.744
0.770
0.863
0.822
0.938
0.938
0.924
0.008
0.008
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.011
0.010
0.011
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.011
0.013
0.008
0.009
0.010
0.007
0.009
0.010
0.006
0.007
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.308
0.331
0.342
0.384
0.343
0.350
0.350
0.359
0.008
0.008
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.008
0.011
0.010
0.011
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.011
0.013
0.008
0.009
0.010
0.007
0.009
0.010
0.006
0.007
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.011
0.013
0.013
0.213
0.230
0.244
0.280
0.239
0.247
0.249
0.256
0.004
0.004
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.003
0.004
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.074
0.081
0.086
0.099
0.084
0.091
0.092
0.093
1.67
1.69
1.94
1.93
1.24
1.37
1.42
1.71
2.99
2.58
2.80
1.98
2.25
2.23
2.63
3.08
1.88
2.16
2.33
1.72
1.94
2.22
1.46
1.52
1.46
1.94
2.31
2.42
2.69
3.11
3.32
3.63
4.16
4.71
5.67
4.10
4.31
4.51
4.82
0.87
0.86
0.95
0.93
0.70
0.73
0.75
0.89
1.28
1.16
1.23
0.94
1.04
1.04
1.25
1.41
0.86
0.97
1.07
0.78
0.95
1.08
0.69
0.74
0.66
0.90
1.06
1.08
1.18
1.41
1.46
7.78
8.54
9.17
10.64
8.80
9.11
9.24
9.62
0.16
0.16
0.18
0.18
0.13
0.14
0.14
0.17
0.24
0.22
0.23
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.24
0.27
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.15
0.18
0.20
0.13
0.14
0.13
0.18
0.21
0.21
0.23
0.28
0.29
7.19
7.96
8.56
9.91
8.16
8.61
8.80
9.06
0.09
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.09
0.13
0.12
0.13
0.10
0.11
0.11
0.13
0.15
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.08
0.10
0.11
0.07
0.08
0.07
0.10
0.12
0.12
0.13
0.16
0.16
7.27
8.00
8.47
9.68
8.23
8.71
8.86
9.06
E0, E1, E2, E3 represent vehicles classied by emission standards: before Euro 1, Euro 1, Euro 2 and Euro 3.
H1-b4 are the ow patterns generated in this research to dene trafc ow types.
800
Highway-BAU
600
Highway-Olympic
400
200
0
11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Arterial-BAU
Arterial-Olympic
1
Daily vehicle running
time (10^6 s)
11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
4000
Residential-BAU
Residential-Olympic
3000
2000
1000
0
1
1158
11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
1000
800
600
400
200
0
BusBAU
BusOlympic
11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29
Vehicle Running Bins
Fig. 3. Vehicle running time distribution by VRBS before and during the Olympics.
Table 3
Vehicle population and VKTa under BAU and Olympic Scenarios.
Taxi
Bus
2,513,911
1,151,864
54
66,600
66,600
0
47
61
400
520
Total
20,489
20,489
0
2,601,000
1,238,953
52
400 e
439 e
Single Vehicle
Operation
(km/day/
vehicle)
BAU
Olympic
VKT (km/day)
BAU
1,17,856,949 26,640,000 8,195,600 1,52,692,549
Olympic
69,965,440 34,621,918 8,993,792 1,13,581,150
Variation
41
30
10
26
(%)
Car
On-road Number BAU
(vehicles)
Olympic
Variation
(%)
600
500
Car
Taxi
Bus
400
300
200
100
0
BAU Olympic BAU Olympic BAU Olympic BAU Olympic BAU Olympic
HC
CO
NOx
PM*100
CO2/100
VKT is Vehicle Kilometers Travelled, reecting the total daily kilometers travelled for one kind of vehicles.
1159
were carried out by this team during the Olympics. This Olympics
vehicle activity measurement is an independent survey and none of
these data is used for developing TRAVEL database. A three days
survey, including vehicle running activity, trafc volume and onroad vehicle eet, were conducted during the Olympics. The
experimental method is the same as mentioned in section 2.1. Good
correlation between approach results and observation values are
shown for average speed and VRB distribution (Fig. 5). Error bars
(one-direction) are used to show the difference between simulation
results with observation values. Simulated speed is very close to the
measured result. The difference is only 7% (3.5 km h1) for Hwy
and 2% (0.5 km h1) for Art. VRB simulation result is also in
a reasonable range (20%) compared with the on-road value. The
trafc density estimate agreed with the observed value within <20%
while the peak hour forecast is limited to 1 h difference (Fig. SI-S3).
Note that model result reects the average vehicle behavior, further
uncertainty study with more trafc and vehicle emission tests data
would be helpful to improve the approach application.
4.2. Emission results validation with eld data and others
Our results are compared with three kinds of results during the
Olympics: source emission reduction; air pollutants concentration
Table 4
Results validation by comparing this research with other studies.
Researches
HC reduction (%)b
CO reduction (%)
NOx reduction (%)
PM reduction (%)
CO2 reduction (%)
VKT reduction (%)
Vehicles
Method
Trafc data
Emission data
Denition
Intervals
Area lower-limit
Area up-limit
#1
#2
59
65
42
24
39
26
Car, taxi, bus
56
57
46
52
Top-down
simulation
Bottom-up
emission
inventory
Hourly
Road
City
32
LDV, taxi, bus,
LDT, HDT, HDVc
Survey
Bottom-up
emission
inventory
Daily
1 1 km grid
City
#3
28
#4
#5
31
54
41
18
#6
#7
23
Car, taxi,
bus, truck
Monitor
18e38
PV, taxi,
truck, bus
Survey
Roadside
air quality
Roadside
air quality
On-road
air quality
Daily
1/4 of the city
City
Weekly
Road
Hourly
Road
Road
Daily
e
City
Daily
e
City
a
Research #1 refers to this research, and research #2 to #6 are other researches including emission inventory, environmental concentration and trafc volume monitoring
results.
b
Pollutants reduction(%) refers to emission reduction for #1 and #2 emission inventory studies and road-side environmental concentration reduction for #3 and #4
monitoring studies.
c
LDV: Light duty vehicles; LDT: Light duty trucks; HDT: Heavy duty trucks; HDV: Heavy duty vehicles; PV: Passenger vehicles.
1160
Davis, N., Lents, J., Osses, M., Nikkila, N., Barth, M., 2005. Development and Application of an International Vehicle Emissions Model. Transportation Research
Board 81st Annual Meeting. Washington, D.C.
EPA, U.S., 2009. Technical Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for Emission
Inventory Preparation in State Implementation Plans and Transportation
Conformity, EPA-420-B-09-042.
Guo, H., Zhang, Q., Shi, Y., Wang, D., 2007. On-road remote sensing measurements
and fuel-based motor vehicle emission inventory in Hangzhou, China. Atmospheric Environment 41 (14), 3095e3107.
Hao, J., Wang, L., 2005. Improving urban air quality in China: Beijing case study.
Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association 55 (9), 1298e1305.
Harley, R.A., Marr, L.C., Lehner, J.K., Giddings, S.N., 2005. Changes in motor vehicle
emissions on diurnal to decadal time scales and effects on atmospheric
composition. Environmental Science & Technology 39, 5356.
Hatzopoulou, M., Miller, E.J., 2010. Linking an activity-based travel demand model
with trafc emission and dispersion models: transports contribution to air
pollution in Toronto. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 15 (6), 315e325.
Huai, T., Durbin, T.D., Miller, J.W., Pisano, J.T., Sauer, C.G., Rhee, S.H., Norbeck, J.M.,
2003. Investigation of NH3 emissions from new technology vehicles as a function of vehicle operating conditions. Environmental Science & Technology 37,
4841.
Kear, T., Niemeier, D.A., 2006. On-road heavy-duty diesel particulate matter emissions modeled using chassis dynamometer data. Environmental Science &
Technology 40 (24), 7828e7833.
Keller, M., Kljun, N., 2007. ARTEMIS Road Emission Model User Guide. EU
Commission.
Kouridis, C., Ntziachristos, L., Samaras, Z., 2000. COPERT III Computer Programme to
Calculate Emissions from Road Transport. European Environment Agency.
Lents, J., Davis, N., 2004. IVE Model Users Manual. ISSRC.
Li, X., Li, G., Pang, S., Yang, X., Tian, J., 2004. Signal timing of intersections
using integrated optimization of trafc quality, emissions and fuel consumption: a note. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 9,
401e407.
Liu, H., He, K., Lents, J., 2008a. A methodology for developing a micro-emission
model based on on-board heavy duty truck tests in China 87th Annual Meeting
of Transportation Research Board. Washington DC.
Liu, M., Mao, B., Huang, Y., Zhang, J., Chen, S., 2008b. Comparison of pre- & postolympic trafc: a case study of several roads in Beijing. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology 8 (6), 67e72.
Liu, X., Guo, J., Sun, Z., 2008c. Trafc operation with comments during Beijing
Olympic Games. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology 8 (6), 16e24.
Liu, H., He, K., Lents, J.M., Wang, Q., Tolvett, S., 2009. Characteristics of diesel truck
emission in China based on protable emissions measurement systems. Environmental Science & Technology 43, 9507e9511.
Liu, H., He, K., Wang, Q., Huo, H., Lents, J., Davis, N., Nikkila, N., Chen, C., Osses, M.,
He, C., 2007. Comparison of vehicle activity and emission inventory between
Beijing and Shanghai. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 57
(10), 1172e1177.
Lumbreras, J., Valdes, M., Borge, R., Rodriguez, M.E., 2008. Assessment of vehicle
emissions projections in Madrid (Spain) from 2004 to 2012 considering several
control strategies. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 42 (4),
646e658.
Namdeo, A., Mitchell, G., Dixon, R., 2002. TEMMS: an integrated package for
modelling and mapping urban trafc emissions and air quality. Environmental
Modelling & Software 17 (2), 177e188.
Nesamani, K.S., Chu, L., McNally, M.G., Jayakrishnan, R., 2007. Estimation of vehicular emissions by capturing trafc variations. Atmospheric Environment 41
(14), 2996e3008.
Ntziachristos, Samaras, 2000. OPERT III Computer programme to calculate emissions from road transport. Methodology and emission factors (Version 2.1).
Technical Report No 49. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. http://
vergina.eng.auth.gr/mech/lat/copert/copert.htm.
Panis, L.I., Broekx, S., Liu, R., 2006. Modeling instantaneous trafc emission and the
inuence of trafc speed limits. Science of the Total Environment 371 (1e3),
270e285.
Rakha, H., Van Aerde, M., Ahn, K., Trani, A.A., 2000. Requirements for evaluating
trafc signal control impacts on energy and emissions based on instantaneous
speed and acceleration measurements. Transportation Research Record 1738,
56e67.
Robinson, N.F., Pierson, W.R., Gertler, A.W., Sagebiel, J.C., 1996. Comparison of
MOBILE4.1 and MOBILE5 predictions with measurements of vehicle emission
factors in Fort McHenry and Tuscarora mountain tunnels. Atmospheric Environment 30 (12), 2257e2267.
Scora, G., Younglove, T., Barth, M.J., 2004. A modal emission model for heavy duty
diesel vehicles. Transportation Research Record 1880, 10e20.
Smit, R., Poelman, M., Schrijver, J., 2008. Improved road trafc emission inventories
by adding mean speed distributions. Atmospheric Environment 42 (5),
916e926.
Streets, D.G., Waldhoff, S.T., 2000. Present and future emissions of air pollutants in
China:: SO2, NOx, and CO. Atmospheric Environment 34 (3), 363e374.
Van Mierlo, J., Van den Bossche, P., Maggetto, G., 2004. Models of energy sources for
EV and HEV: fuel cells, batteries, ultracapacitors, ywheels and engine-generators. Journal of Power Sources 128 (1), 76e89.
1161
Yao, Z., Wang, Q., He, K., Huo, H., Ma, Y., Zhang, Q., 2007. Characteristics of realworld vehicular emissions in Chinese Cities. Journal of the Air & Waste
Management Association 57 (11), 1379e1386.
Yi, H., Hao, J., Tang, X., 2007. Atmospheric environmental protection in China:
current status, developmental trend and research emphasis. Energy Policy 35
(2), 907e915.
Zhai, H., Frey, H.C., Rouphail, N.M., 2008. A vehicle-specic power approach to
speed- and facility-specic emissions estimates for diesel transit buses. Environmental Science & Technology 42 (21), 7985e7991.
Zhang, Q., Xu, J., Wang, G., Tian, W., Jiang, H., 2008. Vehicle emission inventories
projection based on dynamic emission factors: a case study of Hangzhou, China.
Atmospheric Environment 42 (20), 4989e5002.
Zhou, Y., Wu, Y., Yang, L., Fu, L., He, K., Wang, S., Hao, J., Chen, J., Li, C., 2010. The
impact of transportation control measures on emission reductions during the
2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, China. Atmospheric Environment 44 (3),
285e293.