Powerpoint

advertisement
26 July 2013




With public debate around important issues often
dominated by powerful special interests pursuing their
own narrow agenda, the Wisconsin Public Interest Research
Group (WISPIRG) Foundation offers an independent,
articulate voice on behalf of the public interest.
Non-profit and non-partisan
Public interest advocate on a variety of issues such as
health care, financial reform, public health and
transportation.
Published numerous reports on transportation and
infrastructure finance
Structure of the Presentation:
• Rise and Fall of the Driving
Boom
• Why it matters and what might
the future look like?
• Policy recommendations
• Q&A




The Driving Boom 1946-2004
What powered the Driving Boom
Evidence of the end of the Driving Boom
Millennials leading the trend
Vehicle Miles Travelled Per Capita Averaged +2.5% Each Year
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
1958
1956
1954
1952
1950
1948
1946
Labor Force Participation Rate
Rapid increases due to increased
participation of women, demographic
bubble
Share of Population of Peak
Driving Age (35-54)
Steadily increasing due to Baby Boom
Cost of Gasoline
Mostly stable and low
Vehicle Ownership
Increasing to near-universal vehicle
ownership
Driver’s Licensing
Increasing to near-universal licensure
Use of Non-Driving Modes
Dramatically decreasing, then stagnant
Total Vehicle Miles (Millions) Travelled Averaged +3.8% Each Year
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
1958
1956
1954
1952
1950
1948
1946
0
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
1958
1956
1954
1952
1950
1948
1946
Miles per Capita 2004-2012 Fell Each Year
12,000
Peak
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Source: Federal Highway Administration
12-month moving average to Feb 2013
Vehicle-miles traveled declined 23% among 16 to 34 year olds from
2001 to 2009 (2009 NHTS)
Vehicle trips per driver
Avg. trip distance
0%
-2%
-4%
-6%
-6%
-8%
-10%
-12%
-14%
-16%
-15%
The share of
16 to 24
year-olds
with a driver’s
license is now
the lowest
since at least
1963.



Wisconsinites – like
Americans in general – are
driving less.
The average Wisconsinite
now drives about as much
in a year as he or she did
in 1997 - the middle of
President Bill Clinton’s
administration.
Total vehicle travel has
fallen by 3 percent since
2004.
Population projections of percentage of elderly (65 and
above) in Wisconsin
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2010
(actual)
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040



Why do future driving trends matter?
Why are the Millennials especially important?
What might the future look like?




Transportation projects take years to decades to go from
concept to reality and have useful life of several decades.
Transportation funding is indirectly tied to the number of miles
people drive through the gasoline tax.
Transportation decisions have been guided by the assumption
that the number of miles driven will go in one direction: up.
That’s not happening anymore.
Will the change in driving patterns persist? And how must
transportation policy change if it does?
 The
Driving Boom era saw steady
increases in labor force
participation, vehicle ownership,
and driver’s licensure.
 Those
trends have peaked and, in
some cases, reversed.


The share of
population of peak
driving age (35-54)
increased from 21%
to 29% from 1980
to 2000.
Has begun to
decline and will fall
to 25% by 2020.
U.S. Census Bureau
 Driving Boom coincided with sustained period of
(mostly) low gas prices – now ended.
 Relationship between VMT and GDP growth not as
robust as before. Economic growth<>VMT growth.
U.S. Energy Information Administration
FHWA; Bureau of Economic Analysis;
U.S. Census Bureau


Major headwinds
in the way of
further growth of
per-capita VMT.
The Driving Boom
is over.
 The largest generation in the United States.
 Heading into peak driving years by the end of
decade.
Luis Alvarez, istockphoto.com
Millennials will almost
certainly drive more perperson than they do now as
they move into more
driving-intensive phases of
life and as the economy
improves.
The important question is:
Will they drive more than
their parents?
2009 National Household Travel Survey




They are twice as likely as
Boomers or Gen X’ers to want to
live in an urban area. (RCLCO)
They use non-driving modes more
than previous generations.
They are less willing to make
sacrifices to sustain a driving
lifestyle. (Cars less important than
technology.)
They are the first mobile
technology generation. (25% of
Millennials report having used
mobile apps to reduce driving vs.
9% of those 55 and up)
◦
(Zipcar/KRC Research)
“In your daily routine, losing which
piece of technology would have the
greatest negative impact on you?”
100%
90%
80%
70%
Car
60%
50%
Computer
40%
Mobile phone
30%
TV
20%
10%
0%
18-34
55+
Zipcar/KRC Research survey, December 2012.
Developed three simple scenarios based on per-capita driving by
age group from 2009 National Household Travel Survey and
2012 population projections from U.S. Census Bureau.
 Back to the Future: The recent dip in driving is a temporary
blip and people of a given age will go back to driving as much
as they did in 2004.
 Enduring Shift: Recent changes in driving behavior are lasting
and will continue as Millennials and others age.
 Ongoing Decline: Recent changes in driving behavior are just
the beginning of larger changes and a similar change in
driving for each age group will take place between 2009 and
2025 as occurred from 2001 to 2009.

All three scenarios lead to far less driving than
the continuation of Driving Boom-era trends.

All three scenarios lead to significantly lower VMT than
projected in recent official forecasts.
 Less
oil consumption and
pollution.
 Less traffic congestion, less
wear and tear on roads, less
need for highway expansion.


The recent, historically
unprecedented decline in
vehicle travel – coupled
with lower-thananticipated traffic on
recently completed roads –
calls into question whether
massive new investments
in highway expansion are
justified.
Usage of seven recently
completed highways has
not developed as projected
VMT and new highway capacity in Wisconsin since 2000
80
% change in VMT
% change in highway spending
70
Percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Dramatically lower
revenue from the
gas tax (assuming
improved fuel
economy and
declining
purchasing power
due to inflation).
It is too soon to tell which of these futures is
most likely to occur.
Possible futures may exist that are not
presented here.
There are still many important things we don’t
know about how driving trends are changing
… much less how they will change in the
future.
•
•
•
•
It is no longer safe to assume that driving will
increase as it did during the Driving Boom years.
In fact, there is strong reason to believe that is has
peaked for the foreseeable future.
Americans will drive fewer miles than was predicted
just a few years ago … and may drive far fewer
miles if current trends toward reduced driving
continue.
Transportation decisions are still guided by Driving
Boom-era assumptions. Policy priorities no longer
reflect reality.
1. Plan (and invest) for uncertainty
2. Support the desire of Millennials and other
Americans to drive less
3. Revisit plans for new or expanded
highways
4. Refocus the federal role
5. Use transportation revenue where it is
most needed
6. Do our homework
National and local transportation planners have
continually overestimated traffic demand.
 Obsolete models
 Inadequate data
 More regular government travel surveys
 More attention to VMT trends and scenarios
Historic Transportation Budgets and Budget
Proposals
$5,000,000,000.00
$4,000,000,000.00
$3,000,000,000.00
Transit
$2,000,000,000.00
Locals
$1,000,000,000.00
Highways
$1997-1999
2003-2005
2013-2015
(Gov. Thompson)
(Gov. Doyle)
Proposed Budget
The 10% Solution
Bruce Speight
WISPIRG and WISPIRG Foundation
[email protected]
www.wispirg.org
www.wispirgfoundation.org



Driving Boom is over. Stop assuming its
return lies around the corner.
We don’t know what will replace it.
Dealing with uncertainty:
◦ Take post-Driving Boom data seriously
◦ Prioritize projects that make sense for any scenario
◦ Factor uncertainty into cost-benefit calculations
with PPPs



Millennials will be the main beneficiaries and
ultimate financiers of any new transportation
projects.
Some cities racing to build out transit, bike
share and other infrastructure and zoning to
enable non-driving choices.
Most of nation’s transportation policies still
make new highway investment easier than
alternatives.



Expand transportation choices as a priority like
building the Interstate Highway System was.
Reassess state and local auto-oriented planning
and zoning rules.
Refocus federal investment infrastructure that
received less attention during Driving Boom.
Also supports Baby Boomers’ changing mobility
needs for transit, paratransit.



Large portion of highway spending in recent
years went to expansion rather than system
preservation
Lots of “legacy projects” in the pipeline,
approved based on obsolete projections
VMT won’t return to 2007 levels for years, if
ever. This is an opportunity:
◦ Reevaluate projects and long-term plans
◦ Refuse additional resources if highway-expansion
projects don’t make sense at lower-VMT scenarios
Enable and invest in strategic national
priorities




Bring highways and transit to good state of
repair by certain date
Enable multiple modes for communities
Encourage innovation in Internet-connected
solutions
Build on new mandated performance metrics
Tomorrow’s infrastructure should reflect
tomorrow’s needs, not the structure of
yesterday’s funding silos.
State and federal rules restricting use of gastax dollars for other transportation uses should
be eliminated.
Download