ERP

SEMINAR REPORT 08 ELECTRONIC ROAD PRICING
INTRODUCTION
Road Pricing means that motorists pay directly for
driving on a particular roadway or in a particular area. Value
Pricing is a marketing term which emphasizes that road
pricing can directly benefit motorists through reduced
congestion or improved roadways.
Economists have long advocated Road Pricing as an

efficient and equitable way to pay roadway costs, Fund
Transportation Programs, and encourage more efficient
transportation (Market Principles). Road Pricing has two
general objectives: revenue generation and congestion
management. They differ in several ways, as compared in the
table below.
Table 1 Comparing Road Pricing Objectives

Revenue Generation Congestion
Management
• Generates funds. • Reduces peak-period
• Rates set to maximize vehicle traffic.
revenues or recover • Is a TDM strategy.
specific costs. • Revenue not dedicated
• Revenue often dedicated to roadway projects.
to roadway projects. • Requires variable rates
• Shifts to other routes (higher during congested
and modes not desired periods).
(because this reduces • Travel shifts to other
revenues). modes and times
considered desirable.
DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Different types of Road Pricing

Different types of Road Pricing are described below.
Road Tolls
Tolls are a common way to fund highway and bridge

improvements. Such tolls are a fee-for-service, with revenues
dedicated to roadway project costs. This is considered more
equitable and economically efficient than other roadway
improvement funding options which cause non-users to help
pay for improvements (Metschies, 2001). Tolling is often
proposed in conjunction with road privatization (i.e.,
highways built by private companies and funded by tolls).
Tolls are often structured to maximize revenues and success is
measured in terms of project cost recovery. Tolling authorities
may discourage development of alternative routes or modes.
Congestion Pricing
Congestion Pricing (also called Value Pricing) refers

to variable road tolls (higher prices under congested
conditions and lower prices at less congested times and
locations) intended to reduce peak-period traffic volumes to
optimal levels. Tolls can vary based on a fixed schedule, or
they can be dynamic, meaning that rates change depending
on the level of congestion that exists at a particular time. It
can be implemented when road tolls are implemented to raise
revenue, or on existing roadways as a demand management
strategy to avoid the need to add capacity. Some highways
have a combination of unpriced lanes and Value Priced lanes,
allowing motorists to choose between driving in congestion
and paying a toll for an uncongested trip. This is a type off
Responsive Pricing, meaning that it is intended to change
consumption patterns (Vickrey, 1994).

Cordon (Area) Tolls
Cordon tolls are fees paid by motorists to drive in a

particular area, usually a city center. Some cordon tolls only
apply during peak periods, such as weekdays. This can be
done by simply requiring vehicles driven within the area to
display a pass, or by tolling at each entrance to the area.
HOT Lanes
High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes are High

Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes that also allow use by a
limited number of low occupancy vehicles if they pay a toll
(Stockton and Daniels, 2000; Poole and Orski, 2001). It is a
type of Managed Lane (WSDOT, 2001; Goodin, 2005). This
allows more vehicles to use HOV lanes while maintaining an
incentive for mode shifting, and raises revenue. HOT lanes are
often proposed as a compromise between HOV lanes and
Road Pricing.
Vehicle Use Fees
Distance-Based Charges such as mileage fees can be

used to fund roadways or reduce traffic impacts, including
congestion, pollution and accident risk. A proposal by the UK
Commission for Integrated Transport (CFIT, 2002) proposes
that existing vehicle registration fees and fuel taxes be
replaced by a variable road user charge using GPS-based
Pricing Methods, as a way to reduce traffic congestion and
more equitably reflect the roadway costs imposed by each
vehicle. Pay-As-You-Drive Vehicle Insurance, prorates
premiums by mileage so vehicle insurance becomes a variable
cost, which gives motorists an incentive to reduce traffic
impacts, but provides no additional revenue.
Road Space Rationing

A variation of road pricing is to ration peak period

vehicle-trips or vehicle-miles using a revenue-neutral credit-
based system. For example, each resident in a region could
receive credits for 100 peak-period vehicle-miles each or $20
worth of congestion fees each month (Viegas, 2001;
Kockelman and Kalmanje, 2004; Kalmanje and Kockelman,
2004). Residents can use the credits themselves, or trade or
sell them to somebody else. The result is a form of congestion
pricing in which the benefits are captured by residents rather
than road owners or governments.
Table 2 summarizes these different categories of road pricing

and their objectives. Some provide revenues, some reduce
peak-period congestion, some reduce total traffic impacts
(congestion, pollution, accident risks, road and parking
facility costs, etc.), and some help achieve a combination of
objectives.
Table 2 Road Pricing Categories

Name Description Objectives
Road toll A fixed fee for driving on a To raise
(fixed particular road. revenues.
rates)
Congestion A fee that is higher under To raise
pricing congested conditions than revenues and
(time- uncontested conditions, reduce traffic
variable) intended to shift some congestion.
vehicle traffic to other
routes, times and modes.
Cordon Fees charged for driving in To reduce
fees a particular area. congestion in
major urban
centers.

HOT lanes A high-occupant-vehicle To favor HOVs

lane that accommodates a compared with
limited number of lower- a general-
purpose lane,
occupant vehicles for a fee.
and to raise
revenues
compared with
an HOV lane.
Distance- A vehicle use fee based on To raise
based fees how many miles a vehicle revenues and
is driven. reduce various
traffic
problems.
Pay-As- Prorates premiums by To reduce
You-Drive mileage so vehicle various traffic
insurance insurance becomes a problems,
variable cost. particularly
accidents.
Road space Revenue-neutral credits To reduce
rationing used to ration peak-period congestion on
roadway capacity. major
roadways or
urban centers.
This table summarizes the major categories of road pricing.
Road pricing impacts vary depending on various

factors, including the type of pricing, how it is structured, and
the transportation and geographic conditions in which it is
implemented. For example, a fixed road toll may do little to
reduce congestion if alternative routes and modes are poor,
but it may provide significant congestion reductions if
transportation alternatives (such as ridesharing, transit and
telecommuting) are relatively attractive, and so a modest fee
will cause a relatively large mode shift. In some situations,
pricing will shift traffic and congestion problems to other
routes or
areas. Table 3 summarizes the benefits of various pricing

strategies. Actual impacts will vary depending on

circumstances. For example, in some situations HOT lanes
will have greater congestion reduction impacts than others.
The point is that these differences should be considered when
evaluating and selecting pricing option
Table 3 Road Pricing Benefits
Strateg Revenu Congesti Polluti Increas
y e on on ed
Genera Reducti Reducti Safety
tion on ons
Road 3 2 1 1
toll
(fixed
rates)
Congesti 2 3 2 1
on
pricing
(time-
variable
)
HOT 1 2 1 0
lanes
Cordon 2 3 1 1
fees
Distanc 3 2 2 2
e-based
fees
Pay-As- 0 2 2 3
You-
Drive
insuran
ce
Road 0 3 1 1
Space
Rationi
ng
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0
indicates no impact or mixed impacts.

How it is Implemented
Road Pricing is usually implemented by public or
private highway agencies or local authorities as part of
transportation project funding packages, for transportation
demand management, or through privatization of highway
construction and operations. Implementation may require
approval of other levels of government (for example, U.S.
federal law restricts tolling on the Interstate Highway
System).
Road Pricing can be implemented at various scales:

• Point: Pricing a particular point in the road network, such as
a bridge or a tunnel.
• Facility: Pricing a roadway section.
• Corridor: Pricing all roadways in a corridor.
• Cordon: Pricing all roads in an area, such as a central
business district.
• Regional: Pricing roadways at regional centers or
throughout a region.
A variety of Pricing Methods can be used to collect

fees, as summarized in Table 5. Newer electronic pricing
systems tend to have lower costs, greater user convenience, and
more price adjustability, making Road Pricing more feasible.

Type Descri Equi Oper User Pric

pt-ion p- at-ing Incon e
ment Costs ve- Adj
Costs nience us-
tabil
ity
Motori Low Low Mediu Poor
Pass sts m to
must medi
purcha um.
se a
pass to
enter a
cordon
ed
area.
Toll Motori High High High Medi
Booths sts stop um
and to
pay at high.
a
booth.
Electro An High Mediu Low High
nic electro m
Tolling nic
system
bills
users
as they
pass a
point
in the
road
system.
Optica An High Mediu Low High
l optical m
Vehicl system
e bills

Recog users
nition as they
pass a
point
in the
road
system.
GPS GPS is High Mediu Low High
used to m
track
vehicle
locatio
n. Data
are
automa
tically
transm
itted to
a
central
comput
er that
bills
users.
Table 5 Summary of Fee Collection Options (Pricing

Methods)
This table summarizes various pricing methods. Newer
methods tend to have lower costs, greater convenience and
price adjustability, making them more cost effective and
politically acceptable.
Road pricing should be implemented in conjunction

with improved transportation options, so consumers have
viable alternatives. For example, congestion pricing can be
implemented with Transit and Rideshare and Flextime
improvements so motorists have more ways to avoid driving on
the priced road. This reduces user inconvenience, reduces the
fee needed to achieve a given reduction in vehicle traffic, and

increases its effectiveness at reducing traffic congestion.

Travel Impacts
The travel impacts of Road Pricing depend on the
type and magnitude of fees, where it is applied, what alternative
routes and modes are available, and what is assumed to be the
alternative or Base Case (TDM Evaluation).
• Pricing roads that would otherwise be free can shift vehicle

travel to unpriced routes, alternative modes and closer
destinations, and reduce vehicle trip frequency.
• Congestion Pricing (i.e., higher rates during peak periods)

can cause vehicle trips to shift from peak to off-peak periods.
• If Road Pricing is used to fund roadway capacity expansion

that would not otherwise occur, it may increase total vehicle
travel (Rebound Effect).
• Road Pricing reduces total vehicle travel if used to fund

roadway capacity expansion that would otherwise be unpriced
(funded through other taxes).
• The better the travel alternatives (transit, ridesharing and

cycling), the more Road Pricing will cause mode shifts.
The travel impact of HOT lanes depends on the price structure

used. If the price is too low, the facility will experience
congestion, reducing the performance for both single-
occupant vehicle users and HOV users, resulting in reduced
transit and ridesharing. It is therefore important for the sake
of overall transportation system efficiency that HOT facilities
be managed to favor HOV performance.
Several studies have investigated the sensitivity of vehicle

travel to road tolls (Transport Elasticities). These indicate a
price

elasticity of –0.1 to –0.4 for urban highways (i.e., a 10%

increase in toll rates reduces vehicle use by 1-4%), although
this can vary depending on the type of toll, type of traveler and
other factors (TCRP, 2003). Mekky (1999) finds that traffic
volumes and trip lengths decline significantly if tolls exceed
10¢ per vehicle kilometer (Canadian dollars). A state-
preference survey of suburban automobile long-distance
commuters indicates that financial incentives are the most
effective strategy for reducing automobile trips. A US$3.00
per round-trip road toll is predicted to reduce automobile
commuting by 25% (Washbroo, 2002). One study estimates
that congestion pricing can reduce up to 5.7% of VMT and up
to 4.2% of vehicle trips in a region (Apogee, 1994).
Table 6 Estimated Fee To Reduce Vehicle Trips 10%

(May and Milne, 2000)
Type of Road Fee Required to
Pricing Reduce Trips 10%
Cordon (pence per 45
crossing)
Distance (pence per 20
kilometer)
Time (pence per 11
minute)
Congestion (pence 200
per minute delay)
Road pricing impacts and benefits depend on the price

structure. Ubbels and Verhoef (2006) predict that road
pricing in The Netherlands would reduce car trips by 6% to
15%. A flat kilometre fee primarily affects social trips and
tends to cause total trips to decline and shifts to nonmotorized
modes. A peak-period fee primarily affects commute trips,
and tends to cause a
combination of shifts in time and mode, and working at home.
May and Milne (2000) used an urban traffic model to
compare the impacts of cordon tolls, distance pricing, time
pricing and congestion pricing. They found significant

differences in the effectiveness that particular size fee would

have in achieving TDM objectives. Table 6 shows the
estimated price level required to achieve a 10% reduction in
regional vehicle trips. They conclude that time-based pricing
provides the greatest overall benefits, followed by distance-
based pricing, congestion pricing and cordon pricing.
Table 7 Impacts of Congestion Pricing, Year 2010

(Harvey and Deakin, 1997, Table B.6)
Regio A V Tri Del F R Reve
n vg M ps ay ue O nue
. T l G
Fe
e
Bay 13 - - - - - $2,27
Area ¢ 2.8 2.7 27. 8. 6.9 4
% % 0% 3 %
%
Sacram 8¢ - - - - - $443
ento 1.5 1.4 16. 4. 3.9
% % 5% 8 %
%
San 9¢ - - - - - $896
Diego 1.7 1.6 18. 5. 4.2
% % 5% 4 %
%
South 19 - - - - - $7,34
Coast ¢ 3.3 3.1 32. 9. 8.1 3
% % 0% 6 %
%
Avg. Fee = average congestion fee per mile applied to vehicle
travel on congested roads. VMT = change in total vehicle
mileage. Trips = change in total vehicle trips. Delay = change
in congestion delay. Fuel = change in fuel consumption. ROG
= a criteria air pollutant. Revenue = annual revenue in
millions of 1996 U.S. dollars. See report for additional notes
and data.

A small reduction in urban-peak traffic volumes can provide a

large reduction in congestion delays. Deakin and Harvey
(1997) model the effect of congestion pricing on
transportation impacts in four major urban regions in
California. Table 7 summarizes their results for the year 2010.
It indicates, for example, that in the South Coast (Los Angeles)
region, a fee averaging 19¢ per mile driven in congested
conditions would reduce total vehicle trips by about 3.3%, but
congestion delay would decline by 32%. In an experiment
involving time- and mileage-based pricing O’Mahony,
Geraghty and Humphreys (2000) found that motorists
reduced peak-period trips by 22%, and total trips by 6%, peak
mileage by 25% and total mileage by 12%.
Table 8 Travel Impact Summary

Toll Congestion
Travel Road Pricing Comments
Impact Fundin
g
Reduces 1 2 Impacts on
total total travel
traffic. depend on the
price
structure and
the quality of
alternatives.
Reduces 2 3 Fixed tolls
peak cause
period moderate
traffic. peak
reductions.
Shifts peak 0 3 Fixed tolls
to off-peak provide no
periods. incentive to
shift.

Shifts 2 3 Congestion
automobile pricing
travel to supports use
alternative of travel
modes. alternatives,
toll roads do
not.
Improves -1 0 Additional
access, roadway
reduces capacity can
the need encourage
for travel. low-density
urban
expansion.
Increased 2 3 Encourages
ridesharin ridesharing
g. and may fund
rideshare
programs.
public transit use
transit. and may fund
transit
improvement
s.
cycling. cycling and
may fund
cycling
improvement
s.
walking. walking and
may fund
pedestrian
improvement
s.

Telework. telework.
Reduced 1 1 May have
freight some effect.
traffic.
Benefits and Costs:
Road Pricing benefits and costs vary depending on

travel impacts, what is assumed to be the alternative, and
other factors (Pricing Evaluation).
Congestion Pricing is a particularly effective Congestion

Reduction strategy. Many economists consider urban traffic
congestion virtually unsolvable without some sort of
congestion pricing (Goodwin, 1997). Shifting vehicle traffic to
other routes or time provides few other benefits, causes
spillover impacts (increased traffic on other roads), and may
increase crash costs (Shefer and Rietvald, 1997).
Road Pricing that reduces total vehicle travel can reduce road
and parking facility costs, increase road safety, protect the
environment, encourage more efficient land use, and improve
community Livability. The central London congestion
charging scheme resulted in a 12% reduction in total vehicle–
kilometres, and a 30% reduction in car traffic, with a 28%
reduction in crashes (Richards, 2006). Moped and motorbike
journeys increased 10-15%, while crashes decreased 4%, and
pedestrian crash injuries declined by 6%.
Road Pricing that funds additional highway capacity can

increase total automobile travel (Rebound Effects), and so
may increase downstream traffic congestion, parking costs,
crashes, pollution, and sprawl. Expanding highway size and
traffic volumes tends to reduce the livability of communities
that it cuts through (Levine and Garb, 2000). Ragazzi (2006)
argues that highway privatization can result in fragmented

planning and inefficient pricing.
Value Pricing and HOT lanes can increase Transportation

Options. On unpriced roads, travelers have no alternative to
being delayed by congestion. Value Pricing and HOT lanes
allow travelers to choose between driving in congestion,
avoiding congestion by ridesharing, or avoiding congestion by
paying a
toll. This lets individual consumers choose the option that
best meets their needs for a particular trip. It also tends to
improve transportation choice indirectly by increasing
demand for ridesharing and transit services (Kain, 1994).
Road Pricing increases motorists’ direct costs, but these are

economic transfers; payments by motorists are offset by
revenues to the tolling agency or government (Evaluating
Pricing). Overall consumer impacts from Road Pricing depend
on how revenues are used. If returned as rebates or reductions
in other taxes, or used in other ways that consumers value,
consumers may be no worse of financially.
Resource costs are primarily the transaction costs of collecting

fees, including costs to highway agencies and to users. Toll
collection costs range from about 10% of total tolling revenue
for electronic toll collection, up to 40% for tollbooths. Toll
collection that requires motorists to stop at booths causes
motorists delays and increases energy consumption and air
pollution. New electronic tolling can reduce these transaction
costs (Pricing Methods).
Table 9 Benefit Summary – Toll Funded Roads

Objective Rating Comments
Congestion 3 Increases road capacity and
Reduction reduces demand.
Road & -2 Increases total vehicle travel
Parking and facility costs.
Savings
Consumer -1 Increases direct consumer
Savings costs, but reduces indirect road

costs.
Transport 1 Increases motorists’ choice if
Choice untolled roads are also
available or if pricing improves
travel alternatives.
Road Safety -1 Induced travel and higher
traffic speeds can increase
crash costs.
Environmental -1 Induced travel increases
Protection emissions.
Efficient Land -1 Induced travel can increase
Use sprawl.
Community -1 New urban highways may have
Livability negative impacts.
Equity Impacts:
Road Pricing has a variety of equity impacts. It tends

to increase horizontal equity by charging users for the
roadway costs they impose, and reducing cross subsidies
among motorists (from those who don’t drive during peak
periods to those who do).
Some critics argue that Road Pricing represents “double

taxation” since motorists pay road user fees such as fuel taxes
and vehicle registration fees. However, existing road user
charges in North America are insufficient to cover total
roadway costs (FHWA, 1997). Such fees are far lower than the
marginal cost of driving under urban-peak conditions.
Increasing urban highway capacity typically costs 10-50¢ per
peak-period vehicle-mile (Transportation Costs). Direct user
fees are generally the most equitable way to fund
improvements because they can represent the actual cost of
providing capacity on a particular stretch of roadway, and so

avoid cross-subsidies from motorists who do not drive under

such conditions.
Road Pricing can impose a financial burden on motorists

dependent on that roadway. This impact generally declines
over
time as consumers adjust to new prices, and can be minimized
if Road Pricing implementation is predictable and gradual.
For example, if it became public policy that all new suburban
highway capacity expansion projects will be paid through user
tolls, people could take that into account when considering
whether to purchase a home that would require frequent
highway trips.
Road tolls represent a greater financial burden on lower-

income motorists than on higher-income motorists, but they
are not necessarily more regressive than other road funding
options, such as fuel taxes or general taxes. Whether a toll is
regressive overall depends on how much lower-income
consumers drive on such highways, the quality of travel
alternatives, and how revenues are used (Giuliano, 1994;
Litman, 1996). If Affordability is a major concern, Road
Pricing programs can include discounts or a certain number of
free passes provided to lower-income households. There is a
long history of incorporating vertical equity objectives into
transportation policies (i.e., insuring that lower income people
have Basic Access). Adam Smith, one of the founders of
modern economics, wrote that, “When the toll upon carriages
of luxury coaches, post chaises, &c. is made somewhat higher
in proportion to their weight than upon carriages of
necessary use, such as carts, wagons, and the indolence and
vanity of the rich is made to contribute in a very easy
manner to the relief of the poor, by rendering cheaper the
transportation of heavy goods to all the different parts of the
country.” (Smith, 1776, chapter 5).
Rajé (2003) examines the equity impacts of road pricing and

workplace parking levies with focus groups of vulnerable
groups (low income, elderly, disabled, urban residents) and

travel survey analysis. The results indicate that automobile

pricing impacts depend on how revenues are used, how prices
are structured and priced areas are defined; and the quality of
travel options available, and that citizen support for road
pricing increases if they feel that these equity concerns are
addressed.
Even lower-income motorists are sometimes willing

to pay for time savings, indicating that pricing strategies that
prioritize trips can provide a transportation choice that is
valued by motorists of all income levels. For example, user
surveys of the SR 91 Value Priced lanes, in which motorist can
pay a premium to drive on a less congested lane, show that
about a quarter of the lowest-income class of motorist (less
than $25,000 annual income) use the lanes on a frequent
basis (Sullivan, 1998). Paying such a toll may be worthwhile to
allow a working parent to avoid fines at their childcare center
or to reach an urgent appointment (Giuliano, 1994). Even if a
particular motorist seldom uses such an option, its existence
may be highly valued, just as ship passengers value having
lifeboats that they have will never actually be used (Evaluating
Transportation Diversity).
Road Pricing can also benefit transportation-

disadvantaged people by reducing the subsidies they pay
toward highways and by increasing their travel choices (Kain,
1994). HOT lanes in particular can provide equity benefits by
improving mobility options for transit and rideshare users
(Levine and Garb, 2000). Congestion pricing and HOT
facilities can improve basic mobility by giving priority to high
value trips.
Table 11 Equity Summary – Toll Funded Roads

Criteria Rating Comments
Treats everybody -1 Mixed. Impacts some
equally. people more than others.
Individuals bear 3 Yes. Charges users directly
the costs they for their road costs.
impose.
Progressive with -1 Regressive, but not

respect to income. necessarily more regressive
than other funding options.
Depends on travel
alternatives.
Benefits 1 May improve travel
transportation alternatives.
disadvantaged.
Improves basic 2 Improves access by
mobility. automobile and other
modes.
indicates no impact or mixed impacts
Applications:
Toll funding is appropriate for any major bridge or

highway improvement (Samuel, 2000), particularly if the
improvements primarily benefit higher-income households,
so there is little equity justification for subsidies. However,
several studies suggest that the potential market for private
toll roads is limited (Muller, 2001; GAO, 2004). Congestion
pricing and HOT facilities are justified on any roadway that
experiences congestion, such as urban highways and major
commercial centers.
Table 13 Application Summary - Toll Funded

Roads
Geographic Ratin Organization Ratin
g g
Large urban 3 Federal 3
region. government.
High-density, 3 State/provincial 3
urban. government.
Medium-density, 3 Regional 3
urban/suburban. government.
Town. 2 Municipal/local 2
government.
Low-density, 2 Business 1

rural. Associations/TM
A.
Commercial 2 Individual 1
center. business.
Residential 1 Developer. 1
neighborhood.
Resort/recreatio 2 Neighborhood 0
n area. association.
Campus. 0
Ratings range from 0 (not appropriate) to 3 (very
appropriate).

Electronic toll collection

Electronic Toll Collection (ETC), an adaptation
of military "identification friend or foe" technology, aims to
eliminate the delay on toll roads. It is a technological
implementation of a road pricing concept. It determines
whether the cars passing are enrolled in the program, alerts
enforcers for those that are not, and debits electronically the
accounts of registered cars without their stopping, or even
opening a window.
Norway has been the world's pioneer in the

widespread implementation of this technology. ETC was first
introduced in Bergen, in 1986, operating together with
traditional tollbooths. In 1991, Trondheim introduced the
world's first use of 100% full speed unaided electronic tolling.
Today Norway has 25 toll roads operating with EFC
(Electronic Fee Collection), as the Norwegian technology is
called (see AutoPASS). The United States is the other country
with widespread use of ETC in several states, but always
mantaining the option of manual collection.
Overview
In some urban settings, automated gates are in use in

electronic-toll lanes, with 5 mph (8 km/h) legal limits on
speed (and 2 to 3 times that as practical limits even with
practice and extreme concentration); in other settings, 20
mph (35 km/h) legal limits are not uncommon. However, in
other areas such as Dallas, Texas, the Garden State Parkway in
New Jersey, and at various locations in Florida, cars can travel
through electronic lanes at full speed. Illinois' Open Road
Tolling program features 274 contigous miles of barrier-free
roadways, where I-PASS or EZ Pass users continue to travel at
highway speeds through toll plazas, while cash payers pull off
the main roadway to pay at tollbooths. Currently over 75% of
Illinois' 1.4 million daily drivers use an I-PASS.

Enforcement is accomplished by a combination of a

camera which takes a picture of the car and a radio frequency
keyed computer which searches for a drivers window/bumper
mounted transponder to verify & collect payment. The system
sends a notice and fine to cars that pass through without
having an active account or paying a toll.
Factors hindering full-speed electronic collection include:
• significant non-participation, entailing lines in manual

lanes and disorderly traffic patterns as the electronic- and
manual- collection cars "sort themselves out" into their
respective lanes
• problems with pursuing toll evaders
• need, in at least some current (barrier) systems, to confine
vehicles in lanes, while interacting with the collection devices,
and the dangers of high-speed collisions with the confinement
structures
• vehicle hazards to toll employees present in some
electronic-collection areas
• in some areas at some times, long lines form even to pass
through the electronic-collection lanes
• costs and other issues raised when retrofitting existing toll
collection facilities
Even if line lengths are the same in electronic lanes

as in manual ones, electronic tolls save registered cars time:
eliminating the stop at a window or toll machine, between
successive cars passing the collection machine, means a fixed-
length stretch of their journey past it is travelled at a higher
average speed, and in a lower time. This is at least a
psychological improvement, even if the length of the lines in
automated lanes is sufficient to make the no-stop-to-pay
savings insignificant compared to time still lost due waiting in
line to pass the toll gate.
Despite these limitations, however, it is important to

recognize that throughput increases if delay at the toll gate is
reduced (i.e. if the tollbooth can serve more vehicles per
hour). The greater the throughput of any toll lane, the fewer
lanes required, so expensive construction can be deferred.

Specifically, the toll-collecting authorities have incentives to
resist pressure to limit the fraction of electronic lanes in order
to limit the length of manual-lane lines. In the short term, the
greater the fraction of automated lanes, the lower the cost of
operation (once the capital costs of automating are
amortized). In the long term, the greater the relative
advantage that registering and turning one's vehicle into an
electronic-toll one provides, the faster cars will be converted
from manual-toll use to electronic-toll use, and therefore the
fewer manual-toll cars will drag down average speed and thus
capacity.
In some countries, some toll-collection companies

who use similar technology have set up or are setting up
roaming arrangements between each other. This permits one
to drive a vehicle on another operator's tolled road with the
tolls that are incurred on that road being charged to the
driver's toll-payment account that they have with their home
operator. An example is the United States E-ZPass tag, which
is accepted on toll roads, bridges and tunnels in over a dozen
states from Virginia to Maine. Another is in Australia where a
vehicle that has a CityLink e-Tag device can be driven to
Sydney along of Sydney's motorways, such as the M5 South
Western Motorway and pass through the toll barrier smoothly
and quickly while that M5 toll is debited to the CityLink
account. There is a similar device in France, called Liber-T, to
pass through the toll barrier of almost every payroads of the
country.
These factors herald more, and more effective, use of

electronic tolls.

FIG. THE ERP

Use in Urban Areas and

Congestion pricing
The most revolutionary application of ETC is in the
urban context of congested cities, allowing charging tolls
without vehicles having to slow down. This application made
feasible to concession to the private sector the construction
and operation of urban freeways, as well as the introduction
or improvement of "congestion pricing", as a policy to restrict
auto travel in downtown areas.
In 2006, Santiago (Chile) implemented the world's

first 100% full speed electronic tolling with transponders
crossing through the city's core (CBD) in a stretch of a
concessioned urban freeway (Costanera Norte). Similar
schemes were previously implemented but only on bypass or
outer ring urban freeways in several cities around the world:
Toronto in 1997 (407 ETR), several roads in Norway (Auto
PASS), Melbourne in 2000 (City Link), and Tel Aviv also in
2000 (Highway 6).
Congestion charging schemes were implemented to

enter the downtown area using ETC technology and/or
cameras and video recognition technology to get the plate
numbers in several cities around the world: Norway's three
major cities (see Urban Tolling in Norway): Bergen (1986),
Oslo (1990), and Trondheim (1991), Singapore in 1998 (see
Electronic Road Pricing, as an upgrade to the world's first
congestion pricing scheme implemented with manual control
in 1975 - see also Area Licensing Scheme), London in 2003
and extended in 2007 (see London congestion charge), and
Stockholm between 2006 and 2007 (see Stockholm
congestion tax).

Technologies
Electronic toll collection systems rely on four major
components, namely Automated Vehicle Identification,
Automated Vehicle Classification, Transaction Processing, and
Violation Enforcement. This section discusses each of these
further.
The four components are somewhat independent,

and, in fact, some toll agencies have contracted out functions
separately. In some cases, this division of functions has
resulted in difficulties. In one notable example, the New
Jersey E-ZPass regional consortium's Violation Enforcement
contractor did not have access to the Violation Processing
contractor's database of customers. This, together with
installation problems in the Automated Vehicle Identification
system, led to many customers receiving erroneous violation
notices, and a violation system whose net income, after
expenses, was negative, as well as customer dissatisfaction.
Automated Vehicle Identification
Automated Vehicle Identification (AVI) is the process

of determining the identity of a vehicle subject to tolls. The
majority of toll facilities record the passage of vehicles
through a limited number of toll gates. At such facilities, the
task is then to identify the vehicle in the gate area.
Some early AVI systems used barcodes affixed to each vehicle,

to be read optically at the toll booth. Optical systems proved to
have poor reading reliability, especially when faced with
inclement weather and dirty vehicles.
Most current AVI systems rely on radio-frequency

identification (RFID), where an antenna at the toll gate
communicates with a transponder on the vehicle via
Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC). RFID tags
have proved to have excellent accuracy, and can be read at
highway speeds. The

major disadvantage is the cost of equipping each vehicle with

a transponder, which can be a major start-up expense, if paid
by the toll agency, or a strong customer deterrent, if paid by
the customer.
To avoid the need for transponders, some systems, notably the

407 ETR (Electronic Toll Route) near Toronto, use automatic
number plate recognition. Here, a system of cameras captures
images of vehicles passing through tolled areas, and the image
of the number plate is extracted and used to identify the
vehicle. This allows customers to use the facility without any
advance interaction with the toll agency. The disadvantage is
that fully automatic recognition has a significant error rate,
leading to billing errors and the cost of transaction processing
(which requires locating and corresponding with the
customer) can be significant. Systems that incorporate a
manual review stage have much lower error rates, but require
a continuing staffing expense.
A few toll facilities cover a very wide area, making fixed toll
gates impractical. The most notable of these is a truck tolling
system in Germany. This system instead uses Global
Positioning System location information to identify when a
vehicle is located on a tolled Autobahn. Implementation of
this system turned out to be far lengthier and more costly than
expected.
Automated Vehicle Classification
Automated Vehicle Classification (AVC) is closely

related to Automated Vehicle Identification (AVI). Most toll
facilities charge different rates for different types of vehicles,
making it necessary to distinguish the vehicles passing
through the toll facility.
The simplest method is to store the vehicle class in the

customer record, and use the AVI data to look up the vehicle
class. This is low-cost, but limits user flexibility, in such cases
as the automobile owner who occasionally tows a trailer.

More complex systems use a variety of sensors. Inductive

sensors embedded in the road surface can determine the gaps
between vehicles, to provide basic information on the
presence of a vehicle. Treadles permit counting the number of
axles as a vehicle passes over them and, with offset-treadle
installations, also detect dual-tire vehicles. Light-curtain laser
profilers record the shape of the vehicle, which can help
distinguish trucks and trailers.
Transaction Processing
Transaction Processing deals with maintaining

customer accounts, posting toll transactions and customer
payments to the accounts, and handling customer inquiries.
The transaction processing component of some systems is
referred to as a "Customer Service Center". In many respects,
the Transaction Processing function resembles banking, and
several toll agencies have contracted out transaction
processing to a bank.
Customer accounts may be postpaid, where toll transactions

are periodically billed to the customer, or prepaid, where the
customer funds a balance in the account which is then
depleted as toll transactions occur. The prepaid system is
more common, as the small amounts of most tolls makes
pursuit of uncollected debts uneconomic. Most postpaid
accounts deal with this issue by requiring a security deposit,
effectively rendering the account a prepaid one.
Violation enforcement
A Violation Enforcement System (VES) is useful in

reducing unpaid tolls, as an unmanned toll gate otherwise
represents a tempting target for toll evasion. Several methods
can be used to deter toll violators.
Police patrols at toll gates can be highly effective, as being

stopped by the police is quite memorable for the violator. In
addition, in most jurisdictions, the legal framework is already
in

place for punishing toll evasion as a traffic infraction.

However, the expense of police patrols makes their use on a
continuous basis impractical, such that the probability of
being stopped is likely to be low enough as to be an
insufficient deterrent.
A physical barrier, such as a gate arm, ensures that all vehicles

passing through the toll booth have paid a toll. Violators are
identified immediately, as the barrier will not permit the
violator to proceed. However, barriers also force authorized
customers, which are the vast majority of vehicles passing
through, to slow to a near-stop at the toll gate, negating much
of the speed and capacity benefits of electronic tolling.
Automatic number plate recognition:
While rarely used as the primary vehicle

identification method, is more commonly used in violation
enforcement. In the VES context, the number of images
collected is much smaller than in the AVI context. This makes
manual review, with its greater accuracy over fully automated
methods, practical. However, many jurisdictions require
legislative action to permit this type of enforcement, as the
number plate identifies only the vehicle, not its operator, and
many traffic enforcement regulations require identifying the
operator in order to issue an infraction.
The system
The scheme consists of ERP gantries located at all

roads linking into Singapore's central business district - areas
within the Central Area such as the Downtown Core. They
may also be located along the expressways and arterial roads
with heavy traffic to discourage usage during peak hours. A
device known as an In-vehicle Unit (IU) is affixed on the lower
right corner of the front windscreen within sight of the driver,
in which a stored-value card, the CashCard, is inserted for
payment of the road usage charges. It is mandatory for all
Singaporean vehicles to be fitted with an IU if they wish to use

the priced roads. Foreigners driving foreign-registered cars on

priced
roads, during the ERP operating hours, could choose to either

rent an IU or pay a daily flat fee of S$5. The gantry system is
actually a system of sensors on 2 gantries, one in front of the
other. Cameras are also attached to the gantries to capture the
rear license plate numbers of vehicles which do not have
sufficient funds in their CashCards.
When a vehicle equipped with an IU passes under an

ERP gantry, a road usage charge is deducted from the
Cashcard. Sensors installed on the gantries communicate with
the IU via a dedicated short-range communication system,
and the deducted amount is displayed to the driver on an LCD
screen of the IU. The deducted amount is dependent on the
time and location (varying from S$0.25 to S$4.00 for
passenger cars). No ERP charge is imposed during off-peak
hours.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd sold this technology

to Singapore, and the project was spearheaded by a
Consortium comprising Philips Singapore Pte Ltd, Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries Ltd, Miyoshi Electronic Corporation and
CEI Systems and Engineering (now known as CSE Global Ltd)
in 1995 through an open tender.

FIG. THE IU UNIT

FIG. THE ERP ON OPERATION

Advantages of Electronic Road

Pricing
1. Raises Revenue for the Government. If the
government gets more tax revenue it can mean either:
• a. other taxes can fall,

• b. the government can spend more on public transport
• c. or the budget deficit can reduce.
Nobody likes new taxes, but whether money is collected from
new or old taxes makes no difference to the disposable income
of the tax payer.
2. Increase social efficiency. In a free market the
consumption of cars are over consumed. When driving people
ignore the negative externalities of congestion and pollution.
The social cost is much greater than the private cost.
Therefore it makes sense for the government to charge a much
higher price of driving in congested areas.
3. Congestion is Inefficient Congestion costs the UK

economy over £20 billion a year in lost output and wasted
time. This should be tackled.
4. Reduce pollution and global warming. Pollution from

cars is a significant contributor to CO2 emissions in the UK.
Road charging should encourage people to look for other
forms of transport which don’t pollute as much.
5. Save Journey Time - If you earn £15 an hour, why would

you not like the idea of paying £7 to get home an hour earlier?
Who enjoys sitting in a traffic jam?

Arguments against Road Pricing

that are no good
1. It is an intrusion on liberty. To drive you need
countless documents. When you use electricity the electric
companies measure exactly how much electricity you use.
When you make a telephone call the telecom company know
exactly whom you ring and charge accordingly. Why should
driving be any different.
2. Govt is just using it to raise money. Is that not a

purpose of income tax, VAT and every other type of tax?
Raising money from a new tax enables other taxes to be
lowered or spending to be increased.
3. Economic output is more important than Global

warming. We shouldn’t worry about the future, the most
important thing is keeping taxes low for the current motorist.
Read the Stern Report.
4. Increases Inequality. This is true to an extent. A road

pricing charge is a higher % of tax for those on low incomes.
But so is the cost of buying a car and petrol. If concern about
equality of distribution is an issue the govt can alter other
taxes and benefits. A tax which increases efficiency need not
be stopped on equality grounds. It is always possible to
compensate the effects to others.

Issues relating to
implementation
A number of issues were raised during the
implementation process which were resolved during the
course of the project.
A major task of the ERP trial was the installation of

equipment on the highway, which required the design,
commissioning and installation of two purpose-built gantries
to hold the microwave reader beacons for the ARR sites.
Gantries are not widely used in the UK and existing structures
(e.g. bridges) were only suitable for the M32 site. The
successful design and installation of the gantries (see figures
below) meant overcoming a number of regulatory and safety
issues, ranging from planning consent to traffic management
works during installation and highway engineering.
Obtaining a specification for the gantries which was

acceptable in both engineering and safety terms proved a
difficult task. In terms of visual intrusion the original
preferred method was to attach brackets to lamp columns to
mount the microwave beacons on gallows at the Avon Ring
Road sites (shown schematically below as Option 1). However
the lamp columns were not of sufficient strength to
accommodate the broad span required for a dual carriageway
location.
The second option was to design and install a

purpose built gantry supported on both sides of the
carriageway (Option 2). However, owing to the speed limit on
this route (80kmh) any structure situated in the central
reservation needed to be protected by barriers, so that in the
event of vehicular collision the gantry would not collapse. The
introduction of such barriers was not a cost effective option
owing to the engineering works required.

Ultimately it was decided to design and manufacture

a purpose built cantilever gantry in tubular steel (Option 3).
As the supporting column was located in the highway verge
(rather than central reservation) it was possible to allow
sufficient distance from the edge of the carriageway to
overcome this safety issue.
The specification and tender documents for the

planned ERP system requested a design that operated with
integrated smart cards. It had been planned that smart cards
could be used in a reader at a P&R site to enable participants
to obtain a reduced charge when using this facility.
Unfortunately, none of the tenders received from system
suppliers were able to offer this integration of in-vehicle unit
(IVU) and smart card. A revised design was planned whereby
smart cards would be used solely in the P&R reader. However
not only would this option require a more complicated system
architecture, but it would also be less user-friendly for
participants in requiring them to use the smart card in
addition to fitting an in-vehicle unit. This was exacerbated by
the layout of the P&R site which is a multi-storey structure,
and in order to provide ease of access a number of smart card
readers would have been required. It was decided therefore to
install a further beacon at the entrance to the P&R site to
provide a seamless system design which required fewer
actions from participants. As a result a revised system
architecture was implemented (shown in Figure 3.13) from
that documented in D5.1.

Owing to the location of the roadside sites and

duration of the trial it was considered more cost and time
effective to use GSM communications rather than landline,

the latter being the charging system contractor’s normal
method. This link between roadside sites and the Central
Control Station proved to be occasionally unreliable which
meant that data stored in the beacons often did not get
automatically transferred to the server PC. However, the
beacons were able to store a large amount of data and there
was therefore no problem of loss of transaction data. Once
GSM communications were restored, through re-booting the
beacons, the data was transferred to the server PC.
It was found during the verification and subsequent

system operation that the IVUs were sensitive to placement on
the car windscreen. Not only was the angle of the windscreen
(and hence IVU mounted upon it) important, but an anti-glare
coating also appeared to cause problems with transmission.
For the small number of participants who experienced
problems with their IVUs exception reports were completed to
ensure that the system was correctly recording all journeys.
Overall, these implementation issues were overcome

which meant not only that the system and trial generated data
for evaluation purposes, but that real-life experience of system
installation, management and operation was gained together
with useful lessons for the future development of such
telematic applications.

FIG. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ERP

ERP

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ERP

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

SEMINAR REPORT 08 ELECTRONIC ROAD PRICING

Economists have long advocated Road Pricing as an

Table 1 Comparing Road Pricing Objectives

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Different types of Road Pricing

Tolls are a common way to fund highway and bridge

Congestion Pricing (also called Value Pricing) refers

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Cordon (Area) Tolls

Cordon tolls are fees paid by motorists to drive in a

High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes are High

Vehicle Use Fees

Distance-Based Charges such as mileage fees can be

Road Space Rationing

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

A variation of road pricing is to ration peak period

Table 2 summarizes these different categories of road pricing

Table 2 Road Pricing Categories

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

HOT lanes A high-occupant-vehicle To favor HOVs

Road pricing impacts vary depending on various

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

strategies. Actual impacts will vary depending on

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Road Pricing can be implemented at various scales:

A variety of Pricing Methods can be used to collect

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Type Descri Equi Oper User Pric

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Table 5 Summary of Fee Collection Options (Pricing

Road pricing should be implemented in conjunction

fee needed to achieve a given reduction in vehicle traffic, and

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

• Pricing roads that would otherwise be free can shift vehicle

• Congestion Pricing (i.e., higher rates during peak periods)

• If Road Pricing is used to fund roadway capacity expansion

• Road Pricing reduces total vehicle travel if used to fund

• The better the travel alternatives (transit, ridesharing and

The travel impact of HOT lanes depends on the price structure

Several studies have investigated the sensitivity of vehicle

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

elasticity of –0.1 to –0.4 for urban highways (i.e., a 10%

Table 6 Estimated Fee To Reduce Vehicle Trips 10%

Road pricing impacts and benefits depend on the price

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

differences in the effectiveness that particular size fee would

Table 7 Impacts of Congestion Pricing, Year 2010

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

A small reduction in urban-peak traffic volumes can provide a

Table 8 Travel Impact Summary

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

DEPT OF E&I G.P.T.C KORATTY

Benefits and Costs:

Road Pricing benefits and costs vary depending on

Congestion Pricing is a particularly effective Congestion

Road Pricing that funds additional highway capacity can

argues that highway privatization can result in fragmented

Value Pricing and HOT lanes can increase Transportation

Road Pricing increases motorists’ direct costs, but these are

Resource costs are primarily the transaction costs of collecting

Table 9 Benefit Summary – Toll Funded Roads

Savings costs, but reduces indirect road

Road Pricing has a variety of equity impacts. It tends

Some critics argue that Road Pricing represents “double