There is significant interest in reducing urban growth impacts yet little information exists to comprehensively estimate the energy and air quality tradeoffs. An integrated transportation and land-use life-cycle assessment framework is developed to quantify the long-term impacts from residential infill, using the Phoenix light rail system as a case study. The results show that (1) significant reductions in life-cycle energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, respiratory, and smog impacts are possible; (2) building construction, vehicle manufacturing, and energy feedstock effects are significant; and (3) marginal benefits from reduced automobile use and potential household behavior changes exceed marginal costs from new rail service.
AdalberthKarinAlmgrenAndersPetersenEbbe Holleris. 2001. “Life Cycle Assessment of Four Multi-family Buildings.” International Journal of Low Energy and Sustainable Buildings2:21.
2.
ADOT (Arizona Department of Transportation). 2011. What Moves You Arizona: Long-range Transportation Plan 2010-2035. Phoenix: Arizona Department of Transportation.
3.
AktasCan B.BilecMelissa M.2011. “Impact of Lifetime on US Residential Building LCA Results.” International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment17 (3): 337–349.
4.
ANL (Argonne National Laboratory). 2012. “The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) Fuel Cycle Model Version GREET 1.8d and Vehicle Cycle Model Version GREET 2.7a.” Argonne, IL: Transportation Technology R&D Center, Argonne National Laboratory, US Department of Energy. Accessed May 5, 2012. http://greet.es.anl.gov.
Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. 2012. “Impact Estimator for Buildings, Version 4.1.1412.” Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Athena Sustainable Materials Institute.
7.
BareJane. 2011. “TRACI 2.0: The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts 2.0.” Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy13 (5): 687–96.
8.
BartholomewK.2007. “Land Use Transportation Scenario Planning: Promise and Reality.” Transportation34 (4): 397–412.
9.
BoarnetM. G.CompinN. S.1999. “Transit-oriented Development in San Diego County: The Incremental Implementation of a Planning Idea.” Journal of the American Planning Association65 (1): 80–96.
10.
BruegmannRobert. 2005. Sprawl: A Compact History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
CalthorpePeter. 1993. “Design Guidelines.” In The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream, 77–112. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press.
CerveroRobert. 1984. “Light Rail Transit and Urban Development.” Journal of the American Planning Association50 (2): 133–47.
14.
CerveroRobertFerrellChristopherMurphySteven. 2002. “Transit-oriented Development and Joint Development in the United States: A Literature Review.” Research Results Digest52:1–144.
15.
ChatmanD. “Does TOD Need the T?” Journal of the American Planning Association79 (1): 17–31.
16.
ChesterMikhailHorvathArpad. 2009. “Environmental Assessment of Passenger Transportation Should Include Infrastructure and Supply Chains.” Environmental Research Letters4 (2): 1–8.
17.
ChesterMikhailHorvathArpadMadanatSamer. 2010a. “Comparison of Life-Cycle Energy and Emissions Footprints of Passenger Transportation in Metropolitan Regions.” Atmospheric Environment44 (8): 1071–9.
18.
ChesterMikhailHorvathArpadMadanatSamer. 2010b. “Parking Infrastructure: Energy, Emissions, and Automobile Life-cycle Environmental Accounting.” Environmental Research Letters5 (3): 034001.
19.
ChesterMikhailNahlikMatthewFraserAndrewKimballMindyGarikapatiVenu. 2013. “Integrating Life-cycle Environmental and Economic Assessment with Transportation and Land Use Planning.” Environmental Science & Technology. Published electronically September20, 2013. doi:10.1021/es402985g.
20.
ChesterMikhailPincetlStephanieElizabethZoeEisensteinWilliamMatuteJuan. 2013. “Infrastructure and Automobile Shifts: Positioning Transit to Reduce Life-Cycle Environmental Impacts for Urban Sustainability Goals.” Environmental Research Letters8 (1): 015041.
21.
ChurchmanA.1999. “Disentangling the Concept of Density.” Journal of Planning Literature13 (4): 389–411.
City of Phoenix. 2011. Zoning Districts with Brief Descriptions. Phoenix, AZ: City of Phoenix Planning and Development Department. Accessed June 12, 2012. http://www.phoenix.gov/planning.
CooneyGregory A.2011. “Life Cycle Assesment of Diesel and Electric Public Transportation Buses.” MS thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Environmental Engineering.
28.
CooperJ.RyleyT.SmythA.2001. “Energy Trade-offs and Market Responses in Transport and Residential Land-use Patterns: Promoting Sustainable Development Policy.” Urban Studies38 (9): 1573–88.
DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2011. National Household Travel Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
DuffyAidan. 2009. “Land Use Planning in Ireland—A Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Recent Residential Development in the Greater Dublin Area.” International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment14 (3): 268–77.
33.
EcheniqueMarcial H.HargreavesAnthony J.MitchellGordonNamdeoAnil. 2012. “Growing Cities Sustainably: Does Urban form Really Matter?” Journal of the American Planning Association78 (2): 121–37.
EIA. 2011. “Monthly Electric Utility Sales and Revenue Report with State Distributions.” Form EIA-826. Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. Accessed March 15, 2013. http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia826/.
FrijiaStephaneGuhathakurtaSubhrajitWilliamsEric. 2012. “Functional Unit, Technological Dynamics, and Scaling Properties for the Life Cycle Energy of Residences.” Environmental Science & Technology46 (3): 1782–8.
43.
FTA (Federal Transit Authority). 2004. Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects. Washington, DC: Federal Transit Authority. Accessed June 4, 2012. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_102.pdf.
44.
GalsterGeorgeHansonRoyceRatcliffeMichael R.WolmanHaroldColemanStephenFreihageJason. 2001. “Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and Measuring an Elusive Concept.” Housing Policy Debate12 (4): 681–717.
45.
GoberPatricia. 2005. Metropolitan Phoenix: Place Making and Community Building in the Desert. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
46.
GolubA.GuhathakurtaS.SollapuramB.2012. “Spatial and Temporal Capitalization Effects of Light Rail in Phoenix: From Conception, Planning, and Construction to Operation.” Journal of Planning Education and Research32 (4): 415–29.
GuerraE.CerveroR.TischlerD.2012. “Half-Mile Circle: Does It Best Represent Transit Station Catchments?” Transportation Research Board: Journal of the Transportation Research Board2276:101–9.
49.
GuggemosA.HorvathA.2006. “Decision-Support Tool for Assessing the Environmental Effects of Constructing Commercial Buildings.” Journal of Architectural Engineering12 (4): 187–95.
50.
GustavssonL.SathreR.2006. “Variability in Energy and Carbon Dioxide Balances of Wood and Concrete Building Materials.” Building and Environment41 (7): 940–51.
51.
HankeySteveMarshallJulian D.2010. “Impacts of Urban Form on Future US Passenger-Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Energy Policy38 (9): 4880–87.
52.
HeimCarol. 2001. “Leapfrogging, Urban Sprawl, and Growth Management; Phoenix, 1950-2000.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology60 (1): 39.
53.
HeinonenJukkaJunnilaSeppo. 2011. “Case Study on the Carbon Consumption of Two Metropolitan Cities.” International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment16 (6): 569–79.
54.
HeinonenJukkaKyröRiikkaJunnilaSeppo. 2011. “Dense Downtown Living More Carbon Intense due to Higher Consumption: A Case Study of Helsinki.” Environmental Research Letters6 (3): 1–9.
IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, edited by SolomonS.QinD.ManningM.ChenZ.MarquisM.AverytK. B.TignorM.MillerH. L.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
57.
JunnilaSeppoHorvathArpad. 2003. “Life-Cycle Environmental Effects of an Office Building.” Journal of Infrastructure Systems9 (4): 157–66.
58.
Kinkisharyo International LLC. 2008. Phoenix-Valley Metro Rail Technical Data. Westwood, MA: Kinkisharyo International LLC.
59.
KittrellKatherine. 2009. Phoenix Metro Light Rail: Land Appreciation and Public Policy. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.
Maricopa County Assessor’s Office. 2012. Maricopa County Book 100 Parcel Data. Phoenix, AZ: Maricopa County Assessor’s Office.
65.
MasanetEricStadelAlexanderGurselPetek. 2012. Life-Cycle Evaluation of Concrete Building Construction as a Strategy for Sustainable Cities. Skokie, IL: Portland Cement Association.
66.
MashayekhYeganehHendricksonChrisMatthewsH. Scott. 2012. “The Role of Brownfield Developments in Reducing Household Vehicle Travel.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development138 (3): 206–14.
67.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy. 2011. Watering the Sun Corridor: Managing Choices in Arizona’s Megapolitan Area. Tempe: Arizona State University.
68.
National Transit Database. 2011. Ridership 2011. Phoenix: Valley Metro Rail Inc.
69.
NHTSA. 2012. NHTSA and EPA Propose to Extend the National Program to Improve Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gases for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks Benefits to Consumers NHTSA’s Proposed Standards. Washington, DC: National Highway Transportation Safety Administration. Accessed August 17, 2012. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/documents/420f11038.pdf.
70.
NormanJonathanMacLeanHeather L.KennedyChristopher A.2006. “Comparing High and Low Residential Density: Life-Cycle Analysis of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Journal of Urban Planning and Development132 (1): 10–21.
71.
OchsendorfJohnNorfordLeslie K.BrownDorothyDurschlagHannahHsuSophia LisbethLoveAndreaSanteroNicholasSweiOmarWebbAmandaWildnauerMargaret. 2011. Methods, Impacts, and Opportunities in the Concrete Building Life Cycle. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
72.
ParkerT.McKeeverMikeArringtonG. B.Smith-HeimerJanet. 2002. Statewide Transit-Oriented Development Study: Factors for Success in California. Sacramento: California Department of Transportation.
RameshT.PrakashRaviShuklaK. K.2010. “Life Cycle Energy Analysis of Buildings: An Overview.” Energy and Buildings42 (10): 1592–600.
75.
RexTom R.2000. Population Density in Metropolitan Phoenix. Phoenix: Morrison Institute for Public Policy.
76.
RSMeans. 2009a. Square Foot Costs: Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Institutional. 15th ed.Kingston, MA: R. S. Means.
77.
RSMeans. 2009b. RSMeans Residential Cost Data. 28th ed.Kingston, MA: R. S. Means.
78.
SanteroNicholasLoijosAlexanderAkbarianMehdiOchsendorfJohn. 2011. Methods, Impacts, and Opportunities in the Concrete Pavement Life Cycle. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
79.
SartoriI.HestnesA. G.2007. “Energy Use in the Life Cycle of Conventional and Low-Energy Buildings: A Review Article.” Energy and Buildings39 (3): 249–57.
80.
TraynorGregory W.ApteMichael G.ChangGee-Minn. 1996. Pollutant Emission Factors from Residential Natural Gas Appliances: A Literature Review. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
81.
TRB (Transportation Research Board). 2009. Driving and the Built Environment—The Effects of Compact Development on Motorized Travel, Energy Use, and CO2 Emissions. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.
82.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2012. 2011 American Housing Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. Accessed March 15, 2013. http://www.census.gov/housing/ahs/.
83.
WeberChristopherMatthewsH. Scott. 2008. “Quantifying the Global and Distributional Aspects of American Household Carbon Footprint.” Ecological Economics66:379–91.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
