Railways save intercity travel energy

with compatible time cost: Analysis

based on Mobility Big Data
GRMD 3305 Transport Geography

Jacob, Junwei Zhang

28 Feb 2024

1
Me
• PhD @ PolyU
• Postdoctoral fellow @ GRM
• Urban dynamics; Multi-modal Transport; Sustainability

2
Contents
• Introduction
o Energy Consumption in Intercity Transport
o Unique Challenges in Intercity Transport
• Case Study
o Problems – modal split and energy footprint
o Methods – counter-factual design
o Key Results – railway effects and trade-off
• Conclusions and Future

3
Introduction

4
Transportation is Energy in Motion
• In early 1800s, Energy consumed by Transport is not a problem
Industrial Revolution

5
Moving people and goods are expensive
• Major Energy
Consumer:
Transportation
accounts for 28%
of final energy use
globally.

• Urbanization: 55%
of the world’s
population lives in
urban areas
(expected to
increase to 68% by
2050)
6
What defines Intercity Travels?

• Definition: Intercity travel refers to the movement of people

between different cities, typically over a considerable distance
that separates metropolitan areas. This type of travel can be
distinguished from local or intracity travel, which occurs within
a single city's boundaries, and international travel, which
involves crossing borders.

7
(Long) Distance makes intercity travel more unique

8
Is intercity travel energy-intensive?
• Depending on modal efficiency:
million tons of oil equivalent (Mtoe)
per person per kilometers

Frequently used intercity

transport modes

9
Is intercity travel energy-intensive?
• Depending on travel behavior Last year, how many trips did you take
outside Hong Kong?

• To Shenzhen?
• Japan?
• Canada / UK?
• 48 trips (one trip per week) in 100km
• 4 trips (holidays) in 1000km
• 1 trip (conference) in 10000km

However, at least 730 trip inside a city

Intracity vs Intercity transport energy???10
Gonzalez, Marta C., Cesar A. Hidalgo, and Albert-Laszlo Barabasi. "Understanding individual human mobility patterns." nature 453.7196 (2008): 779-782.
Intercity Travels Consume More Energy
• Intercity transport contributes to more Travel energy is a function of loadings,
than 50% of energy consumption and distance, and modal efficiency.
60% of carbon emissions for the
movement of people (ITF, 2021). In
China, intercity travel increases faster
than urban travel, accounting for the
largest share (54%) in total passenger
transport activity by the century end
(Yin et al., 2015).

• A rebound and increase of intercity

traffic is observed after the Covid-19
pandemic and is expected to be
doubled by 2050 compared to 2015
(ITF, 2021).
11
Intracity solutions are not effective to save intercity travel energy
In intracity travel, the target is to reduce traffic
• Commuting-friendly Land use design
• Public transport – tram, bus, etc.

Challenges of intercity travel

• Robust travel demand
• Link with regional economy
• Lack of clean mode alternatives
12
China Strategies in Saving Intercity Energy
• Modal split optimization is a key pathway

What transport mode is largely

promoted in China for intercity
travel?

13
High Speed Railway as Clean Alternative in China
‘Medium-and Long-Term Railway
Network Plan’ (MLTRP) in 2004.

150000km railway length

including 4000km HSR
accounting for the 69% of the
world total HSR lines (UIC, 2022).

14
Case Study

15
About this Study
We learned:
1. Intercity travel consumes a lot of energy
2. Railway is largely promoted in China for intercity travel

Unknown Questions:
1. How does intercity travel energy varies by distances and locations?
2. Did railway really save intercity travel energy in China?
3. How railway influence average travel time together with energy changes?

16
Tencent Mobility Big Data

Travel flows extracted from Tencent Enhance Flows Data by Map API
Location-based-service (LBS) (travel routes and travel time)
17
Study Area

297 cities in China including

16 megacities, 73 very large-sized cities, 190
large-sized cities, and 18 medium and small-
sized cities classified by population size
(State Council, 2014)

18
Method Frame
Question 1

Question 2&3
19
Counter-factual design
Observed Flows and Energy
vs
Simulated Flows and Energy

What if China goes in US way?

20
US way has a Contrasting Modal Structure
Dominated by cars and flights
with less railway traffic

21
Traffic Shifting and Energy Simulation
• Counter-factual Scenario should be realistic. In my case: China Sustainable
Transport Plan (ERI, 2017)
Railway competes with car in 200-400km
Railway competes with flight in 400-1000km

22
Energy Gap, Time Gap, and Cost-effectiveness Ratio
“Toward equitable and sustainable transport, energy-saving mustn't undermine the
accessibility of city and opportunity of citizens for intercity travel” - (ITF, 2021)

ET ratio = Energy Gap / Time Gap

*Energy hereby refers to the sum of energy consumption for travelling to a destination.
23
*Time hereby refers to the weighted sum of route time for travelling to a destination.
 Results

1. How does intercity travel energy vary by distance and locations?

24
Results – Estimating Travel Energy by Mobility Data is Feasible
Our estimations
• Intercity travel consumes 7.4 Ej in total.
• Intercity travel account for 57% of total passenger transport energy (13 Ej).
• An inverted-U distribution of Per capita Energy (0.6 toe in Beijing and 2.0 in Sanya)

Other Records for the same year

• Yin et al. (2015): 7 Ej intercity passenger travel.
• World Energy Database (IEA, 2018): 60% carbon emission by intercity transport
• Per capita energy in US or European countries: approx. 1 toe per person.

25
Results – Pareto Distribution of Intercity Travel Energy
• The top 10% flows (n=1664) accounts for 80% of total flow energy, and the top 24% cities
(n=70) also consume 80% of total destination energy.

26
Results – map of high energy travel flows and destinations

• Wide range of very large cities (orange dots) are energy-intensive due to car trips
• Flight trips to megacities (red dots) are especially energy-intensive 27
Results –
distance
effects
• Traffic (Lines)

• Energy (bars)

28
 Results

2. Did railway really save travel energy for China?

3. Relationship between energy saved and time cost in railway development?

29
Results – Energy Gap
• Total consumption
could be leveled up
from 177 to 229
Mtoe.

• The 52 Mtoe energy

gap is approx.
equivalent to half-
year transport
consumption in
India or all African
countries.

30
Results – Time Gap
• Average time
travelling to
intercity
destinations in
counter-railway
scenario is shorter
(3.4 hour compared
to 4.3 hour in the
baseline)

• City-level time gap

varies across
geographic space (53
to 93 minutes)

31
Results – Interplay between Energy Saving and Increased Time Cost

• A positive relationship
between energy saving (log
scale) and increased intercity
travel time

• Cities have different paces

(slope) of energy-time ratio:
o Cities in red save more
energy with fewer time cost

o Cities in blue save less

energy with more time cost

32
Results – Interplay between Energy Saving and Time Cost
• City in different
regions and
tiers have
different time
cost in exchange
of energy saving

E for East China, SW for Southwest, S for South, N for North, C for Central, NW for Northwest, and NE for
Northeast; the second element represents city tiers: M for Megacities, V for very large-sized cities, L for large-
sized cities, and S for medium and small-sized cities. 33
Results – Map of City-Level ET ratio
ET ratio = Energy Gap / Time Gap
Urban agglomerations benefit the most from railway development
Benefited most Benefited least

34
Takeaways
• Mobility data is effective for the study using bottom-up approach.

• Minor changes in modal split (railway and others) lead to dramatic changes
on the destination energy and travel time, depending on city size and
location.

• The energy saving by railway is in exchange of travel time nowadays, which

will not always be true in future.

35
Future Intercity Travel?

Hyperloop?

36
Or Autonomous
Driving + Long
Ranges Electric Car?
• Privacy
• Flexibility
• Point-to-point

Always consider
distance effects.

37
Thanks for your Attention

junwei.zhang@cuhk.edu.hk
38