Uber:Jump Report On Shared Ebike Potential

Technical Report
November 2018
Shared ebike potential:

London and New York
Uber
Our ref: 23334001
Client ref:
Technical Report
November 2018
Shared ebike potential:

London and New York
Prepared by: Prepared for:
Steer Uber
883 Boylston Street, 3rd Floor 1455 Market Street
Boston, MA 02116 San Francisco
CA 94103
+1 (617) 391 2300 Client ref:

www.steergroup.com Our ref: 23334001
Steer has prepared this material for Uber. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which
Steer has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other
purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer
shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer
has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the
time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made.
Shared ebike potential: London and New York | Technical Report
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 6

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 6
Analysis approach ............................................................................................................... 6
Shared ebike potential – London ....................................................................................... 7
Shared ebike potential – New York .................................................................................... 7
Best case ............................................................................................................................. 8
1 Introduction.............................................................................................................. 9
Overview............................................................................................................................. 9
Study areas ......................................................................................................................... 9
Switchable trips methodology.......................................................................................... 11
Data sources ..................................................................................................................... 13
2 London ................................................................................................................... 15
Switchable trips ................................................................................................................ 15
Impacts analysis................................................................................................................ 22
Shared ebikes required..................................................................................................... 23
3 New York City ......................................................................................................... 25

Switchable trips – New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area.............................................. 25
Impacts analysis................................................................................................................ 32
Shared ebikes required..................................................................................................... 34
4 Best Case ................................................................................................................ 35

Overview........................................................................................................................... 35
London .............................................................................................................................. 35
New York .......................................................................................................................... 35
A Appendix - New York MTC Region ............................................................................. ii
Study area – New York MTC Region ....................................................................................ii
Switchable trips – New York MTC Region ...........................................................................ii
Impacts analysis – New York MTC Region ........................................................................ viii
New York MTC Region – Best Case ......................................................................................x
November 2018
Figures
Figure 1.1: Greater London Study Area ...................................................................................... 10
Figure 1.2: New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area ................................................................... 11
Figure 1.3: New York MTC Region Study Area ............................................................................ 11
Figure 2.1: Mode share of daily complete trips.......................................................................... 15
Figure 2.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips .............................................................. 16
Figure 2.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike....................................................... 18
Figure 2.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike ........................................ 18
Figure 2.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips .................................................. 19
Figure 2.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike .......... 20
Figure 2.7: Total daily switchable trips ....................................................................................... 21
Figure 2.8: Number of shared ebikes required for Greater London........................................... 24
Figure 3.1: Mode share of daily complete trips.......................................................................... 25
Figure 3.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips .............................................................. 26
Figure 3.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike....................................................... 28
Figure 3.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike ........................................ 28
Figure 3.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips .................................................. 29
Figure 3.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike .......... 30
Figure 3.7: Total daily switchable trips ....................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.8: Number of shared ebikes required for New York City ............................................. 34
Tables
Table 1.1: Switchable trips criteria ............................................................................................. 12
Table 2.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions) .................................................................... 15
Table 2.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips) ................................ 17
Table 2.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode........................................... 19
Table 2.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) .. 20
Table 2.5: Total daily switchable trips ........................................................................................ 21
Table 3.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions) .................................................................... 25
Table 3.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips) ................................ 27
Table 3.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode........................................... 29
Table 3.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) .. 30
Table 3.5: Total daily switchable trips ........................................................................................ 31
November 2018
Executive Summary
Introduction
Travel in our cities is an ongoing challenge. Every day millions of people compete for space on
the road and public transport networks to make journeys to work, to shop, to meet friends,
and for many other purposes. Growing populations compound these issues, with London
forecast to grow by 2.6 million people by 20411 and New York City forecast to grow by 0.6
million people by 20402.
Cities adapt to these challenges in many ways, from investing in the road and public transport
networks, to improving conditions to encourage more people to cycle. New innovations also
have a role to play, with publicly and privately-managed bike share systems in London and
New York helping to encourage more people to cycle, particularly in inner cities.
Shared ebikes, implemented at scale, offer the potential to switch a significant number of trips
from vehicles and also to provide easier access to public transport for the first/last mile
access/egress portion of these trips. This would grow the modest number of trips currently
served by publicly-managed bike share systems (29,000 per day3 in London and 47,000 per
day4 in New York) and increase the overall share of trips by bicycle. This report, undertaken by
Steer on behalf of Uber presents, for the first time, an analysis of the potential for shared
ebikes to revolutionize travel in two case study cities: London and New York.
Analysis approach
This analysis of switchable trips5 begins by investigating current trip making patterns to
identify the trips that are potentially in scope to switch to shared ebike. An in-scope trip may
or may not switch to shared ebike, however, depending on a number of factors such as the
current travel mode and the trip distance. The next step of the analysis therefore quantifies
the propensity to switch to shared ebike, given a positive step change in cycle mode share and
applies the corresponding switching fractions to the in-scope trips to predict the number of
trips that will actually switch.
The analysis considers both complete (end-to-end origin-destination) trips as well as the
first/last mile station access/egress portion of trips whose main portion is by public transport.
A final step estimates the network-level impacts of the switching to shared ebike in terms of
reductions in the number of vehicle trips, and in the accompanying congestion and emissions.
This general approach was applied consistently to analyze the potential demand for and
impacts of shared ebikes in London and New York, with some adjustments as needed to adapt
to data availability and differences in the two geographies. The analysis can be considered
conservative: it does not consider the possibility of new demand being induced by shared
1
Mayor’s Transport Strategy, March 2018
2
New York City Population Projections by Age/Sex & Borough, 2010-2040, December 2013
3
Average daily Santander Cycles trips, January-July 2018
4
Average Citi Bike daily ridership, July 2017 - June 2018
5
Switchable trips exclude those that are made by children or by people over 80 years of age, and trips
that are too long, too short, that involve accompanying children or carrying luggage. Other trips are
considered switchable.
November 2018 | 6
ebikes (because they provide greater accessibility and mobility and so encourage new trip
making). The analysis also does not explicitly model induced demand for transit, facilitated by
more convenient first/last mile access/egress by shared ebike to transit stations. Lastly, the
benefits of trip diversions from vehicles to shared ebikes are understated: benefits such as
public health improvements are not considered, and estimates of travel delay reductions
ignore potential average speed improvements resulting from the diversions.
Shared ebike potential – London
Across Greater London, of the 17.4 million trips made daily, about 8.2 million trips are
potentially switchable to shared ebike based on the criteria noted above.
Our analysis suggests that 813,000 daily trips in Greater London would switch to shared
ebike following a deployment at scale. These trips replace 720,000 complete trips previously
made by other modes and 93,000 public transport first/last mile access/egress trips. Based on
the volume of trips currently made by Greater London residents, this would represent a
shared ebike mode share of 4.7%, which is not unrealistic given a positive step change in cycle
use wholly consistent with the goals stated in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. As a
comparison, other progressive cities achieve a considerably higher cycle mode share
(Copenhagen 29%6 and Amsterdam 48%7).
813,000 daily trips switching to shared ebike in London result in:

230,000 fewer daily vehicle trips
1,051,000 fewer daily vehicle-km
21,100 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay
184 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions
0.2 fewer daily metric tons of NOx emissions.
Between 81,000 to 163,000 shared ebikes would be required to serve the 813,000 daily trips in
Greater London.
Shared ebike potential – New York
Across the 5 boroughs of New York City, of the 26.4 million trips made daily, about 10.3 million
trips are potentially switchable to shared ebike based on the criteria noted above.
Our analysis suggests that 1 million daily trips in New York City would switch to shared ebike
following a deployment at scale. These trips replace 901,000 complete trips previously made
by other modes and 97,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips. Based on
the volume of trips currently made by New York residents, this would represent a shared ebike
mode share of 3.8%, which again is not unrealistic given a positive step change in cycle use
consistent with the city’s stated goals. Again, as a comparison, other progressive cities achieve
a considerably higher cycle mode share (Copenhagen 29%6 and Amsterdam 48%7).
6
Cycling Embassy Denmark, Copenhagen City of Cyclists – Facts and Figures 2017
7
Knowledge Institute for Mobility Policy, 2017 data
November 2018 | 7
1 million daily trips switching to shared ebike in New York result in:
227,000 fewer daily vehicle trips
761,000 fewer daily vehicle-miles
25,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay
300 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions
0.2 fewer daily metric tons of NOx emissions.
Between 100,000 to 200,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 1 million
daily trips in New York City.
Best case
If shared ebike adoption in London and New York were to lead to the levels of cycling mode
share currently seen in European cities such as Copenhagen, a higher number of trips could be
switched to shared ebikes. Following a similar methodology, but assuming that a higher
proportion of trips would switch to shared ebikes from their current modes, a ‘best case’
scenario would see 3.2 million daily trips in London switch to shared ebike and 6 million trips
in New York City switch to shared ebike.
November 2018 | 8
1 Introduction
Overview
1.1 The purpose of this report is to illustrate the potential demand for and impacts of shared
ebikes following a deployment at scale in Greater London and New York. The report considers
the effects of shared ebikes in diverting end-to-end origin-destination trips from their vehicles,
and also in replacing other modes for the first/last mile access/egress portion of public
transport trips. This report, undertaken by Steer on behalf of Uber presents, for the first time,
an analysis of the potential for shared ebikes to revolutionize travel in the two case study
cities.
1.2 This chapter details the study areas of the two cities, the general switchable trips methodology
and the data sources used. The report then provides the following detail:
• Chapter 2 - Potential for London trips to switch to shared ebikes, their impact and number
of shared ebikes required;
• Chapter 3 - Potential for New York trips to switch to shared ebikes, their impact and
number of shared ebikes required; and
• Chapter 4 - Best case: considering European levels of cycling in London and New York.
Study areas
Greater London
1.1 We have analyzed the trips made by residents of Greater London, including inner and outer
London; see Figure 1.1 for a map of the study area. This area includes a total population of 8.2
million, which is forecast to increase to 10.8 million by 20418.
8
Mayor’s Transport Strategy, March 2018
November 2018 | 9
Figure 1.1: Greater London Study Area
New York
1.2 To facilitate comparisons, we have analyzed both:
1) New York City (the 5 boroughs); and
2) the wider New York Metropolitan Transportation Council9 region (this analysis is
presented in Appendix A).
See Figures 1.2 and 1.3 for maps of the New York study area.
1.3 The population of New York City (8.4 million) is similar to that of Greater London (8.2 million),
and is projected to increase to 9 million by 204010. The 2017 population of the wider NYMTC
region is 22.2 million, and is projected to increase to 24.7 million by 204011.
9
The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, or NYMTC, is a regional council of governments
that is the Metropolitan Planning Organization for New York City, Long Island and the lower Hudson
Valley.
10
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/data-maps/nyc-
population/projections_report_2010_2040.pdf
11
2010-2050 Total Population https://tig.nymtc.org/
November 2018 | 10
Figure 1.2: New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area
Figure 1.3: New York MTC Region Study Area
Switchable trips methodology

Greater London and New York
1.4 The methodology has been informed by Transport for London’s switchable trips (to cycling)
analysis, with updates to reflect the wider potential appeal of shared ebikes. The analysis
starts by considering the total daily trips made by residents of Greater London and New York
City. We then apply a succession of filters to the total daily trips to identify the portion of trips
that are potentially switchable to shared ebike. We apply the following filters:
November 2018 | 11
Table 1.1: Switchable trips criteria
Criteria Reason Switchable trips

Age of traveler – young To use an ebike in the UK, riders must be Aged 16 or older
over 14 years old. In New York riders
must be 16 or older to use bike share.
Age of traveler – old Although ebikes provide easier access to a Aged under 80
bike, use by those over 80 years old is
likely to be limited.
Distance – trip too short Short trips are typically walked and are Trip distance more than
less likely to switch to shared ebike. 1km 1km (0.6 miles)
(0.6 miles) represents a 10-minute walk.
Distance – trip too long Long trips are less likely to switch to Trip distance less than
shared ebike. 15km (9.4 miles) represents 15km (9.4 miles)
a 45-minute cycle trip at an average speed
of 20 km/h (12.5 mph).
Escorting children It is difficult to escort children when Trip not escorting children
traveling on a shared ebike.
Encumbered It is difficult to travel with heavy or Trip not encumbered
awkward luggage using shared ebike.
1.5 Having identified the trips that could potentially switch from their current mode to shared
ebike, the analysis next considers the fraction of these that will actually switch, given a
deployment of shared ebikes at scale. The probability that a given trip will actually switch
depends on:
• trip distance; and
• trip mode.
1.6 This analysis takes into account the following data and assumptions:
Shared ebike assumptions
• sufficient shared ebikes are available to meet demand
Current cycling trends and transport policy
• current cycle mode share and trends;
• city ambitions to reduce vehicle (i.e. by car, taxi and other for-hire vehicle) trips and
increase public transport, walk and cycle trips; and
• improvements in cycle infrastructure which normalizes cycling for a wider range of people
and for more trips, facilitating a greater cycle mode share.
1.7 Note that the analysis follows a static approach, in that it does not consider possible induced
demand or other second-order or feedback effects of a shared ebike deployment at scale. It
starts with existing modal volumes and predicts their diversions to shared ebike, rather than
attempting to directly predict modal volumes using a full mode choice modeling approach.
1.8 This analysis is based on professional judgement and desk-based analysis. It could be refined
and made more rigorous using stated preference research with potential users.
November 2018 | 12
Data sources
Greater London
1.9 The analysis relies on data collected by both Transport for London and the Department for
Transport. The following data sources were used:
• London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS): To consider the potential for trips to switch to
shared ebike, we have analyzed the London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS) conducted by
Transport for London. LTDS is a travel diary-based survey that captures detailed
information about the trips made by 8,000 randomly-selected Greater London residents.
The survey is designed to represent daily travel by all London residents. The LTDS has
been undertaken on an annual basis since 2005. Our analysis uses the most recent
2016/17 data.
• Department for Transport (DfT) Travel Time Data: To consider the delay on the road
network, we have used travel time data from the Department for Transport. This data
captures the average seconds of delay per vehicle per mile (converted to km values) for
major roads in inner London and outer London. Delay is calculated by subtracting derived
‘free flow’ travel times from observed travel times for individual road sections. The latest
2016 data has been used in this analysis.
• Vehicle Emissions Data: To quantify the emissions benefits of a reduction in the number
of vehicle trips, we have used data on the fleet profile of CO2 per km emissions for petrol
and diesel cars from Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of Excellence (EVCE) and
data on the fleet profile of NOx per km emissions from the Handbook Emission Factors for
Road Transport (HBEFA).
New York
1.10 The New York analysis relies on data from the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council
(NYMTC). The following data sources were used:
• New York Best Practice Model (NYBPM): The NYBPM is NYMTC's travel demand
forecasting model. The NYBPM model area includes twelve counties in New York,
fourteen counties in New Jersey, and two counties in Connecticut, and is made up of
3,500 transportation analysis zones. The NYBPM 2017 highway and transit trip tables12,
which showed the total trip making in the study area, were used as the starting points for
the shared ebike analysis.
• The 2010/2011 Regional Household Travel Survey (RHTS): The RHTS is a comprehensive
survey of the travel behavior characteristics and related demographics of residents within
the 28 counties of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan area. The survey
provides information on travel and mobility patterns, and other key travel statistics for
the region, and enables updates to state and regional travel demand models. There were
43,558 survey participants, drawn from 18,965 households and making 143,925 linked
trips. We used the 2010/2011 RHTS to evaluate the characteristics of BPM travelers and
trips, and these characteristics were ultimately used to identify the portion of trips that
12
NYMTC provided Steer with the 2017 highway trip tables from recent BPM model runs generated
during their Transportation Conformity Determination. NYMTC also provided Steer with 2010 transit
trip tables from the BPM model base year. The study team at Steer applied 2010-2017 transit growth
rates for MTA, MNR, LIRR, and NJT to estimate the 2017 transit trip table.
November 2018 | 13
were potentially switchable to shared ebike. We also used the RHTS to estimate the
volume of walk and bike trips in the study area.
• Congestion Management Process (CMP): The CMP establishes performance measures to
define transportation system congestion in the NYMTC area. We obtained the measures
of delay used for the shared ebike impact analysis from the CMP.
• Vehicle Emissions Data: To estimate the emissions benefits of reduced vehicle trips, we
used data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on CO2 emissions from
passenger gasoline vehicles.
November 2018 | 14
2 London
Switchable trips
Total daily trips
2.1 On an average day in 2016/17, Greater London residents made 17.4 million complete end-to-
end trips entirely within Greater London, and a further 0.2 million trips with an origin or
destination outside Greater London13.
2.2 Figure 2.1 shows that the most common main mode for complete trips is walking,
representing just over one-third of all trips. Car is the second most common main mode, with
just under one-third of all trips. Public transport is the main mode for 28% of all trips.
Figure 2.1: Mode share of daily complete trips
Table 2.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions)
Taxi/ Underground/
National Rail/
Car Private Bus Docklands Light Walk Cycle Other Total
Overground
Hire Rail (DLR)
5.5 0.3 2.3 1.7 0.9 5.9 0.4 0.3 17.4
13
These 0.2 million trips are excluded from the analysis as they are not in scope to switch to a shared
ebike system implemented in Greater London
November 2018 | 15
Potentially switchable trips

2.3 As detailed in the methodology presented in chapter 1, our analysis identifies the trips that are
potentially switchable to shared ebike by filtering all trips based on the following criteria:
• Removing trips by individuals under 15 or over 80 years old;
• Removing trips under 1km or over 15km in end-to-end distance;
• Removing trips escorting children; and
• Removing trips encumbered with luggage.
2.4 These criteria were applied to the 17.4 million daily complete trips within Greater London14.
Figure 2.2 shows that, after excluding trips that meet these criteria, 48% of Greater London
complete trips are potentially switchable to shared ebike. This is a total of 8.2 million daily
complete trips.
2.5 The analysis predicts that roughly comparable numbers of vehicle and public transport trips
could potentially switch to shared ebike (3.4 million and 3.5 million trips respectively).
2.6 Walk and cycle trips have the least potential to switch to shared ebike, with only 20% of trips
potentially switchable. This is due to a high proportion of walk trips less than 1km in distance.
Figure 2.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips
20.0
18.0
16.0
14.0
9.0
12.0
Daily trips (millions)
10.0
Not switchable
8.0 Switchable
6.0
2.4
4.0 1.5 5.1 8.2
2.0 3.4 3.5

1.3
-
Vehicle Public Transport Walk/Cycle Total
Mode
14
Trips in the ‘Other’ category, which includes motorcycle, scooter and boat, are assumed to be out of
scope to switch to shared ebike
November 2018 | 16
Table 2.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips)
Vehicle (Car, Taxi and Public Transport Walk/Cycle Total

Private Hire)
Switchable 59% 30% 20% 48%
Not switchable 41% 70% 80% 52%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
How many potentially switchable complete trips will switch?

2.7 Data from Transport for London shows that cycle mode share in Greater London has increased
substantially over the past decade, from 1.6% in 2005/6 to 2.5% in 2016/17. London’s public
bike share system is the largest bike share system in the UK and is complemented by privately-
operated dockless bike share operators. London has also seen substantial and continued
investment in cycle infrastructure, including a network of segregated Cycle Superhighway
routes and ‘Mini-Holland’ cycling investments in urban centers.
2.8 In inner London particularly, cycling has become normalized as an effective and efficient
transportation mode, especially for short-distance travel or first/last mile access/egress trips
to other modes. Cycling enhances multi-modal trips, and it helps to ease the pressure on roads
and the transit system, reduce road congestion, expand mobility, improve public health and
reduce the transportation footprint of greenhouse gas emissions.
2.9 Continuing these trends, the Mayor’s Transport Strategy includes year 2041 targets of
increasing the walk, cycle and public transport share of trips from 84% to 90% of all trips in
inner London and from 60% to 75% for outer London.
2.10 Of the 8.2 million complete trips that are potentially switchable to shared ebike, our analysis
considers the fraction that will actually switch. This analysis is based on professional
judgement and desk-based analysis. It could be refined and made more rigorous using stated
preference research with potential users.
2.11 Figure 2.3 shows the fractions of potentially switchable trips that are assumed to actually
switch to shared ebike. These ‘bottom up’ assumptions are informed by the following
considerations:
• Shorter trips are expected to switch more readily to shared ebike;
• Longer trips are expected to switch less readily to shared ebike;
• Short and medium-distance public transport trips are expected to switch more readily
than long-distance trips to shared ebike: for these trips, the interchange transfer between
the first/last mile access/egress portion and the public transport portion makes up a
greater proportion of the total (and therefore of their overall inconvenience);
• Cycle infrastructure improvements across Greater London will encourage a greater share
of trips by bike; and
• Provision of shared ebikes at scale will encourage a wider range of trips to be made by
bike, by a wider range of people.
November 2018 | 17
Figure 2.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike
16% 15%
% switchable trips that switch to shared 14%
12%
10% 10% 10%
10%
8% 8%
ebikes
8%
6% 5% 5% 5%
4%
2%
0%
1-3km 3-7km 7-15km
Trip distance
Vehicle Public transport Walk/cycle
Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike

2.12 Applying the fractions of trips that switch to shared ebike from Figure 2.3 to the potentially
switchable trips from Figure 2.2, 720,000 daily complete trips would switch to shared ebike.
This represents a shared ebike mode share of 4.2%.
2.13 Figure 2.4 shows the distribution of the 720,000 switched daily complete trips by current
mode and trip distance. The greatest number of trips switch from public transport (325,000
trips), followed by vehicle (279,000 trips) and walk/cycle (116,000 trips).
Figure 2.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
180,000
160,000
140,000
Daily switched trips
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
1-3km 3-7km 7-15km
Trip distance
Switched vehicle trips Switched public transport trips Switched walk/cycle trips
November 2018 | 18
Table 2.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode
Vehicle (Car, Taxi and Public Transport Walk/Cycle Total

Private Hire)
Switched trips 279,000 325,000 116,000 720,000
First/last mile access/egress trips

2.14 The analysis above considered the potential of complete end-to-end trips to switch to shared
ebike. In addition to these trips, shared ebikes deployed at scale can also be used for the
first/last mile access/egress portion of trips whose main portion is made by public transport.
2.15 We have considered two categories of first/last mile access/egress trips that are potentially in
scope to switch to shared ebike. These are:
• Category A: Public transport trips whose end-to-end distance is too long for them to
switch to shared ebike (>15km end to end), but whose first/last mile access/egress
portion is in scope for switching; and
• Category B: Public transport complete trips that could have switched to shared ebike but
were predicted not to do so in the analysis described above. These trips continue to be
made on public transport, and their first/last mile access/egress portions are in scope to
switch.
2.16 Figure 2.5 shows the daily number of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips.
We have again applied the criteria detailed in Table 1.1 to determine which trips are
potentially switchable.
2.17 Based on our analysis, Figure 2.5 shows that 0.5 million daily first/last mile access/egress trips
are potentially in scope to switch to shared ebike. Trip distance is a key factor that influences
this result, as a high proportion of non-switchable trips are under 1km in distance.
Figure 2.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips
November 2018 | 19
Table 2.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips)
Category A Category B Total

Switchable 10% 10% 10%
Not switchable 90% 90% 90%
Total 100% 100% 100%
2.18 The analysis assumes that 20% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips will
switch to shared ebike. This percentage is higher than the assumptions for complete trips to
reflect the relative inconvenience of traveling by conventional modes to and from public
transport stations.
2.19 By applying these switching fractions to the potentially switchable trips in Figure 2.5, 93,000
daily first/last mile access/egress trips would switch to shared ebike. Figure 2.6 shows the
source by category of the 93,000 daily first/last mile access/egress trips that are predicted to
switch to shared ebike. 26,000 trips are public transport trips that are too long to switch to
shared ebike in their entirety, while 67,000 trips are public transport trips that could have
switched to shared ebike but were predicted not to do so.
Figure 2.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
100,000
90,000
Daily switched first/last mile trips
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
Trip type
November 2018 | 20
Total switchable trips

2.20 In summary, of the 17.4 million trips made within Greater London by residents on a typical
weekday in 2017, we have estimated that 62% are not switchable because the travelers are
too young or too old, or the trips are too short or too long, or with escorts or encumbered. A
total of 8.1 million trips per day, 48% of the 17.4 million daily trips made within Greater
London, are potentially switchable to shared ebike (as shown in Figure 2.7).
2.21 A total of 813,000 trips are predicted to actually switch to shared ebike (about 5% of all
Greater London trips, and a tenth of all potentially switchable trips). This compares to the
current bike mode share in Greater London of 2.5%. As a comparison, progressive cities such
as Copenhagen and Amsterdam achieve a cycle mode share of 29%15 and 48%16 respectively.
Figure 2.7: Total daily switchable trips
20
18
5%
Daily in-scope passenger trips (million)
16
14
42%
12
Switchable Switched
10
Switchable Not Switched
8 Not Switchable
6
53%
4
-
Total Daily Trips
Table 2.5: Total daily switchable trips
Total daily switchable trips

Switchable Switched 813,000
Switchable Not Switched 7.4 million
Not Switchable 9.2 million
Total 17.4 million
15
16
November 2018 | 21
Impacts analysis
Overview
2.22 An increase in the number of shared ebike trips across Greater London will reduce the number
of vehicle trips and their associated congestion and emissions. Given the predicted travel
diversions from vehicles (car, taxi and private hire) to shared ebikes, we estimated the impacts
of:
• Vehicle trip reduction;
• Congestion reduction; and
• Emissions reduction.
2.23 The reduction in vehicle trips has been calculated in the switchable trips analysis presented
above. We assembled a variety of congestion measures for Greater London, sourced from the
Department for Transport, and focusing on measures of delay (the congestion-related increase
in travel time compared to free-flow conditions). We applied these measures to the diversions
(in terms of vehicle-km traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis.
2.24 We also assembled air quality impact data (emissions rates) for the UK and applied them to
the diversions (in terms of vehicle-km traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis
described above.
Vehicle trip reduction
2.25 A calculation of the Greater London vehicle trip reductions based on trips switching to shared
ebike use must consider average vehicle occupancy, to convert person trips into equivalent
vehicle trips. Across Greater London, vehicle occupancy for potentially switchable trips is 1.2
people per vehicle (excluding taxi/private hire drivers). Using this factor, the 3.4 million
potentially switchable daily person trips by vehicle (see Figure 2.2) involve 2.8 million daily
vehicle trips.
2.26 The reduction in vehicle trips has been calculated by applying the proportion of vehicle trips
that will switch to shared ebike from vehicles. As per Figure 2.3, these proportions are as
follows:
• Vehicle trip distance 1-3km: 10% of trips switch to shared ebike;
• Vehicle trip distance 3-5km: 8% of trips switch to shared ebike; and
• Vehicle trip distance 5-10km: 5% of trips switch to shared ebike.
2.27 This analysis results in a prediction of 230,000 fewer daily vehicle movements and a vehicle
travel reduction of 1,051,000 vehicle-km across Greater London.
Congestion reduction
2.28 To calculate the reduction in Greater London congestion, we consider the reduction both in
the number of vehicle trips and in the vehicle-km that these trips travel. The reduction in
vehicle-km is then converted into a corresponding reduction in vehicle delay (the difference
between actual and free-flow travel times), using an average delay per km traveled that was
determined from current travel conditions.
2.29 The analysis does not account for average speed increases that might occur when fewer
vehicles travel on the network; in this sense the congestion reduction estimates are
conservative. We have also not taken into account the possibility of additional vehicle trips on
the network for operational repositioning or maintenance of shared ebikes.
November 2018 | 22
2.30 Vehicle delay due to congestion is greater in Inner London than in Outer London. We have
taken into account the following average vehicle delays, sourced from Department for
Transport Travel Time Data to consider vehicle delay across Greater London:
• Inner London – 1.6 minutes delay per km traveled; and
• Outer London – 0.8 minutes delay per km traveled.
2.31 Switching of 230,000 daily vehicle movements to shared ebike results in a daily reduction of
1,051,000 vehicle-km traveled. This is based on an average trip distance of 4.6km from in-
scope trips, as determined from the LTDS.
2.32 Based on the average vehicle delay across Greater London, this translates into a daily delay
reduction of 21,100 vehicle-hours.
Emissions reduction
2.33 To calculate the reduction in Greater London emissions through vehicle trips switching to
shared ebike, we have taken into account the reduction in vehicle-km and the average
emission rates of the vehicles undertaking the trips. For London we have included analysis of
both CO2 and NOx given the prevalence of diesel fueled vehicles. We have not included in this
analysis the emissions implications of charging or collecting/distributing shared ebikes.
2.34 We have based our emissions reductions calculation on the following assumptions (data
sources in brackets):
• Petrol share of vehicles used for switchable trips in Greater London: 69% (LTDS)
• Diesel share of vehicles used for switchable trips in Greater London: 31% (LTDS)
• Petrol average CO2 emissions rate: 200g/km (Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of
Excellence)
• Diesel average CO2 emissions rate: 120g/km (Cardiff University’s Electric Vehicle Centre of
Excellence)
• Petrol average NOx emissions rate: 0.08g/km (Handbook Emission Factors for Road
Transport)
• Diesel average NOx emissions rate: 0.47g/km (Handbook Emission Factors for Road
Transport)
2.35 The switching of 1,051,000 daily vehicle-km to shared ebike has the following impacts on CO2
and NOx emissions:
• Daily reduction of 184 metric tons of CO2
• Daily reduction of 0.2 metric tons of NOx
2.36 These reductions represent a 4% reduction in total daily vehicle CO2 and NOX emissions in the
Greater London area.
Shared ebikes required
2.37 Figure 2.8 shows the number of shared ebikes required to serve the demand estimated in this
chapter. The required number of shared ebikes depends on the assumed average number of
trips made per shared ebike per day. The analysis assumes either 10 or 5 daily trips per bike.
2.38 Based on 10 trips per bike per day, 81,000 shared ebikes are required across Greater London.
Based on 5 trips per bike per day, twice as many bikes are required: 163,000 shared ebikes
across Greater London.
November 2018 | 23
Figure 2.8: Number of shared ebikes required for Greater London
200,000
Number of shared ebikes required 180,000 163,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
81,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
Number of shared ebikes required
10 trips per bike per day 5 trips per bike per day
November 2018 | 24
3 New York City

Switchable trips – New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area
Daily complete trips
3.1 A total of 26.4 million complete end-to-end trips are made within New York City by residents
on a typical weekday in 2017. Figure 3.1 shows that about 38% of all trips are made by walking
and biking. Cars (drive alone, HOV with 2 people, HOV with more than 3 people, and taxis) are
the second most popular mode with just over one-third of all trips. Roughly 30% of all trips are
made on public transportation.
Figure 3.1: Mode share of daily complete trips
Table 3.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions)
Walk to Drive to
Drive HOV HOV Walk to Drive to
Taxi Comm. Comm. Bike Walk Total
Alone 2 3+ Transit Transit
Rail Rail
2.6 3.0 2.0 0.7 7.2 0.3 0.3 0.05 0.3 9.9 26.4
November 2018 | 25
Potentially switchable trips

3.2 To estimate the trips switchable to shared ebike, we apply a filtering process based on the
following criteria:
• Remove trips with origin or destination outside New York City;
• Remove trips by individuals under 15 or over 80 years of age;
• Remove trips under 1km or over 15km in end-to-end distance;
• Remove trips escorting children; and
• Remove trips with luggage.
3.3 Based on our analysis, a total of 10.3 million complete trips per day, or 39% of the 26.4 million
complete daily trips made within New York City, are potentially switchable to shared ebike
(Figure 3.2). Of the switchable complete trips, 4.3m are existing vehicle (car/taxi) trips, 5.1m
are public transportation trips, and 0.9m are walk trips. As shown in Table 3.2, this represents
a share of 52% of vehicle trips, 65% of public transportation and 9% of walk trips. A high
percentage of walk trips are less than 1km in end-to-end distance, and as such are filtered out
of the analysis.
Figure 3.2: Potentially switchable daily complete trips
November 2018 | 26
Table 3.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips)
Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

Switchable 52% 65% 9% 39%
Not Switchable 48% 35% 91% 61%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
How many potentially switchable trips will switch?

3.4 The American Community Survey (ACS) Journey to Work data between 2011 and 2016 shows
that the number of people cycling to work in New York City has grown at a rate almost double
that of other U.S. cities. Not only that, but New York’s public bike share system, launched in
2013, is now the largest bike share system in North America.
3.5 These and other cycling trends show that New Yorkers have welcomed cycling as a reliable
mode of travel, even as traffic congestion on New York roads continues to rise. While many of
the bike trips are made on personally-owned bikes, the rapid growth in bike sharing suggests a
role for bikeshare. Bikeshare offers an inexpensive, convenient and low-maintenance
alternative to owning a bike.
3.6 Overall, cycling is quickly becoming an effective mode of transportation, especially for short-
distance travel or for access/egress trips to other modes. Cycling enhances multi-modal trips,
and it helps to ease the pressure on roads and transit system, reduce road congestion, expand
mobility, improve public health and reduce the transportation footprint of greenhouse gas
emissions.
3.7 Despite the rapid increase in New Yorkers’ embrace of cycling, the bike mode share in the city
– at 1.3% of all travel – is still very low. New York city officials have committed to supporting
growth in cycling and bike infrastructure, and to doubling the bike mode share in the city by
2020.
3.8 Our analysis considers the fraction of the 10.3 million switchable complete trips that will
actually switch, given deployment of shared ebikes at scale. The probability that a given trip
will switch depends on trip mode and trip end-to-end distance. The estimated switching
fractions are based on professional judgement and could be refined and made more rigorous
by conducting stated preference research with potential users in the study area.
3.9 Figure 3.3 shows the fractions of switchable complete trips that are assumed to switch to
shared ebike. These ‘bottom up’ assumptions are informed by the following considerations:
• Shorter trips are expected to switch more readily to shared ebike;
• Longer trips are expected to switch less readily to shared ebike;
• Short- and medium-distance public transportation trips are expected to switch more
readily than long-distance trips to shared ebike, since a more significant proportion of
these trips involves accessing and egressing public transportation stations;
• Bike infrastructure improvements across New York encourage a greater share of trips by
bike; and
• Provision of shared ebikes at scale encourages a wider range of trips to be made by bike,
by a wider range of people.
November 2018 | 27
Figure 3.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike

3.10 We applied the switching fractions shown in Figure 3.3 to the switchable complete trips shown
in Figure 3.2. 901,000 daily complete trips are predicted to switch to shared ebike. This
represents a mode share of 3.6%.
3.11 Figure 3.4 shows the distribution of the 901,000 daily complete trips by trip end-to-end
distance and current mode. As shown in Table 3.3, the greatest number of trips switch from
public transportation (503,000 trips), followed by vehicle (313,000 trips) and walk (85,000
trips).
Figure 3.4: Daily complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
November 2018 | 28
Table 3.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode
Mode switched Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

from >>
Switched trips 313,000 503,000 85,000 901,000
First/last mile access/egress trips

3.12 The analysis above considered only complete end-to-end origin-destination trips with the
potential to switch to shared ebike. In addition to these, first/last mile trips that access/egress
public transportation stations are also potentially switchable to shared ebike. For this analysis,
we have considered the following two categories of first/last mile access/egress trips:
• Category A: Public transportation trips whose end-to-end distance is too long for them to
switch to shared ebike (>15km end to end), but whose first/last mile access/egress
portions are in scope for switching; and
• Category B: Public transportation trips that could have switched to shared ebike but were
predicted not to do so.
3.13 Figure 3.5 shows the number of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips. We
applied the same criteria as used before to determine which first/last mile access/egress trips
are potentially switchable. Based on our analysis, about 0.5 million daily first/last mile
access/egress trips are potentially in scope to switch to shared ebike. As expected, however,
many of these trips are not switchable since access/egress trips tend to be over short
distances. Table 3.4 shows that only 8% of first/last mile access/egress trips are switchable.
Figure 3.5: Daily switchable first/last mile access/egress trips
November 2018 | 29
Table 3.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips)

Switchable 8% 8% 8%
Not Switchable 92% 92% 92%
Total 100% 100% 100%
3.14 We have assumed that 20% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips actually
switch to shared ebike. This percentage is higher than the assumption made for complete trips
to reflect the relative inconvenience of access to and egress from public transportation
stations by conventional modes.
3.15 When applied to the switchable trips shown in Figure 3.5, we predict that a total of 97,000
daily first/last mile access/egress trips will switch to shared ebike. Figure 3.6 shows the source
of the 97,000 daily trips by category. 23,000 trips are from Category A: first/last mile of public
transportation trips that are too long to switch to shared ebike (>15km end to end), while
74,000 are from Category B: first/last mile of public transportation trips that could switch to
shared ebike but were predicted not to do so.
Figure 3.6: Daily first/last mile access/egress trips predicted to switch to shared ebike
November 2018 | 30

3.16 In summary, of the 26.4 million trips made within New York City by residents on a typical
weekday in 2017, we have estimated that 61% are not switchable because the travelers are
too young or too old, or the trips are too short or too long, with escorts or encumbered. A
total of 10.3 million trips per day, or 39% of the 26.4 million daily trips made within New York
City, are potentially switchable to shared ebike (as shown in Figure 3.7).
3.17 A total of 1 million trips are predicted to actually switch to shared ebike (about 4% of all New
York City trips, and a tenth of all potentially switchable trips). This represents a tripling of the
current bike mode share in New York City, from 1.3% to 4%. As a comparison, progressive
cities such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam achieve a cycle mode share of 29%17 and 48%18
respectively.
Figure 3.7: Total daily switchable trips
Table 3.5: Total daily switchable trips
Total daily trips

Switchable Switched 1 million
Total 26.4 million
17
18
November 2018 | 31
Impacts analysis
Overview
3.18 Given the predicted travel diversions from vehicles (car/taxi) to shared ebikes, we estimated
the impacts in terms of:
• Congestion reduction; and
3.19 The vehicle trip reduction has been calculated in the switchable trips analysis presented
above. We assembled air quality impact data (emissions rates) for the US and applied them to
the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis
described above.
3.20 We also assembled a variety of congestion measures for New York, focusing on measures of
delay (the congestion-related increase in travel time compared to free-flow conditions) and
also applied these to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the
switchable trips analysis.
3.21 As shown in Table 3.3, of the 1 million daily trips predicted to switch to shared ebike, 313,000
trips switch from vehicle trips (while the others switch from public transportation and walk
trips). These are person trips.
3.22 Based on the average vehicle occupancy of 1.38 for vehicles within New York City, we
estimated that about 227,000 vehicle trips are replaced by shared ebike, which corresponds to
a reduction of 761,000 vehicle-miles traveled (VMT). This suggests the average shared ebike
trip distance is 3.4 miles.
3.23 We assembled a variety of automobile congestion measures for New York from NYMTC’s 2017
congestion management process. We focused on vehicle-hours of delay (VHD), which is the
sum of delays experienced by all vehicles on the network. Delay is the difference between
actual travel speed and free-flow travel speed, and is therefore readily understood by the
traveling public. Vehicles traveling in New York City experienced a total of 1.8 million hours of
delay in 201719, which suggests a delay of 2 minutes per vehicle per mile in New York City. We
then applied this estimate of delay to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled)
predicted from the switchable trips analysis.
3.24 For application, our approach assumed that the improvement in congestion measures
(vehicle-hours of delay) is proportional to the reduction in vehicle-miles traveled (with no
assumed improvement in average travel speed from the diversions). The analysis does not
account for average speed increases that might occur when fewer vehicles travel on the
network; in this sense the congestion reduction estimates are conservative. We have also not
taken into account the possibility of additional vehicle trips on the network for operational
repositioning or maintenance of shared ebikes.
19 https://www.nymtc.org/Required-Planning-Products/Congestion-Management-Process
November 2018 | 32
3.25 Our analysis shows a reduction of 25,000 hours of delay from vehicle trips switched to shared
ebike in New York City.
Emissions reduction
3.26 New York City adds about 150,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each day.
About 10% of these daily emissions are from the transportation sector, and about one-sixth of
the transportation sector emissions are from vehicle trips traveling within New York City. For
New York we have included an analysis of CO2 but not of NOx given the low proportion of
diesel fueled vehicles in the passenger fleet.
3.27 According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), emissions from passenger
vehicles are based on the fuel economy of the vehicle, and the amount of carbon in the
vehicle’s fuel. In the U.S. today, most passenger vehicles on the road are gasoline vehicles,
and average about 22.0 miles per gallon20. In turn, each gallon of gasoline creates about 8,887
grams of CO2 when burned21. Together, the EPA estimates an emission rate of about 404
grams of CO2 per mile from passenger vehicles.
3.28 This CO2 emission rate is applied to the diversions of vehicle trips to shared ebike (in terms of
vehicle-miles traveled) predicted from the switchable trips analysis. Our analysis shows about
300 metric tons of carbon offset per day from vehicle trips replaced by shared ebike. We have
not included in this analysis the emissions implications of charging or collecting/distributing
shared ebikes.
20
Federal Highway Administration Highway Statistics 2016. This is representative of the light duty
passenger vehicle feet as a whole, including both new and existing vehicles. The average passenger
vehicle fuel economy is expected to increase over time as a result of greenhouse gas and fuel economy
standards developed in coordination between EPA, DOT and California.
21
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
November 2018 | 33
Shared ebikes required

3.29 Figure 3.8 shows the number of shared ebikes required to serve the demand. The required
number of shared ebikes is based on assumptions about the average number of trips per ebike
per day. The analysis assumes a low estimate of 5 daily trips per ebike, and a high estimate of
10 daily trips per ebike. As a benchmark, between July 2017 and June 2018, utilization of New
York’s public bike share system using regular bikes ranged from 3 to 6 trips per bike per day.
3.30 Based on the low estimate of 5 trips per bike per day, we determine that 200,000 shared
ebikes are required across New York City. Assuming 2017 levels of vehicle registration hold,
200,000 shared ebikes would imply one shared ebike bike for every 36 vehicles in New York
City22.
3.31 Based on the high estimate of 10 trips per bike per day, we determine that 100,000 shared
ebikes are required across New York City.
Figure 3.8: Number of shared ebikes required for New York City
22
NYS Vehicle Registrations on File - End of year 2017
November 2018 | 34
4 Best Case
Overview
4.1 If shared ebike adoption in London and New York were to lead to the levels of cycling seen in
European cities such as Copenhagen, a higher number of trips could be switched to shared
ebikes. Following the methodology described above, but assuming that a higher proportion of
trips will switch, we have considered a ‘best case’ scenario where overall cycle mode share for
London and New York increases to the current cycle mode share in Copenhagen of 29%23.
London
4.2 In this best case scenario, 3.2 million daily trips would switch to shared ebike in London. These
trips replace 2.9 million complete trips previously made by other modes and 348,000 public
transport first/last mile access/egress trips. This would represent a shared ebike mode share
of 19.5%, with the remainder of cycling trips by personal bike or shared regular bikes. The
impacts of 3.2 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 920,000 fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 4,204,000 fewer daily vehicle-km;
• 84,500 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay;
• 736 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions; and
• 0.8 fewer daily metric tons of NOx emissions.
To serve 3.2 million daily trips would require deployment of between 325,000 and 650,000
shared ebikes across Greater London.
New York
4.3 In this best case scenario, 6 million trips would switch to shared ebike in New York City. These
trips would replace 2 million vehicle trips, 3 million public transportation end-to-end trips,
230,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips, and 640,000 walk trips. Based
on the volume of trips currently made by New York residents, this would be a shared ebike
mode share of 22.7%, with the remainder of cycling trips by personal bike or shared regular
bikes. The impacts of the 6 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 1.5 million fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 5 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 164,000 fewer daily vehicle-hours of delay; and
• 2,000 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
600,000 to 1,200,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 6 million daily
trips in New York City.
23
November 2018 | 35
Appendices
i
A Appendix - New York MTC Region

Study area – New York MTC Region
A.1 Figure A.1 shows the wider New York MTC region study area, with a population of 22.2 million
in 2017, projected to increase to 25.2 million by 204024.
Figure A.1: New York MTC region study area
Switchable trips – New York MTC Region

A.2 The analysis of switchable trips for the wider NYMTC region followed the same process as the
New York City analysis.
Daily complete trips
A.3 67.4 million complete trips were made in the NYMTC region by residents on a typical weekday
in 2017. Figure A.2 shows that two-thirds of these trips were made by car (drive alone, HOV
with 2 people, HOV with more than 3 people, and taxi), 14% by public transportation, and 21%
by walking or biking.
24 2010-2050 Total Population https://tig.nymtc.org/
ii
Figure A.2: Mode share of daily complete trips (NYMTC Region)
Table A.1: Daily complete trips by mode in the NYMTC region (millions)
Walk to Drive to
Drive HOV HOV Walk to Drive to
Taxi Comm. Comm. Bike Walk Total
Alone 2 3+ Transit Transit
Rail Rail
19.5 14.0 9.9 0.8 7.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 13.6 67.4
Potentially switchable complete trips

A.4 To estimate the trips switchable to shared ebike, we apply a filtering process based on the
following criteria:
• Remove trips with origin or destination outside the NYMTC region;
• Remove trips by individuals under 15 or over 80 years of age;
• Remove trips under 1km or over 15km in end-to-end distance;
• Remove trips escorting children; and
• Remove trips with luggage.
A.5 As shown in Figure A.3 and Table A.2, 24 million complete trips per day, or 36% of the 67.4
million daily complete trips currently made within the NYMTC region, are potentially
switchable to shared ebike. Of the switchable complete trips, 17m are vehicle (car/taxi) trips,
6m are public transportation trips, and 1m are walk trips.
iii
Figure A.3: Daily switchable complete trips within the NYMTC region
Table A.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode in the NYMTC region (millions)

Switchable 40% 59% 8% 36%
Not Switchable 60% 41% 92% 64%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
How many potentially switchable complete trips will switch?

A.6 The portion of the 24 million switchable complete trips that will switch considers different
rates of trip switching based on trip location (NYC and Other – outside NYC), trip mode, and
trip end-to-end distance. Figure A.4 shows the share of switchable trips that are predicted to
switch to shared ebike. As expected, the switching propensity in NYC is much higher than for
“Other” trips outside NYC.
iv
Figure A.4: Potential of NYMTC region complete trips to switch to shared ebike

A.7 We applied the shared ebike switching fractions shown in Figure A.4 to the switchable
complete trips (shown in Figure A.3). 1.1 million daily trips were predicted to switch to shared
ebike, which represents a shared ebike mode share of 1.5% of all person trips in the NYMTC
region.
A.8 Figure A.5 shows the distribution of the 1.1 million daily complete trips by location (NYC and
Other), trip end-to-end distance, and mode switched from. Table A.3 shows the total switched
complete trip volume by source mode.
v
Figure A.5: Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike in the NYMTC region
Table A.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by trip location and source mode in the NYMTC region

NYC 313,000 503,000 85,000 901,000
Other 168,000 9,000 6,000 183,000
Total 481,000 512,000 91,000 1,084,000
First /last mile access/egress trips

A.9 We evaluated the first/last mile trips accessing/egressing public transportation stations that
are potentially switchable to shared ebike, considering the following two trip categories:
• Category A: Public transportation trips that are too long to switch to shared ebike (>15km
end to end) but whose first/last mile access/egress portions are in scope for switching;
and
• Category B: Public transportation trips that could have switched to shared ebike but were
predicted not to do so.
A.10 Based on our analysis, there are about 0.9 million daily first/last mile access/egress trips that
are in scope to switch to shared ebike as shown in Figure A.6.
vi
Figure A.6: Switchable public transportation first/last mile trips in the NYMTC region
Table A.4: Potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress trips by mode (share of trips) in the NYMTC region

Switchable Inner 5% 7% 6%
Switchable Other 10% 2% 5%
Not Switchable Inner 58% 85% 76%
Not Switchable Other 28% 6% 13%
Total 100% 100% 100%
A.11 The analysis assumes that 20% and 10% of potentially switchable first/last mile access/egress
trips in NYC and outside NYC (Other), respectively, switch to shared ebike. When applied to
the switchable trips (Figure A.6), we predict that a total of 130,000 daily first/last mile
access/egress trips will switch to shared ebike.
A.12 As shown in Figure A.7 and Table A.5, of the 67.4 million trips made within the NYMTC region
by residents on a typical weekday in 2017, we have estimated that 64% are not switchable,
34% are switchable but not predicted to switch to shared ebike, and 2% (1.2 million trips) are
predicted to switch to shared ebike.
vii
Figure A.7: Total daily switchable trips in the NYMTC region
Table A.5: Total daily switchable trips in the NYMTC region
Total daily trips

Switchable Switched 1.2 million
Total 67.4 million
Impacts analysis – New York MTC Region

Overview
A.13 Given the predicted travel diversions from vehicles (car/taxi) to shared ebike, we estimated
the impacts of the vehicle trip reduction in terms of:
• Traffic congestion reduction; and
A.14 0.5 million of the 1.2 million trips predicted to switch to shared ebike come from vehicle trips.
These person trips are equivalent to 370,000 vehicle trips, given the average vehicle
occupancies of 1.37 in NYC and of 1.19 outside NYC.
A.15 Table A.2 shows the VMT of vehicle trips and the reduction from these trips switching to
shared ebike in the NYMTC region. The VMT reductions of 1.4 million represents about 1% of
total vehicle VMT in the NYMTC area.
viii
Table A.6: VMT from vehicle trips in NYMTC region and reduction from shared ebike
NYC Other NYMTC Region

Daily vehicle miles-traveled (VMT) 25,000,000 189,000,000 214,000,000
VMT reduction 760,000 610,000 1,400,000
A.16 Vehicles traveling in the NYMTC region experienced a total of 2.4 million hours of delay in
201725, which suggests a delay of 1 minute per vehicle per mile in the NYMTC region. We
applied this estimate of delay to the diversions (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled) predicted
from the switchable trips analysis.
A.17 Table A.3 shows a reduction of 29,000 hours of delay from vehicle trips replaced by shared
ebike.
Table A.7: Daily vehicle-hours of delay from vehicle trips in the NYMTC region and reduction from shared ebike
NYC Other NYMTC Region

Daily vehicle-hours of delay (VHD) 1,800,000 610,000 2,40,000
VHD reduction 25,000 4,000 29,000
Emissions reduction
A.18 About 86,500 metric tons of carbon dioxide are emitted to the atmosphere from vehicle trips
traveling within the NYMTC region each day. The CO2 emission rate of 404 g/gallon was
applied to the diversions of vehicle trips to shared ebike (in terms of vehicle-miles traveled)
predicted from the switchable trips analysis. Table A.4 shows a carbon offset of 550 metric
tons per day from vehicle trips replaced by shared ebike.
Table A.8: CO2 emissions from vehicle trips in the NYMTC region and offset from shared ebike
CO2 emissions NYC Other NYMTC Region

Daily Carbon Emission 10,200 76,300 86,500
Carbon Offset 300 250 550
Impact summary
A.19 In summary, 1.2 million trips were predicted to switch to shared ebike in the NYMTC region.
These trips would replace 480,000 vehicle trips, 500,000 public transportation end-to-end
trips, 130,000 public transportation first/last mile access/egress trips, and 92,000 walk trips.
Based on the volume of trips currently made in the New York MTC region, this would be a
shared ebike mode share of 1.7%, with the remainder of cycling trips by private bike or shared
regular bikes. The impacts of the 1.2 million daily trips switching to shared ebike include the
following:
• 370,000 fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 1.4 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 550 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
25
https://www.nymtc.org/Required-Planning-Products/Congestion-Management-Process
ix
120,000 to 240,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 1.2 million daily
trips in New York MTC region.
New York MTC Region – Best Case
A.20 In the best case scenario based on Copenhagen’s current cycling mode share, 7.3 million trips
would switch to shared ebike. These trips would replace 3.2 million vehicle trips, 3.1 million
public transportation end-to-end trips, 480,000 public transportation first/last mile
access/egress trips, and 600,000 walk trips. Based on the volume of trips currently made in
the New York MTC region, this would be a shared ebike mode share of 11% with the
remainder of cycling trips by private bike or shared regular bikes. The impacts of the 6 million
daily trips switching to shared ebike include the following:
• 2.4 million fewer daily vehicle trips;
• 9.3 million fewer daily vehicle-miles;
• 3,700 fewer daily metric tons of CO2 emissions.
730,000 to 1,500,000 shared ebikes would need to be deployed to serve the 7.3 million daily
trips in New York MTC region.
x
Control Information
Prepared by Prepared for
Steer Uber
883 Boylston Street, 3rd Floor 1455 Market Street
Boston, MA 02116 San Francisco
+1 (617) 391 2300 CA 94103
www.steergroup.com
Steer project/proposal number Client contract/project number

23334001
Author/originator Reviewer/approver
Matthew Clark, Tolu Ogunbekun Jon Bottom
Other contributors Distribution

Katie Watson Client: Steer:
Frances Alder
Version control/issue number Date

FINAL 11/08/2018
steergroup.com

Uber:Jump Report On Shared Ebike Potential

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

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

Uber:Jump Report On Shared Ebike Potential

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Technical Report

Shared ebike potential:

Shared ebike potential:

Prepared by: Prepared for:

+1 (617) 391 2300 Client ref:

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 6

3 New York City ......................................................................................................... 25

4 Best Case ................................................................................................................ 35

813,000 daily trips switching to shared ebike in London result in:

Figure 1.1: Greater London Study Area

Figure 1.2: New York City (5 boroughs) Study Area

Figure 1.3: New York MTC Region Study Area

Switchable trips methodology

Table 1.1: Switchable trips criteria

Criteria Reason Switchable trips

Table 2.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions)

Potentially switchable trips

2.0 3.4 3.5

Table 2.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips)

Vehicle (Car, Taxi and Public Transport Walk/Cycle Total

How many potentially switchable complete trips will switch?

Figure 2.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike

Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike

Table 2.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode

Vehicle (Car, Taxi and Public Transport Walk/Cycle Total

First/last mile access/egress trips

Category A Category B Total

Total switchable trips

Table 2.5: Total daily switchable trips

Total daily switchable trips

Figure 2.8: Number of shared ebikes required for Greater London

3 New York City

Table 3.1: Daily complete trips by mode (millions)

Potentially switchable trips

Table 3.2: Potentially switchable complete trips by mode (share of trips)

Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

How many potentially switchable trips will switch?

Figure 3.3: Percentage of trips that switch to shared ebike

Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike

Table 3.3: Daily complete trips switched to shared ebike by mode

Mode switched Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

First/last mile access/egress trips

Category A Category B Total

Total switchable trips

Table 3.5: Total daily switchable trips

Total daily trips

Shared ebikes required

A Appendix - New York MTC Region

Switchable trips – New York MTC Region

24 2010-2050 Total Population https://tig.nymtc.org/

Figure A.2: Mode share of daily complete trips (NYMTC Region)

Potentially switchable complete trips

Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

How many potentially switchable complete trips will switch?

Complete trips predicted to switch to shared ebike

Vehicle Public transportation Walk Total

First /last mile access/egress trips

Category A Category B Total

Figure A.7: Total daily switchable trips in the NYMTC region

Table A.5: Total daily switchable trips in the NYMTC region

Total daily trips

Impacts analysis – New York MTC Region

NYC Other NYMTC Region