Abstract
Although researchers have long argued in favor of off-peak transit service, studies that have empirically estimated its benefits regarding revenue generation, trip diversions, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission are rare. This study provides important evidence about the benefits of off-peak commuter rail service by focusing on the Pascack Valley line in New Jersey, where off-peak service was introduced in October 2007. The research involved two focus groups and an onboard survey of passengers. Benefits were estimated regarding additional revenue generation and reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG emission. The research shows that the new off-peak service potentially reduced VMT by more than 12 million annually due to diversions from other modes. Although diversions from other modes resulted in a substantial reduction in GHG emissions, due to the additional diesel fuel used by the new trains, the net GHG savings were in the range of 28–49 %. The research further shows that both peak period and off-peak riders benefited from the new off-peak service. Evidence is found about an increase in new transit riders and a modest increase peak period usage because of the off-peak service.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Public Transit Association: Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transit. American Public Transit Association, Washington, DC (2009)
Bailey, L., Mokhtarian, P.L., Little, A.: The Broader Connection Between Public Transportation, Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gas Reduction. ICF International, Fairfax (2008)
Cambridge Systematics and Apogee Research. Measuring and Valuing Transit Benefits and Disbenefits: Summary. TCRP Report 20. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (1996)
Cervero, R.: Transit pricing research: A review and synthesis. Transportation 17, 117–139 (1990)
Chen, Y., Whalley, A.: Green infrastructure: The effects of urban rail transit on air quality. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 4(1), 58–97 (2012)
Davis, S.C., Diegel S.W., Boundy, R.B.: Transportation Energy Data Book, 30th edn. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge
Deakin, E., Ferrell, C., Mason, J., Thomas J.: Policies and practices for cost-effective transit investments: Recent experiences in the United States. Transp. Res. Rec. 1799, 1–9 (2002)
Environmental Protection Agency: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the US Transportation Sector: 1990–2003. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC (2006)
Environmental Protection Agency: Green Power Equivalency Calculator Methodologies. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/pubs/calcmeth.htm#vehicles (2011). Accessed 30 Aug 2011
Federal Highway Administration: Highways statistics. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2009/ (2009). Accessed 20 Aug 2011
Federal Transit Administration: National Transit Database, Database. http://www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/pubs/dt/2010/excel/DataTables.htm (2010). Accessed 12 Apr 2013
Feigon S., Hoyt, D., McNally L., Mooney-Bullock, R., Campbell, S., Leach D.: Travel Matters: Mitigating Climate Change with Sustainable Surface Transportation. TCRP Report 93. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2003)
Hsu, C.-I., Guo, S.-P.: Externality reductions in residential areas due to rail transit networks. Ann. Reg. Sci. 55, 555–566 (2005)
ICF Consulting: Estimating Transportation-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Use in New York State. ICF Consulting, Washington, DC (2005)
Jia, W.: Metrorail trends and markets: Synopsis of recent ridership growth. Transp. Res. Rec. 2112, 34–42 (2009)
Kennedy, C.A.: A comparison of the sustainability of public and private transportation systems: Study of the Greater Toronto Area. Transportation 29, 459–493 (2002)
Labelle, S.J., Stuart, D.G.: Diverting automobile users to transit: Early lessons from the Chicago Transit Authority’s Orange Line. Transp. Res. Rec. 1503, 79–87 (1995)
Lane, C., DiCarlantonio, M., Usvyat, L.: Sketch models to forecast commuter and light rail ridership. Transp. Res. Rec. 1986, 198–210 (2006)
Oram, R.L.: The role of subsidy policy in modernizing the structure of the bus transit industry. Transportation 9, 333–353 (1980)
O’Toole, R.: Does rail transit save energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Policy Anal. 615, 1–23 (2008)
PB Americas, Cambridge Systematics, E.H. Pechan and Associates, EuQuant: Incorporating Greenhouse Gas Emissions into the Collaborative Decision-Making Process. SHRP 2 Report S2-C09-RR-1. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2013)
Poudenx, P., Merida, W.: Energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions from urban passenger transportation versus availability of renewable energy: The example of the Canadian Lower Fraser Valley. Energy 32(1), 1–9 (2007)
Pucher, J.: Equity in transit finance: Distribution of transit subsidy benefits and costs among income classes. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 47(4), 10–28 (1981)
Pucher, J.: Socioeconomics of urban travel. Transp. Q. 57(3), 49–77 (2003)
Rubin, T.A., Moore II, J.E., Lee, S.: A postmortem analysis of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s 20-year long range plan. Public Works Manag. Policy 3(3), 187–206 (1999)
Storchmann, K.: Externalities by automobiles and fare-free transit in Germany: A paradigm shift? J. Public Transp. 6(4), 89–105 (2003)
VandeWeghe, J.R., Kennedy, C.: A spatial analysis of residential greenhouse gas emissions in the Toronto Census Metropolitan area. J. Ind. Ecol. 11(2), 133–144 (2007)
Voith, R.: The long-run elasticity of demand for commuter rail transportation. J. Urban Econ. 30, 360–372 (1991)
Voith, R.: Fares, service levels, and demographics: What determines commuter rail ridership in the long run? J. Urban Econ. 41, 176–197 (1997)
Wachs, M.: US transit subsidy policy: In need of reform. Science 244, 1545–1549 (1989)
World Resources Institute: Employee Commuting Spreadsheet. http://www.carbonfund.org/site/pages/carbon_calculators/category/Assumptions (2011). Accessed 30 July 2011
Acknowledgments
This research was funded by a grant from the New Jersey Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Research (Grant # FHWA-NJ-2011-008). The authors are grateful to Jon Carnegie for moderating the two focus groups and to Orin Puniello for coordinating the focus groups and the onboard survey. The authors are particularly grateful to Thomas A. Rubin, one of the reviewers, for providing extraordinarily useful advice regarding GHG estimation from new trains. However, the authors bear the sole responsibility for the content of the paper and any potential errors or omissions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Deka, D., Marchwinski, T. The revenue and environmental benefits of new off-peak commuter rail service: the case of the Pascack Valley line in New Jersey. Transportation 41, 157–172 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-013-9495-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-013-9495-0