Urban CO2 emissions in Xi’an and Bangalore by commuters: implications for controlling urban transportation carbon dioxide emissions in developing countries

  • Yuanqing Wang
  • Liu YangEmail author
  • Sunsheng Han
  • Chao Li
  • T. V. Ramachandra
Original Article


China and India together have more than one third of the world population and are two emerging economic giants of the developing world now experiencing rapid economic growth, urbanization, and motorization. The urban transportation sector is a major source of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in China and India. The goal of this study is to analyze the characteristics and factors of CO2 emissions produced by commuters in Chinese and Indian cities and thus to identify strategies for reducing transportation CO2 emissions and mitigating global climate change. Xi’an in China and Bangalore in India were chosen as two case study cities for their representativeness of major cities in China and India. The trends of CO2 emissions produced by major traffic modes (electric motors, buses, and cars) in major cities of China and India were predicted and analyzed. The spatial distributions of CO2 emissions produced by commuters in both cities were assessed using spatial analysis module in ArcGIS (Geographic Information System) software. Tobit models were then developed to investigate the impact factors of the emissions. The study has several findings. Firstly, in both cities, the increase of vehicle occupancy could reduce commuting CO2 emissions by 20 to 50 % or conversely, if vehicle occupancy reduces, an increase by 33.33 to 66.67 %. It is estimated that, with the current increasing speed of CO2 emissions in Xi’an, the total CO2 emissions from electric motors, buses, and cars in major cities of China and India will be increased from 135 × 106 t in 2012 to 961 × 106 t in 2030, accounting for 0.37 to 2.67 % of the total global CO2 emissions of 2013, which is significant for global climate change. Secondly, households and individuals in the outer areas of both cities produce higher emissions than those in the inner areas. Thirdly, the lower emissions in Xi’an are due to the higher density and more compact urban pattern, shorter commuting distances, higher transit shares, and more clean energy vehicles. The more dispersed and extensive urban sprawl and the prevalence of two-wheeler motorbikes (two-wheeler motorbike is abbreviated as “two-wheeler” in the following sections) fueled by gasoline cause higher emissions in Bangalore. Fourthly, car availability, higher household income, living outside the 2nd or Outer Ring Road, distance from the bus stop, and working in the foreign companies in Bangalore are significant and positive factors of commuting CO2 emissions. Fifthly, “70-20” and “50-20” (this means that generally, 20 % of commuters and households produce 70 % of total emissions in Xi’an and 20 % of commuters and households produce 50 % of total emissions in Bangalore) emission patterns exist in Xi’an and Bangalore, respectively. Several strategies have been proposed to reduce urban CO2 emissions produced by commuters and further to mitigate global climate change. Firstly, in the early stage of fast urbanization, enough monetary and land investment should be ensured to develop rail transit or rapid bus routes from outer areas to inner areas in the cities to avoid high dependency on cars, thus to implement the transit-oriented development (TOD), which is the key for Chinese and Indian cities to mitigate the impact on global climate change caused by CO2 emissions. Secondly, in Bangalore, it is necessary to improve public transit service and increase the bus stop coverage combined with car demand controls along the ring roads, in the outer areas, and in the industry areas where Indian foreign companies and the governments are located. Thirdly, Indian should put more efforts to provide alternative cleaner transport modes while China should put more efforts to reduce CO2 emissions from high emitters.


Global climate change Urban transportation CO2 emissions by commuters Spatial distribution Impact factor China and India 



This study was funded by Australian Research Council Project (ARCDP1094801), Asia Pacific Network for Global Change Research (ARCP2011-07CMY-Han), and National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51178055-E0807). We appreciate the help of Mr. Michael Wang from the Argonne National Laboratory in Chicago, USA; Associate Professor Qiang Bai; and Professor Minquan Li from Chang’an University in Xi’an, China, in the paper.


  1. Anable J, Boardman B, Root A (1997) Travel emission profiles: a tool for strategy development and driver advice, Environmental change unit research report 17. University of Oxford, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Araújo J, Oliveira J, Silva H (2014) The importance of the use phase on the LCA of environmentally friendly solutions for asphalt road pavements. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 32:97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brand C, Boardman B (2008) Taming of the few—the unequal distribution of greenhouse gas emissions from personal travel in the UK. Energy Policy 36:224–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brand C, Preston J (2010) “60-20 emission”—the unequal distribution of greenhouse gas emissions from personal, non-business travel in the UK. Transp Policy 17(1):9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brand C, Goodman A, Rutter H, Song Y, Ogilvie D (2013) Associations of individual, household and environmental characteristics with carbon dioxide emissions from motorised passenger travel. Appl Energy 104:158–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Büchs M, Schnepf S (2013) Who emits most? Associations between socio-economic factors and UK households’ home energy, transport, indirect and total CO2 emissions. Ecol Econ 90:114–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlsson-Kanyama A, Lindén A (1999) Travel patterns and environmental effects now and in the future: implications of differences in energy consumption among socio-economic groups. Ecol Econ 30:405–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (1997) Revised 1996 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventoriesGoogle Scholar
  9. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007) “Climate change 2007” The Fourth IPCC Assessment ReportGoogle Scholar
  10. Emrath P, Liu F (2008) Vehicle carbon dioxide emissions and the compactness of residential development. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research 10(3):185–202Google Scholar
  11. Frank L, Stone B, Bachman W (2000) Linking land use with household vehicle emissions in the central Puget Sound: methodological framework and findings. Transp Res D 5:173–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glastris M (2013) GDP and city population in the development performance of city structures. Paper presented at State of Australian Cities Conference, Sydney, November 2013Google Scholar
  13. Gover M, Hitchcock G, Collings S, Moon D (1994) UK petrol and diesel demand. Energy and emissions effects of a switch to diesel. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Guo JX, Liu HA, Jiang Y, He DQ, Wang QD, Meng F, He KB (2014) Neighborhood form and CO2 emission: evidence from 23 neighborhoods in Jinan, China. Front Environ Sci Eng China 8(1):79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Han S (2010) Urban expansion in contemporary China: what can we learn from a small town? Journal of Land Use Policy 27:780–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hong J, Shen Q (2013) Residential density and transportation emissions: examining the connection by addressing spatial autocorrelation and self-selection. Transp Res D 22:75–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huo H, Yao Z, He K et al (2011) Fuel consumption rates of passenger cars in China: labels versus real-world. Energy Policy 39:7130–7135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huo H, Wang M, Zhao X et al (2012) Projection of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by motor vehicles in China: policy options and impacts. Energy Policy 43:37–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Indiancn (2013) The ten richest cities rankings in India. Cited Oct. 1 2015
  20. Ko J, Park D, Lim H, Hwang I (2011) Who produces the most CO2 emissions for trips in the Seoul metropolis area? Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 16:358–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. JLL (Jones Lang LaSalle) (2015) China 60: from fast growth to smart growth. Sept. 23 2015
  22. Liu L, Hou K (2009) Study on gas consumption index for CNG bus. Gas Heat 29(1):20–22Google Scholar
  23. Liu P, Du N, Huang J, and Xiang C (2012) Impact study of daily commuting carbon emissions effected on urban spatial characteristics based on neighborhood diversity and inclusion. In: Proceedings of Diversity and Inclusion-Annual Conference of Urban Planning Society of China, Kunming, December, 2012Google Scholar
  24. Mamatha P, Madhu CK (2007) Spaces of mobility in the city center, Bangalore—the role and impact of transportation infrastructure. ITPI Journal 4(2):52–59Google Scholar
  25. Meyer M, Miller E (2001) Urban transport planning: a decision-oriented approach, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Book Co., SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  26. Miller E, Ibrahim A (1998) Urban form and vehicular travel: some empirical findings. Transp Res Rec 1617:18–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moriarty P (2002) Environmental sustainability of large Australian cities. Urban Policy Res 20(3):233–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nicolas J, David D (2009) Passenger transport and CO2 emissions: what does the French transport survey tell us? Atmos Environ 43:1015–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Norman J, MacLean H, Kennedy C (2006) Comparing high and low residential density: life-cycle analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. J Urban Plann Dev 132(1):10–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parthasarathy B (2004) India’s silicon valley or silicon valley’s India? Socially embedding the computer software industry in Bangalore. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 28(3):664–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Potter S (1997) Vital travel statistics. Landor, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Pucher J, Korattyswaropam N, Mittal N, Ittyerah N (2005) Urban transport crisis in India. Transp Policy 12:185–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pucher J, Zhong R, Mittal N, Zhu Y, Korattyswaroopam N (2007) Urban transport trends and policies in China and India: impacts of rapid economic growth. Transp Rev 27(4):379–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ramachandra T, Shwetmala (2009) Emissions from India’s transport sector: statewise synthesis. Atmos Environ 43:5510–5517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ramachandra T, Bharath H, Sanna D (2012) Insights to urban dynamics through landscape spatial pattern analysis. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 18:329–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ramachandra T, Bharath H, Sreejith K (2015) GHG footprint of major cities in India. Renew Sust Energ Rev 44:473–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Redsell M, Lucas G, Ashford N (1988) Comparison of on-road fuel consumption for diesel and petrol cars. Transport and road research laboratory contractor report 79. TRRL, CrowthorneGoogle Scholar
  38. Sabapathy A, Flachsbart P, Saksena S (2012) Commuting patterns of employees in the information technology and traditional manufacturing sectors of Bangalore, India. Transp Policy 19:155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sudhakara RB, Balachandra P (2013) Benchmarking urban sustainability—a composite index for Mumbai and Bangalore. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
  40. Sudhira H, Ramachandra T, Bala Subrahmanya M (2007) City profile—Bangalore. Cities 24(5):379–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Susilo Y, Stead D (2009) Individual carbon dioxide emissions and potential for reduction in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Transp Res Rec 2139:142–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. BT (Bangalore Traffic) (2015) Bangalore traffic, vehicle population in Bengaluru City. Cited 21 April 2015
  43. Troy P, Holloway D, Pullen S, Bunker R (2003) Embodied and operational energy consumption in the city. Urban Policy Res 21(1):9–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang H, Xie Y, Luo C et al (2011) Greenhouse gas emission status and reduction measures of transportation industry. Energy Research and Management 2011(3):9–11Google Scholar
  45. Wang Y, Li L, Wang Z, Lv T, Wang L (2013) Mode shifts behavior impacts from the introduction of metro service: case study of Xi’an, China. J Urban Plann Dev 139(3):216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang Y, Yang L, Han S, Li C, Liu Y, Ren Q (2015) Sprawling city’s home-based commuting carbon dioxide spatial distribution: case study in Xi’an. Proceedings of 94th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, D CGoogle Scholar
  47. Weber C, Matthews H (2008) Quantifying the global and distributional aspects of American household carbon footprint. Ecol Econ 668:379–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. WMO (World Meteorological Organization) (2014) 2013 WMO greenhouse gas bulletin. World Meteorological Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  49. XBS and NBSXIT (Xi’an Bureau of Statistics and National Bureau of Statistics Xi’an Investigation Team) (2013) Xi’an statistical yearbook. China Statistics Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  50. XCTMCCU (Xi’an City Traffic Management Committee and Chang’an University) (2012) Documentation of Xi’an Transport Development Annual ReportGoogle Scholar
  51. Xiao Z, Chai Y, Liu Z (2011) Quantitative distribution and related factors for household daily travel CO2 emissions in Beijing. Urban Stud 9:247–257Google Scholar
  52. Xu G (2012) Dynamic characteristics of land use change and the built-up expansion case study of Xi’an. Thesis of Master’s Degree, Shaanxi Normal UniversityGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang S, Wu Y, Liu H et al (2014a) Real-world fuel consumption and CO2 emissions of urban public buses in Beijing. Appl Energy 113:1645–1655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang X, Yang X, Yan Y (2014b) Statistical estimation method for energy consumption and carbon emissions by urban transport. China Soft Science 6:142–150Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuanqing Wang
    • 1
  • Liu Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sunsheng Han
    • 2
  • Chao Li
    • 1
  • T. V. Ramachandra
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Traffic Engineering, School of HighwayChang’an UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Faculty of Architecture, Building and PlanningThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  3. 3.Indian Institute of ScienceBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations