Energy use for transportation in 22 Nordic towns

Næss, Petter; Sandberg, Synnøve Lyssand; Røe, Per Gunnar

doi:10.1080/02815739608730401

Cited by 52 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present Scandinavian context, the early work of Petter Naess from Norway followed this comparative approach, specifically investigating the issue of urban form and its influence on energy use in transport in Nordic urban environments [39]. Naess investigated energy use in transport in 22 Nordic towns and regions and found that the influence of urban form variables, especially denser central and inner core areas of cities, was more significant than that of car ownership, income and fuel prices [40]. Transportation energy use in Swedish towns and regions was also investigated [41].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Energy Saving Potential in Private, Public and Non-Motorized Transport for Ten Swedish Cities

Svensson

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transport energy conservation research in urban transport systems dates back principally to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries’ (OPEC) “Arab Oil Embargo” (1973–1974) and the Iranian revolution (1979), when global oil supplies became threatened and costs rose steeply. Two subsequent Gulf Wars (1991 and 2003) highlighted the dangerous geo-political dimensions of Middle-Eastern oil. In latter times, the urgency to reduce global CO2 output to avoid catastrophic climate change has achieved great prominence. How to reduce passenger transport energy use therefore remains an important goal, which this paper pursues in ten Swedish cities, based on five scenarios: (1) increasing the relatively low public transport (PT) seat occupancy in each Swedish city to average European levels (buses 35%, light rail 48%, metro 60% and suburban rail 35%); (2) doubling existing PT seat occupancy in each Swedish city; (3) increasing existing car occupancy in each Swedish city by 10%; (4) decreasing existing energy use per car vehicle kilometer by 15%; (5) increasing existing modal split for daily trips by non-motorized modes to 50% in each city. A sixth “best-case scenario” is also explored by simultaneously combining scenarios 2 to 5. The data used in the paper come from systematic empirical research on each of the ten Swedish cities. When applied individually, scenario 2 is the most successful for reducing passenger transport energy use, scenarios 1 and 4 are next in magnitude and produce approximately equal energy savings, followed by scenario 5, with scenario 3 being the least successful. The best-case, combined scenario could save 1183 million liters of gasoline equivalent in the ten cities, representing almost a 60% saving over their existing 2015 total private passenger transport energy use and equivalent to the combined 2015 total annual private transport energy use of Stockholm, Malmö and Jönköping. Such findings also have important positive implications for the de-carbonization of cities. The policy implications of these findings and the strategies for increasing public transport, walking and cycling, boosting car occupancy and decreasing vehicular fuel consumption in Swedish cities are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Energy Saving Potential in Private, Public and Non-Motorized Transport for Ten Swedish Cities

Svensson

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research focusing on urban planning has, for apparent reasons, emphasized the role of infrastructural and spatial variables, such as the density of cities and the distance to public and commercial services (shopping centers, public travel, schools, and so on), that may lock people into automobile dependency (Newman and Kenworthy ; Næss et al 1996; Næss ). In a comparison of Swedish towns, Næss and colleagues () found that urban form variables had an even larger impact on energy use for transport than SEVs such as income.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the Variation in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Between Households: Socioeconomic, Motivational, and Physical Factors

Nässén¹,

Andersson²,

Larsson³

et al. 2014

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumption-accounted greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (GHGEs) vary considerably between households. Research originating from different traditions, including consumption research, urban planning, and environmental psychology, have studied different types of explanatory variables and provided different insights into this matter. This study integrates explanatory variables from different fields of research in the same empirical material, including socioeconomic variables (income, household size, sex, and age), motivational variables (proenvironmental attitudes and social norms), and physical variables (dwelling types and geographical distances). A survey was distributed to 2,500 Swedish households with a response rate of 40%. GHGEs were estimated for transport, residential energy, food, and other consumption, using data from both the survey and registers, such as odometer readings of cars and electricity consumption from utility providers. The results point toward the importance of explanatory variables that have to do with circumstances rather than motivations for proenvironmental behaviors. Net income was found to be the most important variable to explain GHGEs, followed by the physical variables, dwelling type, and the geographical distance index. The results also indicate that social norms around GHG-intensive activities, for example, transport, may have a larger impact on a subject's emission level than proenvironmental attitudes. Keywords:consumer behavior energy food industrial ecology greenhouse gas emissions transport

show abstract

“…In line with theoretical expectations (cf. section 2), a clear relationship between urban population density and energy use for transport was found (Naess, Sandberg & Røe 1996), still present when controlling for a number of other urban form and socio-economic variables (including population size and income level). A similar study of 97 Swedish cities also clearly showed higher levels of energy use for transport in low-density than in high-density cities, also after controlling for other key factors of influence (Naess 1993).…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Urban form and travel behavior: experience from a Nordic context

Næss

2012

JTLU

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article surveys the results of research carried out in the Nordic countries on the influence of various aspects of urban form and settlement patterns on travel behavior and discusses these results in the view of studies carried out in other European, American, Australian, and Asian countries. There is overwhelming evidence that urban spatial structures matter to travel behavior. However, whereas much of the research in America and parts of Europe has focused on the influences of local neighborhood characteristics on travel, the Nordic research shows effects on travel behavior mainly from urban form characteristics at a higher geographical scale: the overall population density within continuous urban areas and the locations of residences and workplaces relative to the city-level or metropolitan center structure.

show abstract

Energy use for transportation in 22 Nordic towns

Cited by 52 publications

References 9 publications

Exploring the Energy Saving Potential in Private, Public and Non-Motorized Transport for Ten Swedish Cities

Exploring the Energy Saving Potential in Private, Public and Non-Motorized Transport for Ten Swedish Cities

Explaining the Variation in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Between Households: Socioeconomic, Motivational, and Physical Factors

Urban form and travel behavior: experience from a Nordic context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About