Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Energy risks to activity systems as a function of
urban form
Dr. André Dantas, Civil Engineering DepartmentDr. Susan Krumdieck, Mechanical Engineering DepartmentMr Shannon Page, Mechanical Engineering Department
Advanced Energy and Material Systems LabAdvanced Energy and Material Systems Lab
Presentation outline
• Discussion
•RECATS demonstration
•Case study findings
•RECATS model
•Context
•Energy supply analysis
•Risk analysis
Once upon the time, there was an urban area ….
…. And the urban area was changing
and growing…t=1
t=2
t=n
And growing
….
…and the more it was growing, the more people had complex needs
Complex commuting patterns all over the
city.
t=1
t=2
t=n
Central displacements
on foot;
Travel Demand
Long-motorized travel from suburbs to
CBD;
…and the more people had complex travel needs,
...
ENERGY crisis/shortage risks
???
Which urban form
development option minimizes
energy risks?
?
Petroleum availability?
Alternative energy sources?
Transport technology?
Facts about Oil Resources
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
60
50
40
30
20
10
Billions of Barrels per year
Projected Discoveries
Discovery
Production
Energy supply analysis
World Oil Supply Situation
Sept 2005 Saudi’s Oil Minister pledges (again) to increase production
Oil production capacity remains limited, leaving the market vulnerable to shocks…
www.fin.gc.ca
High Price can cause oil shortages in import-dependent economies
Philippines, Eritrea, Zimbabwe,Nigeria, China, South Africa
Panic Buying can cause oil shortagesUK, USA, India, China
Energy supply analysis
Facts about NZ Oil Demand
Values in Gross Peta Joules for the year ending September 2005
Product Imports
Crude oil imports (incl. condensate, naptha and feed stocks) International transport,
Industry & agriculture, and other uses
50.0 Indigenous production
33.0 Export
85.89
Losses, own use, stock change and exports
Domestic Transport
Diesel 75.7
Motor Gasoline 109.1
Av. Fuel & others 21.6
231.30
Diesel 32.6 Gasoline 35.5
NZRC Total refined
Products 311.0
Energy supply analysis
There is a Possibility• Fuel Shortage• High Price
Published January 14, 20032005 Minneapolis Star Tribune
Encarta.msn.com
That there will be a problem
Energy supply analysis
Peak Oil is a problem because…
It’s not accounted for in the original design and operation
It is an issue we don’t have a plan to deal with
Therefore it poses a RISK
Energy supply analysis
Peak Oil Probability
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025 2050 2075 2100 2125
History
Mean
USGS Estimates of Ultimate Recovery Ultimate Recovery Probability BBls-------------------- ---------Low (95 %) 2,248Mean (expected value) 3,003High (5 %) 3,896
7.8% Growth1963-1973
2% Growth& Decline
High Prices CanAffect Demand4.1% Decline
1979-1983
2016
40
30
35
25
20
15
10
5
01900 1925 1950 1975 2000 2025 2050 21002075 2125
Billi
ons
of B
arre
ls p
er y
ear
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 20300
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pro
babi
lty (%
)
Peak Oil5% Reduction7.5% Reduction10% Reduction15% Reduction20% Reduction
Fuel Shortage
Y
Y
yr
ryyrXCP
2005
20051!1!2005!20051
Energy supply analysis
Probability of Fuel Shortfall Shortage10% Below 2005
2005 0% 2010 0%2015 30%2020 78%2025 96%2030 99.5%
Post Peak Oil Supply Decline neglecting cost or panic induced shortages
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 20300
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pro
babi
lty (%
)
Peak Oil5% Reduction7.5% Reduction10% Reduction15% Reduction20% Reduction
Fuel Shortage
Energy supply analysis
Petroleum availability?
Alternative energy sources?
Transport technology?
Technology Substitutes or Alternatives? Alternative Vehicles Alternative Fuels
Alternatives don’t change the fact that an oil shortage represents a change in the amount of oil currently being used.
Energy supply analysis
Petroleum availability?
Alternative energy sources?
Transport technology?
?PEAK OIL
AND THE SUBSEQUENT SUPPLY DECLINE
Risk to Transportation Activities?
Impacts on wellbeing?
Urban form and adaptability?
Essentiality?
Essentiality Metric
For Wellbeing
Optional
Necessary
Essential
Risk Analysis
Num
ber o
f Trip
s
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Essentiality LevelsOptional Necessary Essential
Car
Bus
Walk
Bike
Trip Modes
ShortDistance Bins
Medium Long
Travel Demand
Risk Analysis
Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r D
ay (
1000
s)
CarBusW alkBike
Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r D
ay (
1000
s)
CarBusW alkBike
High Density
Low Density
Risk Analysis
Adaptation to Reduced Fuel Use
Optional
Necessary
Essential
People will act to preserve wellbeing
Eliminate First
Eliminate Last
Eliminate Trips
Risk Analysis
Mode Shifting
Walk Bike Bus (Public Transport) Car (Private Transport)
People will act to preserve participation in activities
Function of Urban Form
Risk Analysis
Distance Shifting
Neighbourhood Area Region
Function of Urban Form
People will act to preserve participation in activities
Risk Analysis
Efficiency Shifting
Share Rides Combine Trips or Modes Use or Purchase more
Efficient Vehicle
Function of Urban Form
People will act to preserve participation in activities
Risk Analysis
Impact Assessment
Loss of Essential Trip
Loss of Necessary Trip
Loss of Optional Trip
Change of Mode
Change of Destination
Risk Analysis
•Identify Risks•Evaluate Impacts•Mitigation Measures•Implementation
Risk Analysis
Exploring Energy Constraint Impacts
Impose a Fuel Shortage
Choose an Urban Form
Model Travel Demand
Calculate Energy Demand
Until Energy Demand = Supply
Model Travel Behaviour Change
Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess Opt Nec Ess0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r D
ay (
1000
s)
CarBusW alkBike
m d
ddmdm DBECTDE ,, *
Risk Analysis
Energy Constrained Activity ModelTravel Activity
RECATS ModelImplemented in MATLAB®
Energy Constraint
Calculate Energy Consumption
E2< E1?Modify
Travel Activity
Constrained Travel ActivityCalculate Risk
Yes
NoE1
E2
Risk Analysis
Risk Assessment
1*
**
,,
,,
m d s
ssdmm d s
ssdm
eeIW
IWTPR
Ψ
Risk = Probability * Impact
Pro
babi
lity
of p
eak
havi
ng o
ccur
red
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Year b)
Travel Activity
Energy Constraint
Calculate Energy Consumption
E2< E1?Modify
Travel Activity
Constrained Travel ActivityCalculate Risk
Yes
NoE1
E2
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 0
5
10
15
20
25
30 WORLD WORLD OUTSIDE PERSIAN GULF PERSIAN GULF U.S. AND CANADA FORMER SOVIET UNION U.K. AND NORWAY
ANNU
AL O
IL PR
ODUC
TION
(BILL
IONS
OF
BARR
ELS)
Risk Analysis
RECATS
Risk Analysis
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
What are the risks?
Scenario:Probability Reduction event=20%
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
URBAN DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Business As Usual Car Trips Lost High
Risk=117
Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess 0
100
200
300
400
500
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r Day
(100
0s)
Car Bus Walk Bike
• Optional Trips must be reduced by 84%• Necessary trips must be reduced by 1%• 17% reduction in car travel
Option A – Centralized development Car Trips Lost
Low Risk=105
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess 0
100
200
300
400
500
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r Day
(100
0s)
Car Bus Walk Bike
URBAN DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
• Optional Trips must be reduced by 74%• Necessary trips must be reduced by 2%• 15% reduction in car travel
Option B – Hybrid-Corridor based development Car Trips Lost
Moderate Risk=110
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess 0
100
200
300
400
500
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r D
ay (1
000s
)
Car Bus Walk Bike
URBAN DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
• Optional Trips must be reduced by 72%• Necessary trips must be reduced by 2%• 16% reduction in car travel
URBAN DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Option C – Urban sprawlCar based development Car Trips Lost
Very High Risk=126
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess Opt Pur Ess 0
100
200
300
400
500
Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance
Trip
s pe
r Day
(100
0s)
Car Bus Walk Bike
• Optional Trips must be reduced by 84%• Necessary trips must be reduced by 1%• 17% reduction in car travel
Impact of Shortages
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1 2 3 4Scenario
Ris
k le
vel (
Re)
Option BAU Option A Option B Option C
7% 10% 15% 20%
Case Study, Christchurch 2041
Conclusions
•RECATS: a planning tool to assess future scenarios of urban development forms.
•Transport energy: a critical sustainability issue.
•Energy supply analysis: probabilities of future disruption scenarios.
•Greater Christchurch 2041: urban development options subject to different energy risk levels.
•Limitations and further studies: limited data on travel behavior in energy constrained situations.
Acknowledgements
End-user organisations: Christchurch City Council Environment Canterbury Urban Development Strategy Forum Combined Owner Driver Association MWH Global
This research project was funded by
Dr. Susan [email protected]
Advanced Energy and Material Systems Lab
Interdisciplinary research effort to develop the theory, models, information, ideas, technology and planning tools for New Zealand to begin the journey toward a Sustainable Civilization.
Dr. André [email protected]
