Connected Autonomous Vehicles: Travel Behavior and Energy Use

  • Jonathan RubinEmail author
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)


Autonomous vehicles offer great promise for unprecedented improvements in mobility and safety. However, self-driving vehicles may also significantly alter behavior because they can make driving easier and safer. This may lead connected autonomous vehicles to have large unintended consequences in terms of additional energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as causing decreases in the density of urban areas and may impact congestion. This paper uses consensus estimates from the literature on the cost of driving and the value of travel time to evaluate automation’s ability to reduce the costs of travel time. Policy solutions to address the induced driving include charging for miles driven taking into account when and where vehicles are used.


Autonomous vehicles Energy use Travel costs Economics 


  1. 1.
    NHTSA (2015) Traffic safety facts, 2013 Data. NHTSA.
  2. 2.
    NHTSA (2013) Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles, no. Monograph.
  3. 3.
    SAE International, International (2014) Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automated driving systems, vol J3601.
  4. 4.
    Brown A, Gonder J, Repac B (2014) An analysis of possible energy impacts of automated vehicle. In: G. Meyer, S. Beiker (eds) Road vehicle automation. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer International Publishing, 137–153.
  5. 5.
    MacKenzie D, Wadud Z, Leiby PN (2014) A first order estimate of energy impacts of automated vehicles in the united states. In: Transportation research board annual meeting, Vol. 93rd. The National Academies, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morrow III, William R, Jeffery BG, Sturges A, Saxena S, Gopal A, Millstein D, Shah N, Gilmore EA (2014) Key factors influencing autonomous vehicles’ energy and environmental outcome. In: G. Meyer, S. Beiker (eds) Road vehicle automation. Lecture Notes in Mobility, Springer International Publishing, 127–35.
  7. 7.
    Barth M, Boriboonsomsin K, Wu G (2014) Vehicle automation and its potential impacts on energy and emissions. In: G. Meyer, S. Beiker (eds) Road vehicle automation. Lecture Notes in Mobility, Springer International Publishing, pp 103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fagnant DJ, Kockelman KM (2014) The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based model scenarios. Trans Res Part C: Emerg Technol 40(March):1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2013.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schipper L (2002) Sustainable urban transport in the 21st Century: a new agenda. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 1792(1)(J Art):12–19Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson JM, Kalra N, Stanley KD, Sorensen P, Samaras C, Oluwatola O (2014) Autonomous vehicle technology: a guide for policymakers. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
  11. 11.
    Small KA, Verhoef ET (2007) The economics of urban transportation. Book, Whole. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    AAA (2015) Your driving costs: how much are you really paying to drive?
  13. 13.
    Schrank D, Eisele B, Lomax T, Bak J (2015) “2015 Urban mobility scorecard. Texas A&M Transportation Institute.
  14. 14.
    FHWA (2015) Our nation’s highways—2000, selected facts and figures. Office of Highway Policy Information Federal Highway Administration.
  15. 15.
    Triplett T, Robert S, Sandra R (2015) American driving survey: methodology and year 1 results, May 2013–May 2014. AAA Found Traffic Saf.
  16. 16.
    Becker GS (1965) A theory of the allocation of time. Econ J 75(299):493–517. doi: 10.2307/2228949 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Belenky P (2011) Revised departmental guidance on valuation of travel time in economic analysis. US Department of Transportation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hensher D (2013) Value of travel time savings. In: Andre de P, Robin L, Emile Q, Vickerman (eds) A handbook of transport economics. Edward Elgar Pub, Cheltenham, 135–159Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Small KA (2012) Valuation of travel time. Econ Transp 1(1–2). doi: 10.1016/j.ecotra.2012.09.002
  20. 20.
    Abrantes PAL, Wardman MR (2011) Meta-Analysis of UK values of travel time: an update. Transp Res A: Policy Pract 45(1):1–17. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2010.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shires JD, de Jong GC (2009) An international meta-analysis of values of travel time savings. Eval Program Plann Evaluating Impact Transp Projects: Lessons Disciplines 32(4):315–325. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Parry IWH, Small KA (2002) Does Britain or the United States have the right gasoline tax? Resources for the FutureGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Steimetz SSC (2008) Defensive driving and the external costs of accidents and travel delays. Transp Res B: Methodol 42(9):703–724. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2008.01.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Carrion C, Levinson D (2012) Value of travel time reliability: a review of current evidence. Transp Res A: Policy Pract 46(4):720–741. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2012.01.003 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barker T, Jonathan R (2007) Macroeconomic effects of climate policies on road transport: efficiency agreements versus fuel taxation for the United Kingdom, 2000–2010. Trans Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 2017(-1):54–60Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chan NW, Gillingham K (2015) The microeconomic theory of the rebound effect and its welfare implications. J Assoc Environ Res Econ 2(1):133–159. doi: 10.1086/680256 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schrank D, Eisele B, Lomax T, Bak J (2015) 2015 Urban mobility scorecard. Texas A&M Transportation Institute.
  28. 28.
    EPA (2008) Average annual emissions and fuel consumption for gasoline-fueled passenger cars and light trucks. US Environ Prot Agency Off Transp Air Qual.
  29. 29.
    Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government (2013) Technical support document: technical update of the social cost of carbon for regulatory impact analysis—Under executive order 12866. The White House.
  30. 30.
    EPA, and USDOT (2012) Final rulemaking for 2017–2025 light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and corporate average fuel economy standards.
  31. 31.
    NHTSA (2012) 2017 and later model year light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions and corporate average fuel economy standards. 40 CFR Parts 85, 86 and 600Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li J (2001) Explaining high-occupancy-toll lane use. Transp Res D: Transp Environ 6(1):61–74. doi: 10.1016/S1361-9209(00)00013-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Konishi H, Mun S (2010) Carpooling and congestion pricing: HOV and HOT Lanes. Reg Sci Urban Econ 40(4):173–186. doi: 10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2010.03.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lindsey R (2006) Do economists reach a conclusion on road pricing? The intellectual history of an idea econ journal watch. Econ J Watch 3(J Art):292–379Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lindsey R (2010) Reforming road user charges: a research challenge for regional science. J Reg Sci 50(1):471–492. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2009.00639.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sorensen P, Ecola L, Wachs M (2013) Emerging strategies in mileage-based user fees. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board 2345(J Art):31–38. doi: 10.3141/2345-05

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Margaret Chase Smith Policy Center and School of EconomicsUniversity of MaineOronoUSA

Personalised recommendations