• Ingen resultater fundet

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

N/A
N/A
Info
Hent
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Del "The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial"

Copied!
43
0
0

Indlæser.... (se fuldtekst nu)

Hele teksten

(1)

v v

Confidential | August - 2006

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

BACKGROUND

RESULT – TRAFFIC IMPACT SOLUTION DESIGN

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION WHY IBM

(2)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

BACKGROUND ››

(3)

Situation in Stockholm

Inhabitants

ƒ 1,9 million in the county of Stockholm

ƒ 760 000 in the city of Stockholm

ƒ 275 000 in the Stockholm inner city

Travel & transportation

ƒ 560 000 vehicles cross the inner city cordon per working day

ƒ 73% of all personal trips across the inner city cordon during rush hour is by public transport

ƒ 2,5% car ownership increase per year

ƒ Lack of capacity in between the northern and the southern halves of the region (road and rail)

BACKGROUND

(4)

Situation in Stockholm

External impacts

ƒ Congestion estimates cost

600 to 800 million Euro per year

ƒ 361 severely injured & 18 traffic deaths

ƒ 10 – 100 cases of cancer caused by atmospheric pollution

ƒ 50 000 inhabitants exposed to over 65 dBA

BACKGROUND

(5)

Situation in Stockholm

BACKGROUND

(6)

Objectives

ƒ Reduce congestion – reduce traffic volume by 10 – 15 % during rush hour

ƒ To improve accessibility for buses and cars in the inner city

ƒ Improve the environment

Improved Public Transport

New Park & Ride

BACKGROUND

(7)

The Stockholm Trial – 4 Parts

The city of Stockholm Procurement

General Information Evaluation Program

Park-and-Ride SL

Public Transport Operator Road Administration

Congestion Charges System Owner

Information how to pay tax

IBM

Design, Build & Operate the solution and

all processes

BACKGROUND

(8)

Congestion Charges Trial Period

ƒ Trial period January 2006 – July 2006

ƒ Referendum September 2006

ƒ Decision about making the system permanent or not

BACKGROUND

(9)

Charging Schemes Design

BACKGROUND

ƒ Charges in both directions

ƒ Exempted traffic

– To and from the Lidingö islands – Emergency vehicles

– Vehicles with disability permits – Foreign cars

– Buses over 14 tons – Taxis

– Motorcycles

– Environmental vehicles

(10)

Pricing approach for redistributing traffic

BACKGROUND

ƒ Variable charges

ƒ No charges during low traffic periods

ƒ Max charge 60 SEK per day (6

Euro)

(11)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

Like establishing a new

Company ››

(12)

Solution Complexity

Performance

ƒ 99,96 % system availability

ƒ Very low number of failed charges

Volumes

ƒ 350,000 passages per day

ƒ 850,000 photos per day

ƒ 110,000 payments per day

ƒ 10,000 - 2,000 calls per day

Scale

ƒ 1,000,000 user accounts

ƒ 430,000 distributed transponder

ƒ 81 charged lanes

ƒ 7,4 Terabyte storage

IBM ON DEMAND SOLUTION

(13)

How does it work?

2

Information is matched with registered vehicle. Fee is added to the owner’s account

Call-centre operations managed by IBM

The gateway registers the vehicle

A

1 Picture is taken of the vehicle’s licence plate.

ABC 123

B

IBM has designed, built, implemented integrated and runs

the congestion charging system

3 Way of payment

• Transponder/direct debit

• Bank/Giro

• 7-eleven/ Pressbyrån

(14)

Equipment

CAMERA ANTENNA

IBM ON DEMAND SOLUTION

LASER

(15)

Vehicle identification process

WHY IBM

Road Surface

6300

1700 25

50

10000 10000

31

5500 1300

Distance between suspension point of Registration Unit and center of

middle gantry

Height to Registration Unit suspension point

Distance defined by detection sensor bracket

1700 Distance between center of gantry and equipment suspension points

Height to Radio Communication equipment suspension points 6500

Height to detection sensor

suspension points

Distance between suspension point of Registration Unit and center of

middle gantry DBLS

TX / R / MR

RU RU

The Switch (S) shall be mounted above and not more than 500 mm from the TXes

(not applicable for MR)

6500

Minimum headroom 5500

Height to Registration Unit suspension point

6500

Minimum headroom

(16)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

RESULT – TRAFFIC IMPACT ››

(17)

Road traffic down 20-25%

RESULTS – TRAFFIC IMPACT

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Jan Feb Mars April

2005

2006

(18)

Redistributed traffic from the peek

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(19)

Exceed all expectations

Improvements also for non car users

ƒ 40,000 new daily public transport passengers

ƒ Time tables for inner city buss has to be

redesign due to the increased average speed

ƒ Inner-city retailers trade no significant impact

ƒ Attitudes has changed from negative to positive

RESULTS – TRAFFIC IMPACT

(20)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION ››

(21)

A holistic business approach

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(22)

Responsibility from end to end

ƒ What's the frame work?

ƒ What needs to be decided?

ƒ How are we going to control the performance?

ƒ How are we going to execute the operation?

ƒ How can we organise the system in the most efficient way?

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(23)

City of Stockholm

Transport of Stockholm Swedish Road

Adminstration

Tax Authority IBM

Ministry of Finance

Enforcement

Courts B ra vi da

C o nn e ct a

E la n I T R e so u rc e e W o rk

M a np o w er

N o rd ea P o st e n

R e ita n S e rv ic e ha nd e l S ve ri ge A B R iz IT

S A P

S to ka b

S w e co V B B A B

V Ä G B E L Y S N IN G I S V E R IG E A B FO

R T U M D IS T R IB U TI O N A B N O F A

V Ä G V E R K E T P R O D U K TI O N Fo cu s N eo n

Ministry of Industry …

Q -Fr

e e

(24)
(25)

Expectations VS reality

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

Architecture Overview

Internet Extrane t

SAP CRM FI-CA

BW

Customer Service

Integration Hub

Transaction Store

Local Vehicle Database Detailed Transaction

database

Citrix

Vehicle owner

MLC

Preprocessor OCR

Images Store

Charging points

Web Portal

External Systems

E2E Monitoring

Schedul ing

Storage USF Copenhagen

Roadside

(26)

Expectations VS reality

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

6

24 12

Web + Payment

Capturing Passage Data

Preprocessing and OCR Tax Decision

Dunning

Direct Debit Business Warehous Update

Car Registy Update

Payment Files

7

8

9 10

11

MCR and

13

15 14 21

22 23

1 2

3

4

Backup

5

START

24 Hours Operational Cycle

(27)

We redesigned the solution a number of times!

Major challenges to overcome

ƒ IBM got the responsibility from end to end

ƒ Coordinate the large number of partners

ƒ Manage the large number (200) of change requests

ƒ Optimise the system design to meet the aggressive service levels

ƒ Manage all data processing within a 24 hour cycle

ƒ The system had to be up and running 3 Jan 2006

ƒ Publicity

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(28)

Reality VS Expectations

A normal day at work

ƒ Calls to the call centre 2,000 (30,000)

ƒ Charged passages 350,000 (500,000)

ƒ Tax decisions 110,000

ƒ Reminder letter 1 3,650

ƒ Reminder letter 2 1,200

ƒ Complaints on charges 100 (1,000)

ƒ Legal appeals 6 (100)

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(29)

Extensive media coverage

Before the launching date

Solution, transponders and project costs

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(30)

Extensive media coverage

System launching day

Focused on the expected chaos

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(31)

Extensive media coverage

One day after

Immediate positive press focused on the huge impact

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(32)

Extensive media coverage

Some weeks after

System performance exceeds all expectation

DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION

(33)

Costs

What's driving the total cost?

ƒ Exemptions rules

ƒ Service levels

ƒ Payment rules

ƒ Transponders

WHY IBM

(34)

Recommendations and lessons learned

Preparation phase

ƒ Secure a strong political support & commitment

ƒ Define clear objective

ƒ Apply Road User Charging as part of an integrated transport policy

ƒ Prepare regulations and legislation to support an efficient and user friendly system

ƒ Procurement based on functional requirements Delivery phase

ƒ Use a simple and well proven technical solution

ƒ Design a flexible and scalable solution based on open standard components

ƒ

WHY IBM

(35)

Road Charging – Why IBM

Managing complexity

ƒ Holistic approach

ƒ Experience

ƒ IBM Research

ƒ Security/privacy

ƒ Technology evolution

ƒ Open standards

WHY IBM

(36)

Contact details – Reference case contact

WHY IBM

Jamie Houghton

Associate Partner IBM BTO RUC Global Leader

Tel: + 44 (0) 771 8778662

E-mail: jamie.houghton@uk.ibm.com

Gunnar Johansson

Associate Partner, IBM GBS

EMEA RUC Business Solution Professional Tel: +46 70 793 5729

E-mail: gunnar.s.johansson@se.ibm.com

Todd Appel

Associate Partner, IBM BTO EMEA Public Sector Business Development Tel: +44 (0) 77 64 988 987

E-mail: todd.m.appel@uk.ibm.com

ƒ Videos

Winning the Road Game

Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

ƒ Planed RUC seminars

– Urban Futures conference, Stockholm May 3-5

– Impact Conference, Stockholm June 29-30

ƒ Stockholm VIP client demonstrations – Road side equipment (Bus tour) – Call centre

– Central system

ƒ White Papers / Leaflets

Driving the future of road user chargingCongestion Charging White Paper

Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial leaflet

ƒ RUC Knowledge card (IBM internal)

(37)
(38)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

WHY IBM ››

(39)

A combination of economic trends and policy trends make the transport system inefficient, and there is no immediate relief in sight

Inefficiency

Policy Trends

Environmental pressure

Static tax

Land exploitation resistance Infrastructure

Growth Limitations

Economic Trends

Glo baliz

ation

Urban ization

Economic Growth Tec

hnological &

Industrial evo

lution

Growth in road usage

Growth in

road usage Inefficiency

(40)

IBM Vision for Europe – towards national road charges (cordon and distance)

Inter-urban road tolls Tunnels &Bridges New/wider roads

Congestion charging

Lorry road user charging

(41)

Charging schemes in other cities

Singapore Oslo London Stockholm

Objective

Pricing scheme

Payment

Enforcement Revenue per year

Future

Reduce congestion 10- 15%, improve the environment and fund increased public transport and Park&Ride

Reduce congestion 15%

and fund investments in the London transport system

Fund new road & public transport infrastructure projects

Optimize the usage of road infrastructure.

€0-2 per in bound trip;

variable charge

Monday to Friday 8:00 to 19:00

Pre payment Cash card and DSRC

€1-2 per in and outbound trip; variable charge Monday to Friday 6:30 to 18:30

Camera and ANPR

€10 area charge per day, flat rate Monday to Friday 7:00 to 18:30

€40M

€1,5 per inbound trip; flat rate all days

Pre payment via DSRC or manually at road side

Post payment via DSRC &

direct debit or manually (giro or retailer)

Camera and MCR

€130M

Pre payment manually

Camera and ANPR

GPS based system considered

Extension and variable pricing scheme considered

€270M

Western extension, DSRC pilot project

Camera and ANPR

€85M

Referendum to decide to permanent or not

(42)

The Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial

BENCHMARKING ››

(43)

Differences and similarities

Solutions looks the same but are different

ƒ Oslo don’t charge congestions

ƒ London don’t have transponders

ƒ Stockholm is a “state of the art” solution built on proven technology

ƒ Singapore consider GPS solution for the future

WHY IBM

Referencer

RELATEREDE DOKUMENTER

The project is structured in six main pillars: 1) Deep Building Retrofit, 2) Shared e-Mobility (with five sub- domains: charging points, e-car sharing, e-bike sharing,

phases of the CC charging curve, Park et al. used the SOC to correct the kernel function in DNN [119]. Hence, the proposed method can accu- rately estimate the SOH of the battery

a) Sharing rules may be applied for interdependent bidding zone borders to share capacities efficiently among the different bidding zone borders. Zone-to-zone PTDF matrices may

Svenska kraftnät has reduced the capacity on the interconnector between SE3 and DK1, because of congestion in the West Coast Corridor, planned maintenance on and close to

Svenska kraftnät has reduced the capacity on the interconnector between SE3 and DK1, because of congestion in the West Coast Corridor, planned maintenance on and near

Subsequently, the process is repeated by heating the water in the second tank (charging), while the water in the first tank is used for industrial process heating

It considers the consumption, PV electricity generation, off-peak charging, storage capacity and state of charge of each individual dwelling, as well as the storage capacity and

The advantages of hydrogen EVs over BEVs are shorter charging time, comparable to the charging time of ICE cars, and higher specific energy. Taking into account onboard