PRT as a

1

• PRT as a
• Transportation Utility
• A New Business Model of Urban Transportation
• Paul Hoffman
• Booz Allen Hamilton

hoffman_paul_at_bah.com
2
19th Century Options for a 21st Century Problem

• Expansion of current modes is limited by
• High costs
• Land availability
• Impact and public acceptance
• Highways
• Expensive in urban areas
• Limited land availability
• Metro/Commuter Rail
• Expensive in urban areas
• Light Rail
• High service factor but limited by surface
  traffic unless separated at higher cost
• Bus
• Low cost but limited by surface traffic and
  slower trip times
• Additional capacity is needed
• ITS can optimize current road infrastructure
• Congestion pricing can manage demand

New infrastructure that offers high service and
capacity at a reasonable cost and impact is also
needed to meet growing demand
3
The Genesis of PRT - Needs and Features

• A New Paradigm for Urban Public Transportation
• PRT has been engineered to serve modern urban
  needs

• ENGINEERED FEATURE
• Faster, personalized service with wide access to
  attract automobile users
• Non-stop, on-demand service with private,
  seated-only vehicles
• Lower costs, smaller footprint and tighter
  turning radius
• Smaller infrastructure for stations, track and
  right-of-way
• Reduced staffing, reduced energy use and reduced
  maintenance
• Small, lightweight vehicles operating non-stop
  and on demand
• Quiet, electric vehicles
• Short headways and high average speed through
  automation and non-stop trip

• NEED
• Reduce congestion, improve mobility
• Faster and more attractive service
• Improve urban access, impact and integration
• Lower capital costs
• Lower operating costs
• Reduce energy use
• Reduce pollution

4
Technology Overview PRT Fundamentals

• Fundamental elements of PRT technology
• On-demand, non-stop, origin-to-destination
  service
• Small, automated vehicles
• Small, exclusive use guideways
• Off-line stations
• Network of connected guideways
• Combines elements of automotive, computer,
  network and transit technologies
• Uses current state-of-the-art technologies
  including
• Advanced propulsion systems
• On-board switching and guidance
• High speed controls and communication
• Lightweight advanced materials

PRT represents a new option for sustainable,
effective urban transportation providing higher
access and service at a lower cost than current
transit options.
5
Components of PRT

• Small, fully automated vehicles
• Small, exclusive use guideways

ULTra
Skyweb Express
Vectus
Small guideway and foundation reduces right of
way requirements
Low impact allows ease of urban integration
6
Components of PRT

• Off-line stations sized to demand
• Networks supporting distributed demand and line
  haul access

Line-Haul Rail System
7
A New Paradigm Distributed Demand, Small
Infrastructure

• Conventional Guideway Transit
• Compact travelers into a few large vehicles
• Large guideway, large posts
• Scheduled service, long vehicle headways
• Higher costs, higher visual impact
• Personal Rapid Transit
• Distribute travelers among many small vehicles
• Small guideway, small posts
• On-demand service, short vehicle headways
• Lower costs, lower impact

8
Potential PRT Applications

• Urbanized Area
• Central Business District circulator
• High density area connector
• Feeder to existing transit stations/hubs
• Connector/distributor from satellite parking
  facilities
• Potential alternative to LRT, BRT or Monorail
  development or expansion
• Urban goods and light freight movement
• Activity Center/Campus
• Circulator within entertainment/tourism district
  
• Circulator within/between college or business
  campuses
• Airport landside and airside access
• Feeder to existing transit stations/hubs
• Connector/distributor from satellite parking
  facilities

9
Small Infrastructure Benefits

• Potential installation along
• Median or shoulder along commercial arterials or
  thoroughfares
• Curb line of major streets
• Minimizes environmental impact
• Quiet operation
• Low vibration
• Small visual impact
• No direct emissions
• Small stations allow
• Installation in building interiors
• Free standing structures
• Integrated into new additions

10
PRT has undergone over 30 years of development
Aerospace - USA
CVS - Japan
Cabintaxi - Germany
Morgantown System - USA
Chicago RTA/Raytheon - USA
11
ULTra

• Developed by Automated Transport Systems UK
• Initial funding from University of Bristol and
  extensive studies by the European Union EDICT
  program
• Partnership with British Airport Authority and
  European consortium of firms
• Test track in Cardiff Wales
• Heathrow implementation underway with August 2008
  target opening

Images courtesy of ATS
12
Vectus

• Joint venture led by Posco Steel and affiliates
  of Korea with WGH and Noventus European partners
• Initial technology development at POSTECH Pohang
  Univ. of Science and Technology in Korea
• Extensive technology development program in Korea
• Test track in Uppsala Sweden
• Target commercial readiness in 2008

Images courtesy of Vectus
13
Skyweb Express

• Developed by Taxi 2000 Corporation - Minnesota
• Initial development at University of Minnesota
  with private funds supporting ongoing efforts
• Significant history of development, engineering,
  research, application studies and PRT promotion
• Prototype vehicle and guideway section in
  Minnesota
• Pursuing programs in the Middle East

Images courtesy of Taxi 2000
14
PRT Technology Maturation

• PRT has followed an extended RD stage and is
  entering an early adopter stage of maturation

Large Scale Urban Mass Market
Regulated Utilities, Commoditization
Small Moderate Scale Systems
Standardization, Public/Private Development
Early Adopters - Public Systems
Morgantown
Heathrow, UAE? Sweden? Virginia?
Applied Research -Prototype and Pilot Systems
Cabintaxi, CVS, Raytheon, ULTRa, EDICT, Vectus
Basic Research -Concept Development
We are at a technology inflection point
Aerospace, UMTA, AGRT, U of M
15
Average Speed Comparison

• Average speed is determined by line speed, number
  of stops, distance between stops, dwell time at
  stops, and trip length
• PRT systems can achieve an average speed of 20-25
  mph with line speed of 25-35 mph due to non-stop
  trip
• PRT trips can be 80-100 faster than a typical
  bus trip
• PRT trips can be 20-30 faster than a typical
  heavy rail trip
• All else being equal, higher average speed can
  result in higher patronage

Source 2005 APTA Fact Book
Non-stop service allows PRT to have higher
average speeds than other transit modes
16
Capital Cost Comparison

• Capital costs are highly specific to location,
  line layout, number and complexity of stations
• The design of PRT systems, with small vehicles
  and guideways, can support lower capital costs
  than other exclusive, grade-separated, fixed
  guideway rail systems
• PRT costs can be expected to be comparable with
  exclusive right-of-way BRT systems
• Lower capital costs would be primarily due to
• Smaller guideway and stations
• Reduced civil work and right-of-way acquisition
• 1st Phase Metro Expansion
• 232 M per mile

SourcesKerr-2005, TCRP R90, GAO BRT 2000,
Vendor Estimates, Case Studies
17
OM Cost Comparison

• OM Cost Per Passenger Mile

Source 2005 NTD, FTA, Case Studies, PRT
Vendors, BAH Estimates
High levels of automation, reliable commercial
components and exclusive use guideways may allow
PRT systems to have competitive Operating and
Maintenance (OM) costs.
18
OM Cost and Revenue Per Trip Comparison

• Transit OM cost recovery is 34 nationally
• PRT systems can be expected to recover a higher
  percentage of OM costs if fares reflect per mile
  OM cost
• PRT in a moderate scale application can expect to
  break even on operating costs for an average four
  mile trip and average fare of 1.60

Source 2005 NTD, Case Studies, PRT Vendors, BAH
Estimates
19
Energy Use Comparison
Source Anderson 1998 - Note PRT figures are
engineering estimates only
PRT can provide lower overall energy use than
other transit modes with an auto equivalent of
70-90 MPG
HR - Heavy Rail Transit LR - Light Rail
Transit TB - Trolley Bus MB - Motor Bus VP
- Van Pool DB - Dial-a-Bus A - Automobile PR
- Personal Rapid Transit.
20
PRT Performance Comparison Capacity

• Line capacity is determined by headway, vehicle
  capacity and load factor
• PRT systems can have comparable line capacity
  with bus and light rail if safe and reliable
  short headway operation is achieved
• PRT systems can have higher overall system
  capacity when multiple lines and network layouts
  are considered with comparable total costs

Source TCRP Transit Capacity Manual
21
Moving Forward PRT as Full Option for Urban
Transportation

• Conventional transit guideway systems have
  difficulty providing urban scale service due to
  limitations including
• Custom designs
• Limited standards and interoperability
• Limited scalability
• Expensive and disruptive implementation
• Required transfers between line haul segments
• Service reductions for station additions
• To achieve the promise of an urban transportation
  solution, PRT will need to
• Avoid custom designs and vendor specific
  solutions that limit scalability, require
  transfers, increase complexity
• Adopt standards and commercial business models
  that provide increase revenue potential and
  decreased costs

22
Vision for the Future PRT - The Network Utility
Model

• PRT has the opportunity to develop a new business
  model with the potential to SCALE beyond the
  limited access of fixed guideway transit
• The model is founded on the success of other
  commercial network businesses such as
• Telephone
• Internet
• Cell Phones
• Cable
• These network industries are founded on several
  fundamental principles
• Open standards
• Mass production and economies of scale
• Multiple suppliers and providers
• Government regulation of public access and right
  of way
• Market pricing
• Open competition
• Private funding
• Transit can also follow these network successes
  if the fundamentals are applied to a common
  technology

23
Scalable Transit Networks

• PRT systems have the potential to evolve from
  local circulation and distribution systems to a
  full regional network

Franchise District 1
24
Scalable Transit Networks

• PRT systems have the potential to evolve from
  local circulation and distribution systems to a
  full regional network

Franchise District 1
Franchise District 2
Franchise District 3
25
The Internet Example

• Standard-Enabled Business
• TCP/IP protocol allowed all manufacturers to
  build to a common standard that allowed different
  devices and software products to work on a common
  network.
• A commercial business model with mass production,
  competition and division of providers
• Backbone Trunk Lines
• Devices
• Software
• Customer Access
• Billing
• Administration
• Content Providers
• Private utilities with government regulatory
  involvement

The Internet On Demand Information, Anytime,
Anywhere
26
A New Urban Transportation Business Model

• The Transit Utility model
• Publicly regulated
• Privately owned and operated
• Primarily private and supplemental public funding
• Market driven
• Standards based
• Organizations within an integrated business model
• Public Transit Regulator
• Transit Utility
• Service Operators
• Vehicle Operators
• Manufacturers

27
Public Transit Regulator

• Public Regulatory Agency functions
• Sells or grants public access/right-of-way
  through franchises
• Oversee standards compliance
• Insure safety, security, equal access
• Manage fare policy and costs of developer/service
  provider
• Manage central operations provider
• Provides supplemental funding
• Creation and Operation
• Multi-jurisdictional representation and authority
  for a region
• Generally chartered by the State
• Taxing and bonding authority
• Integrated charter with regional land use and
  transportation planning authorities

28
Transit Utility

• Private Transit Utilities
• One or more utilities for a region
• License to operate transit system from regulator
• Own and operate the transit network in the
  franchise area
• Own the land or acquire air-rights to install
  guideways in franchise area
• Private corporation with bonding and multiple
  funding sources
• Ownership by potential consortium of local land
  owners, developers, investors and public entities
• Build and operate against public standards
• Interoperability standards with other utilities

• Contract with manufacturers to build and install
  guideways, stations, vehicles and systems
• Contract with central operations provider for
  system management and control

29
Increased Revenue and Value with Private Utility

• Increased Real Estate Value
• Increased floor area ratio (FAR) is allowed if
  property is served by transit
• Increased FAR allows higher revenue per property
  and overall value
• Increased value due to attractiveness from access
  to transit
• Real Estate Value Capture Options
• Directly captured by Utility through ownership of
  stations and surrounding areas
• Captured by consortium of land owners as
  investors in the Utility
• Returned to Utility as private investments by
  consortium
• Potential real estate taxing district

• Other Revenue
• Station Fees from local developers to install
  stations and off-line guideways as an aid to
  development
• Station revenue from advertising and retail
  services
• Cargo Services
• Fare Revenue
• Right-of-Way Fees
• Supplemental Public Support

30
Operators Contract to Provide Services

• Service Operators
• Provide command and control functions
• Supervise overall control of system
• Insure vehicles and guideway sections are
  performing to standards
• Vehicle Operators
• Multiple providers are allowed to operate
  vehicles
• Similar to access providers for the internet
• Contract with manufacturers to build vehicles
• Contract with service operators for access to
  systems
• Manufacturers
• Build components such as control, vehicles and
  guideways to standards
• Compete on design, cost, efficacy, reliability,
  performance

31
MTR Corporation Hong Kong Transit Utility

• Operates as a private transportation and
  development corporation regulated to operate in
  Hong Kong
• Competes with other rail and bus transit
  operators
• Evolved from a government entity in 2000
• Railway Operations
• One of the most efficient operators in the world
• Privately funded and publicly regulated
• 50 year public franchise, 76 public ownership
• MTR Stations, Property and Development
• Highly commercial stations with multiple revenue
  generators
• Owns and operates residential and retail
  properties above and adjacent to stations
• Directly or cooperatively develops property
  around stations

32
MTR Performance A Best Case Example
33
MTR By the Numbers

• Railway Operations
• 2.5 million daily passengers
• 867 million annual passengers
• 1074 rail cars
• 53 stations
• 57 miles of track
• Efficient Operations
• MTR 4.5/rail-car-mile
• US Metro Average 8.2/rail-car-mile
• Powerful 2006 Financials
• Average fare 0.95
• Total Operating Expense 555 Million
• Total Fare Revenue 834 Million
• Total Operating Revenue 1,220 Million
• Gross Operating Profit 665 Million
• Net Property Profit/Taxes/Depreciation 327
  Million
• Net Profit 992 Million