Drivers & Barriers, Readiness Indicators and Good Practices for e-bus deployment

Thematic Working Group 1

Drivers & Barriers, Readiness Indicators and Good Practices for e-bus deployment

Contents Summary & Conclusions 3 1. About eBussed 4 2. About the Thematic Working Group, Readiness Indicators and Good Practices 6 3. Barriers & Drivers 7 4. Readiness Indicators 9 5. Good Practises 16

5.1 The documented Good Practice experiences 16

5.2 Conclusive remarks on Good Practice documentation in TWG1 27

5.3 Good Practice experiences transferred 28 Appendix 1 Readiness Indicator table 30 Appendix 2 Knowledge pool 33

Summary & Conclusions This report summarizes the work done by Thematic Working Group 1 (TWG1) on: - Drivers & Barriers (D&B) - Readiness Indicators for e-bus deployment - Documentation and analysis of several good practices collected by project partners with special emphasis on the two above sub-themes.

In this way, the report takes the policy learning one step further and sheds light on regional similarities and differences in good practice experiences about e-bus deployment and management. It also paves the way to further possible investigations to explore associated themes like “Risk & Opportunity analysis” of the various actions which will be planned in the forthcoming Action Plan for each of the partner regions and associated preventive/ remedial measures.

3

1. About eBussed Transitioning from a region with public transportation based on diesel buses to a region with e-bus fleets requires ample expertise in different fields. A wide range of themes must be covered to initiate and support e-bus development. The Interreg Europe eBussed project concentrates on the exchange of experience between partner regions at different stages of e-bus operation development, thereby serving regions struggling with this highly technical and fast-developing field. As no partner region has entirely settled their e-bus transitioning path, new ideas, solutions and technologies can still be introduced to their development plans regardless of their current e-bus status. eBussed supports the transition of European regions towards low carbon mobility and more efficient public transport. It promotes the uptake of e-buses in new regions and supports the expansion of existing e-fleets. eBussed project contributes to the Interreg Europe programme Specific objective 3.1 “Improving low-carbon economy policies” by encouraging regions to develop and deliver better policies related to the deployment of e-buses. The project also facilitates the integration of electricity production based on renewables and low carbon electrified public transport. Through new ideas and better policies, the project promotes both the demand and supply side of electricity from clean renewable sources and the subsequent transitioning towards a low carbon economy. eBussed engages regions with and without practical experience on e-buses. In addition to this and three other thematic good practice reports, the project will deliver six regional action plans and policy recommendations to be used in partner regions. The project increases capacities and knowledge among its partner regions via a multi-level exchange of experiences and cross-regional pollination of ideas to better support the transition towards fully electrified bus fleets and low carbon mobility.

The consortium formed for eBussed comprises of the following partners: - Turku University of Applied Sciences, Finland - Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Germany - Ministry for Gozo, Malta - Province of Livorno, Italy - University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, the Netherlands - Province of Utrecht, the Netherlands - South Transdanubian Regional Innovation Agency, Hungary The main idea in forming the project consortium was to find project partners at different stages of e-bus development to maximize the knowledge exchange potential between 4

project partners. The benefits of having a consortium consisting of regions familiar with e-buses and regions with less experience on the topic is evident. As no single or one-sizefits-for-all solution is currently available for e-buses, knowledge exchange is extremely fruitful to all partners despite their different development stages. In addition, e-bus technologies, charging solutions and business models are in a constant flux of development, with many competing solutions and models currently available, and new, more advanced technologies and solutions continuously entering the market.

Consequently, all regions benefit from the experiences gathered and shared before and during the project.

5

2. About the Thematic Working Group, Readiness Indicators and Good Practices The project utilizes a thematic approach based on four key issues recognized in previous studies on the subject: 1. Drivers and barriers (i.e. total cost of ownership, noise/emission reduction, upfront costs, scalability, flexibility, policy guidance and governance, the attitude of the local communities), 2. Technological aspects (i.e. busses, batteries, data collection, electricity production based on RES, grid requirements), 3. User interface (i.e. driver education and experiences, passenger perceptions, uncertainty drivers), and 4. Business models and procurement.

Correspondingly, four thematic working groups have developed the regions’ expertise and raised the level of competence, while taking into consideration the regional context. In addition, the necessary interplay between the sub-topics (i. e. technological, territorial, societal, contextual factors and policy level drivers) have been explored.

This report summarizes the work done by Thematic Working Group 1 (TWG1) on Drivers & Barriers and Readiness Indicators for e-bus deployment. It further analyses the various good practices collected by project partners with a reference to the above aspects. This report takes the policy learning one step further and sheds light on regional similarities and differences in good practice experiences concerning e-bus deployment and management.

6

3. Barriers & Drivers The working group’s task was to identify the existing drivers and barriers to the introduction of electric buses in specific regions. The following definitions were agreed: A driver is an element (such as a policy or an action) that can help transit agencies and governments initiate, continue, or expand their e-bus fleet.

A Barrier is an obstacle or circumstance that can prevent transit agencies and/or governments from initiating, continuing, or expanding their fleet of e-buses.

The initial work concentrated on two draft spreadsheets: the Status Quo report draft that the Dutch partners prepared and similar reports drawn by the other partners, and from other sources such as technical reports, project publications, articles etc.

The structure available in the research document “Barriers-to-adopting-electric-buses” published by WRIROSSCITIES.org in 2019 was also considered. The common goal was to have a concise structure for the analytical framework for Drivers & Barriers.

The working group observed that, when Barriers are being read positively and not as obstacles, it opened the way to identifying corresponding possible solutions. Solutions can be reported also in the form of experiences being documented by each project partner called Good practices (see section 4 hereunder).

The second step was to link up the spreadsheet with the more compact matrix indicated in WRIROSSCITIES.org Report (see Fig. 1 and Appendix 2). The project held an online workshop on the said theme in April 2020. The working group presented to the participants the initial results of the analytical work and carried out an online survey to evaluate the Drivers & Barriers relevance.

As a result, the TWG prepared the final version of the Drivers & Barriers spreadsheet, including results of the survey scoring and the suggested additional Drivers & Barriers by the Workshop participants during the online survey. This version of the spreadsheet is shown in Fig. 1.

7

Fig. 1 Drivers & Barriers spreadsheet: example of one sheet 8

4. Readiness Indicators Methodology The second theme tackled by TWG1 concerned the Readiness Indicators, analysed as indicators of the readiness of a region to introduce and utilise e-buses.

Readiness Indicators (RI) are thus meant to assist public and private stakeholders in assessing the present conditions of their region concerning the introduction of electric buses and the provision of related infrastructure.

Within TWG1 the initial step was in defining those indicators. Some help came from Stefan K. Johansen who, in his Master Thesis “E-Mobility Maturity Model: Measuring E-Mobility Readiness of Countries” (see Appendix 2 for more details), believes that with the creation of such a model, countries, companies and researchers alike can contribute with substantial value to the environment by being able to measure progress within a given scope. In his document, key success factors of e-mobility were divided into five distinct categories, where each category forms a parameter for the evaluation of the overall maturity.

This was the first step. Next, the categories adopted in the identification and evaluation of Drivers and Barriers to e-bus deployment by TWG1 were considered (see Section 1.1 above and the Thematic Article n. 10, Drivers and Barriers to electric bus deployment ).

The working group resolved that readiness indicators (RI) should be related to an ex-ante situation in every region, that is before e-bus deployment or fleet diversification/innovation.

As a general approach, the partners agreed to try and identify at least four to five main RI for each category plus some others to be added for specified categories, using a top-down method.

The working group prepared a spreadsheet including a description of the indicators, presence/absence (Y/N) of the relevant criteria and further details. A logical link was established between the Barriers and Drivers identified earlier and the RIs. In addition, the structure established in the research document Barriers-to-adopting-electric-buses published by WRIROSSCITIES.org in 2019 (see Appendix 2) was considered as well.

The aim was to arrive at a final compact structure of an analytical framework. The spreadsheet capitalizes upon the indications derived from the Status Quo reports and prepared by the project partners, similar to what was done when identifying Drivers and Barriers.

9

The initial layout was jointly reviewed, found useful and coherent with the scope of identifying and documenting RI as proposed. In addition to the logical link kept between the Barriers and Drivers and the RI, an additional link was also provided between a RI and relevant stakeholders.

As readiness cannot be defined as yes or no but rather as development in stages, it was recognized that it would be useful to set some criteria to be fulfilled when establishing the level of readiness. A semaphore-type indication (rather than a YES/NO binary option) was chosen with three columns indicating:

- Not ready (red) - Getting ready (yellow) - Ready (green)

A choice between the three options requires, however, to be supported by an explanation: this is being provided in an ad-hoc column which has been added to this purpose.

The working group realized that the RI list would be best if kept simple. Indicators not strictly relevant for identifying a region’s readiness level were consequently removed.

The question of how to transfer the theoretical model into the practical application has been also examined. Considerations about “what should be green, yellow or red” would help establish some sort of indicative thresholds or priorities.

An additional column was inserted to reflect the categories applied in Johansen’s Maturity Model. After a thorough literature review, field studies and discussions in the working group, the following categories of RI were selected: 1. Government policies and investment 2. charging infrastructure construction and operation / Energy production & distribution 3. business models and maintenance service system 4. consumer and other awareness education 5. operation scope and environmental benefits / Other features 10

Altogether 42 Readiness Indicators were defined, accompanied by the following attributes: - category - maturity parameters - drivers - barriers - readiness indicator number - criteria - description - when red, not ready yet - when yellow or green, details needed to justify - stakeholders involved Work progress and results Three eBussed project partners, Livorno, South Transdanubia and Utrecht, compiled the spreadsheet (see Appendix 1). Results of the test application are indicated in the following Fig. 2. The digits refer to the number of Readiness Indicators for each category and level of readiness.

Number of Readiness Indicators for each of the 5 Categories

Partner

Livorno South Transdanubia Utrecht

Level of readiness

1. Government policies and investment

2. Charging infrastructure construction & operation / Energy Production & Distribution

3. Business models and maintenance service system

4. Consumer and 5. Operation other awareness scope and education environmental benefits / Other features

4

3

2

0

0

2

1

0

0

1

2

1

1

0

5

2

0

0

0

2

1

1

1

1

0

8

7

8

2

6

2

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

5

8

2

5

1

3

Fig. 2 Readiness-Indicator Survey in test-regions 11

Livorno Province Livorno province and the provincial capital town are in a situation of start-up, whereas electric buses were deployed in the past but to limited and temporary use. A series of technical hitches caused the bus fleet to become non-operational; it is only recently that initial steps are being taken to introduce electric buses again.

The present situation of limited readiness, as outlined by the indicators in Fig. 2 above, is due to: - Lack of ongoing public investment - Limited low-emission zones in urban areas; limited access zones - Previous positive experience of introducing alternative fuel public transport - Decision-making process in e-bus deployment: absent, being or already established - No activity (design or implementation) regarding charging infrastructure A “getting ready” situation concerns areas such as grant availability, R&D support and energy company’s experience in installing rapid charging infrastructure.

However, favourable environmental conditions, such as mild temperatures and low emission levels, the existence of sensitive areas in the urban centres where e-buses can be introduced, and a good rate of renewable energy sources in Tuscany’s total sources contribute to the efficient deployment of electric buses.

University of Applied Sciences and Province of Utrecht Utrecht’s score on indicator 5, Operation scope and environmental benefits / Other features, may seem relatively low. The reason is that there is currently no longer any transgression of the European limit for the yearly average concentration of the pollutants mentioned in the tool (CO, NO2, PM10 and non-methane volatile organic compound.

Some hot spots with high concentrations of PM10, however, still exist. Noise is a problem, but not to the extent that limit values are exceeded. However, air quality and noise remain a political issue in many Dutch cities, so the ‘yellow’ score does not quite reflect e-bus readiness from an environmental quality perspective, which is, in fact, rather high.

In 2025, new concessions will be issued, probably with more strict concession requirements, to comply with the clean energy policy and the national covenant. The ‘yellow’ score on indicator 3, Business models and maintenance service system, will then presumably turn to green.

12

The score on indicator 2, Charging infrastructure reflects the fact that, although about 80 charging locations are operational (± 1/3 overnight; 2/3 opportunity), none of these, as yet, are used for grid balancing.

For Government policies and investment, the red indicators stem from the fact that there are no rebates used. Government loans do exist, as well as policies conducive to eBus deployment, e.g. the National Agreement BAZEB 2016. A ‘red’ score on Consumer and other awareness education is due to the absence, so far, of congestion charges to limit private traffic, which is a national issue.

Readiness Indicators are meant to assist public and private stakeholders in assessing the present conditions of their region with regard to the introduction of electric buses and the provision of related infrastructure.

South Transdanubian Regional Innovation Agency / South Transdanubia, Hungary Within the convergence region of South Transdanubia two cities, Pécs, the regional capital with 10 solo e-buses and Paks, the district seat town with six solo e-buses and four midi e-buses, have already been operating e-bus fleets.

In terms of government policies, South Transdanubia has a favourable position: loans and rebates are not available for local municipalities and public transport operators. Instead, non-refundable grants are provided by the state for e-bus procurement and public financed demonstration programs, too. The large-scale state-supported initiatives also aim at renewing the already existing bus fleets, partly by e-buses. Research and development are also present in the public transport system as joint research including universities and bus manufacturer companies - such as the cooperation between Óbuda University and Ikarus Járműtechnika Ltd. - aiming at developing new electric bus technological solutions. Thanks to the harmonisation of different strategies and laws, such as the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan, National Electromobility Strategy and National Bus Strategy, the policy instruments or initiatives work in effective tandem. There are traffic-calming zones defined in all Hungarian cities, including also South Transdanubian ones, although the practical designation of these zones sometimes lags behind in practice.

13

Focusing on charging infrastructure and energy provision issues of e-bus public transport, the opportunity for grid balancing is given by the national transmission system operator organisation. At Pécs and Paks overnight/depot charging is applied, and competent national/regional/local actors reinforce the energy provision-bus connections. Similarly, e-buses are often communicated from a climate-friendly perspective within South Transdanubia and Hungary.

Referring to business models and maintenance-service systems, the whole public transport system is regulated by national laws and by-laws. This provides no room for manoeuvring at the regional and national levels. Even though, local (i.e. settlement level) transport is organised by municipality-owned public transport operator companies that should operate by these laws and by-laws. Smaller private bus companies also operate, but those mainly render their rental and transport services to private and market customers. In 2019, the average age of the Hungarian bus fleet was 13,25 years. Local supply chains of bus manufacturers located in Hungary are given, whilst the public transport operator companies choose their sub-contractors by different procurements.

When speaking about consumer and other awareness education, public and education campaigns support the local passengers’ awareness-raising and the young generations with the advantages of the clean and environment-friendly e-bus public transport. Their contribution to the air quality improvement is a convincing aspect at cities like Pécs, where the concentrate of flue dust and pollutants in the air is relatively high. These are also complemented with pilot e-bus trials before the deployment in a given settlement (such as it happened in Pécs and Paks). These demonstrations are available country-wise, thanks to the Green Bus demonstration Pilot Project.

As regards operation scope and environmental benefits, the Hungarian dry continental climate, in general, is in favour of the deployment of e-buses and their seamless operation in the four seasons of the calendar year. Similarly, 33% in South Transdanubia and 73% in Hungary (% on total regional area) are considered as flatlands, therefore geomorphological conditions are favourable, too. Above the limit emissions in terms of NO2 and PM10 are registered and the excess compared to the threshold is limited.

Conclusion The identified and classified Readiness Indicators signal the readiness status of a given region, particularly because most indicators are not qualitative, but are relatively easy to justify because they are based on metrics and statistics.

14

The working group agreed that, once a region’s readiness level is identified, further progress could be made, by carrying out a “risk and opportunity” analysis of the various actions planned to increase the readiness level for each category.

This may represent the content of a useful complementary activity to the Drivers & Barriers and RI analyses carried out in sections 3 and 4 of the present report or be introduced in the exercise of preparing the Action Plan in the latter stage of eBussed Phase 1.

As a final methodological note, it was resolved to keep the indicator count as in the above table, without any attempt to establish composite indicators (as an aggregation of more RIs by category) or an overall index, as they were not recognized to be of significant convenience.

The final RI spreadsheet version in Excel format is available on request.

Readiness cannot be defined as yes or no but rather as development in stages.

15

5. Good Practises All TWGs collected and documented Good Practices (GPs) and related some of them to the specific contents of one or more Thematic Working Groups (this is evident in the coding adopted in the GP template).

Based on the Interreg Europe template, the partners created a Good Practice template with further space for investigating a number of particular aspects relevant to the experience transfer process.

Each Good Practise form is supported by a 1–2-page slide explaining its main features.

These summaries are available on the project website.

Below is a list of the Good Practices that are identified relevant to Drivers & Barriers.

5.1 The documented Good Practice experiences Turku Separately funded research project for e-bus follow-up (1.1) Location: Turku, Finland Short description: A research program was launched to utilize the data from various sensors in the e-bus, and to have a general view of the process encountered.

Objectives: One of the criteria for the tender was the energy consumption of the car.

To determine the actual consumption of the vehicle, data is collected and analyzed.

Added value: In connection with the data collection, information is also obtained on the drivers’ driving style, this information can be used in training. Monitoring makes it possible to detect changes in vehicles and anticipate potential problems.

Transferability: Suitable for transferring to other locations.

16

E-bus training for the whole staff, separate eco-driving training for drivers (1.2) Location: Turku, Finland Short description: The whole operator staff was trained how to operate, maintain and handle the buses Objectives: Ensures safe, secure and economical operation of electric buses.

Added value: The utilization rate is maximized, travel comfort is improved and the energy consumption is reduced.

Transferability: Suitable for transferring to other locations Public operator testing and monitoring platform (1.3) Location: Turku, Finland Short description: The city has incorporated its own municipal enterprise. The company serves as a test platform where new functions can be tested and experience gained in operating different vehicles.

Objectives: Under the ownership of the city, new technologies can be tried, both in terms of vehicles and information systems. The company may be required to do some experimentation, as was done with the use of electric buses.

Added value: Financial benefits from own experiences, cost savings in tenders, easy test new systems or functions.

Transferability: Suitable for transferring to other locations where is still Municipal public transport, especially if it is intended to tender for transport to private operators.

Cooperation between cities to promote electric bus transport (1.4) Location: Helsinki, Tampere, Turku, Finland Short description: Cities and others working in the field form a group to share experiences and good practices from different regions.

17

Objectives: Sharing experiences in a broad group, finding cost-effective operating models for operation and tendering.

Added value: Financial benefits from the experiences of others, not everyone needs to experiment. Cost savings in tenders.

Transferability: Suitable for transferring to other locations

Fig. 3: Current members of the Initiative Elektrobus

Hamburg Structured approach for e-bus transition (E-Mobility Roadmap) (2.1) The practice showcases that a comprehensive approach and detailed planning of the e-mobility transition is beneficial if not essential for PTOs. Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: The PTO VHH defined 16 work packages, which cover the main aspects of a transition towards e-mobility, from assessing the energy demand of future e-bus operations to the planning of long-term traffic concepts. This enables a structured approach to planning e-bus implementation and facilitates the identification of required steps of adaptation.

Objectives: Detailed planning of e-bus implementation based on predefined work packages.

Added value: Form of knowledge and experience transfer, because proven aspects worth considering are already proposed. Saving time and money.

Transferability: Can easily be adopted by another traffic operator.

18

National E-Bus Platform (2.2) In the early stages of the e-bus transition in public transport, standardization is a particularly important issue. In Germany, the platform “Initiative Elektrobus” under the Association of German Transport Companies (VDV) was formed to work cooperatively towards uniform standards and technological readiness regarding e-bus technology.

Location: Hamburg, Germany Short description: The national e-bus platform “Initiative Elektrobus” started in 2016, currently representing 18 PTOs. It is a network for the exchange of knowledge and document templates (technical specifications) under the Association of German Transport Companies VDV. Core elements are bi-annual conferences with site visits.

Objectives: Knowledge transfer and peer-review between PTOs and other stakeholders.

Involvement of relevant partners, e.g. bus manufacturers, manufacturers of charging infrastructure, federal states, cities, municipalities.

Coordinated work towards uniform standards and technological readiness.

Added value: Overall better implementation of e-mobility in Germany due to common knowledge and good practice pool. Reduction of uncertainties for the upcoming e-mobility transition due to a peer-review platform.

Transferability: Easy to transfer to other regions. Can be started based on existing networks.

Gozo Cost-Benefit Analysis to assess the feasibility of electric buses in the region (3.1) Before the purchase of electric buses in the region, a cost-benefit analysis was done to assess the demand for a park and ride system in Gozo and also the feasibility of using electric buses for this system.

Location: Malta (Gozo) Objectives: - To assess the feasibility of using e-buses for a park & ride service in Gozo 19

- To get feedback from stakeholders about the introduction of such a system - To find out the benefits that can arise from using such a system Added Value: The value of this practice is that it enables the territory to have an analysis of the costs and benefits of introducing electric buses in their region prior to doing the actual investment in the project.

Transferability: This Good Practice may be useful for territories like Malta that do not yet have an electric bus fleet since it is a practice that helps to make the territory more aware of the costs and benefits associated with such a project.

Livorno Transport Investment Evaluation using ACB and MC Analyses (4.1) Adapting an evaluation tool-kit, as an analytical model to facilitate decision making for e-bus procurement and e-bus related investment Short description: adaptable evaluation tool-kit, which can be used as an analytical model to facilitate decision making for e-bus procurement and e-bus related investments Location: Livorno, Italy Objectives: The tool-kit responds to the need for a factual, rational appraisal of investment options; it incorporates two analytical components to depict alternative scenarios and scaling them by evaluation criteria: COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (CBA) MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS (MCA) Added value: The toolkit is of potential use or benefit to both private and public investors, in particular in the sector of electric bus deployment and when setting up related infrastructure. The model proved to date to be versatile; it has demonstrated to apply to various contexts and to meet different needs and requirements.

Transferability: The toolkit is expandable in a modular form as well as within each of the possible scenarios to be considered. The version is available in English but criteria and parameter headings can be easily translated into another language. Formulas are embedded in the model and can be easily modified using coded access if needed.

20

Microlotto: Mobility On Demand (4.2) Transport public service usability improved by service on demand Short description: Expanding local public transport, with particular attention to people with reduced mobility; improving the accessibility of coastal areas and roads of major tourist interest; defining a system of routes for greater usability of the territory but protecting the environment; developing and implementing an App for disseminating services to citizens and tourists Location: various municipalities in Livorno province, Italy Objectives: - Improve the fruition of heritage, even in peripheral and island areas (difficult to con nect). With Tuscany being full of scenic beauties that are distributed throughout the whole territory - Mitigate the impact of seasonal tourism - Introduce “experiential tourism” which enhances the journey and not just the desti nation Added value: Improved pedestrian/ bike accessibility and increased use of electric public transport connecting railways stations, hotels, camping sites, beaches, parking areas and discotheques (night shuttle services); the preservation of the natural environment and the quality of life of citizens and tourists Transferability: the practice is transferable without the need foe any particular adaptation to other regional contexts where similar demands are being expressed. No particular conditions are being noted.

21

Improving urban mobility through a self-driving vehicle (4.3) Short description: Developing solutions for the mobility of the first and last mile - people and goods Location: Merano, Italy Objectives: - test possible transport services based on the use of driverless electric bus - set one of the strategies to introduce innovative modalities of public transport, complementary to other initiatives more related to private transport means - position in a correct manner the product/service within the urban mobility offer Added value: Verified driverless technology, and the vehicle in general, as a result of the test drive. This test drive has been the first Italian Open-Road Test.

Positive impact on the Smart Road decrees, to prepare for a legislative acceptance if the driverless transport systems in areas open to the public.

Contribution to larger availability of municipal mobility “on demand”.

Another added value of the shuttle consists in the smaller lanes it needs and the possibility to travel in shared spaces with pedestrians and cyclists.

Transferability: the test drive is easily replicable given similar conditions and arrangements (Good Practises support, adequate information, obtaining the necessary licenses and permits to operate driverless transport in an urban area).

Passenger satisfaction for driverless e-bus service in Merano (4.4) Short description: Ascertaining the passenger satisfaction of driverless e-bus service in a trial-test in Merano town centre (the first Italian market survey).

Location: Merano, Italy Objectives: - to assess the level of interest towards electric buses with no driver - to assess the acceptance ratio for the service 22

- to position accurately the product/service within the urban mobility offer - to collect and evaluate doubts and questions about driverless e-bus - to process data and to present innovative results from the survey Added value: Confidence in driverless technology, and the vehicle in general, did improve considerably after the test drive.

Amongst perplexities and doubts, the problems raised were: - possible loss of employment by drivers - security against hacker attacks - inappropriate behaviour onboard.

Much attention was paid also to the availability of municipal mobility “on demand”.

Transferability: the survey is easily replicable in similar conditions and arrangements with Good Pracices support, adequate information to the would-be passengers and recording their opinions before and after the test drive and obtaining the necessary licenses and permits to operate driverless transport in an urban area.

Utrecht National Administrative Agreement Zero-Emission Buses (BAZEB) in 2016 in the Netherlands (6.1) Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands Short description: In 2016, all Dutch Public Transport Authorities signed the BAZEB-agreement with targets for Zero Emission public transport and cooperation on a shared agenda.

Objectives: - all newly deployed buses are Zero Emission (ttw) in 2025 or earlier - in 2030 all PT-buses in the Netherlands are Zero Emission (ZE) Added value: - Prices of operations with electric (battery) buses have dropped.

- Less pollution or better air quality, e.g., in cities and less CO2-exhausting due to the introduction of 1.000 ZE-buses in Dutch PT. - Bus passengers are more satisfied with the comfort of new ZE-buses.

Transferability: Political agreement to come to ZE bus on a national scale has helped a lot 23

given the governance construction. Once that is in place, other aspects can help ZE bus further along. Such as sharing information, standard TCO is transferable as are other tools that have been developed. Meeting every other month with all PTA ZE bus experts is also something that can be done in other countries and regions.

Just e-start! (6.2) Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands Short description: In 2016 the Provincial Government adopted the Action Plan Introducing ZE-Buses. In 2017 followed by 11 new e-buses on line 1; providing a lot of information for the next e-bus projects.

Objectives: - Introduction of new ZE-buses (11 in 2017, 55 in 2020) - Learning of the introduction by Plan-Do-Check-Act - In 2028 all buses (over 500) must be zero emission in the Utrecht region

Fig.4: Signed agreement for Zero Emission Public Transport in the Netherlands 2016 (photo CROW-KpVV) 24

Added value: - Less energy/fuel consumption (carbon-reduction) and cleaner air - More experience with ZE-operations and introductions in the region Utrecht (buses and charging infrastructure), especially with all partners and staff involved.

- More prepared (more knowledge) for upcoming, bigger e-bus implementation Transferability: Start with a strategic Regional ZE-action Plan, and follow this up with real steps for scaling up and learning. Our lessons learned with the Monitoring plan and Evaluation of introductions ZE-buses are transferable.

South Transdanubia Green Strategy of Tüke Busz Co. (9.1) Location: Pécs, South Transdanubia, Hungary Short description: Development of professional framework assisting bus operators and maintenance administrations in the procurement and operation of public transport e-bus fleet.

Objectives: In terms of the development of local concepts for e-bus fleet development, developing a professional framework is necessary for assisting bus operators and maintenance administrations in preparing for the procurement and operation of the public transport e-bus fleet.

Starting with the analysis of the baseline mobility needs of the city of Pécs, the local municipality identified green and environmentally friendly transport as a goal to reach. The roots leading to this date back to the late 2000s and had several preparatory stages - elaborating a successful CIVITAS project by the city, for example.

Elaboration of the Green Strategy of Tüke Busz Plc., the PTO of the Municipality of Pécs was a significant step of this process in 2016. This strategy laid down the exact foundations for the procurement of e-buses in Pécs, taking into consideration the major ecosystem factors of e-bus mobility development in the city, too.

Added value: The use of electric buses in the local Pécs public transport results in more favourable air pollution figures registered. The operating costs of the Pécs bus fleet also decrease significantly. High level of acceptance of e-buses by local residents.

25

Transferability: The Green Strategy of the Tüke Busz Plc. as a key strategic level initiative behind and in support of e-bus deployment could be potentially interesting for European regions considering the transition of their public bus or coach transport schemes.

Elaborating such a short and to the point, relevant issues focused document is a one-time investment that ideally pays off by addressing the burning questions around the current status and future aspirations of the e-bus stakeholders of a given settlement/district/county/region. Similar strategies exist in several European cities (for example in Hamburg), and proved to be effective as pioneer advocates of the e-bus deployment.

Smart Grid – Smart City – E-mobility (9.2) Location: Paks, South Transdanubia, Hungary Short description: E-bus deployment in Paks was an integrated part of the renewable electricity-based smart grid development that resulted in a more sustainable settlement.

Objectives: The City of Paks is a pioneer city when it comes to electricity production. Besides its nuclear power plant, it always looks for innovative settlement development ideas, hence initiating the creation of a healthier, more energy-efficient and inhabitant friendlier city by a local smart grid initiative.

City of Paks is working on the restructuring of public transport by procuring 100 e-buses, installing charging stations and deploying PV panels to supply the chargers with energy.

This action also requires the establishment of a balanced group. All e-mobility activities are coordinated by the project company of the City, Protheus Holding Plc. The framework of this work was the so-called Protheus project (financed by the ELENA Programme). That project aims to build up a sustainable e-mobility system, produce renewable electricity, and store that energy to partly cover the consumption of the city of Paks and the surrounding municipalities. The projects’ main goal is the creation of a healthier, more energy-efficient and more residential-friendly city. In this way, the vertical integration in public transport development is reached as being part of the smart city, smart grid local developments.

Transferability: The main lesson learnt from the practice is that the planning and the delivery of the e-bus deployment are more effective in case it is delivered in the context of the complex development of the settlement.

26

5.2 Conclusive remarks on Good Practice documentation in TWG1 The basket of 15 Good Practices related to TWG1 themes provides examples of valuable experiences which encompasses strategies, governance and methodological tools, description of platforms of various kinds, as well as practical innovative applications of electric transport in different conditions and personnel training to e-bus use. Reasons of success and transferability features have been duly highlighted in each Good Practise form, to facilitate each partner peer-review of the other partners’ experiences.

It is expected that among those experiences, eBussed partners will be in a position to earmark those of most relevance and potential impact when replicated in their region. Such transfer of experience will be proven at the appropriate time in future, in section 5.3 of this report.

The following tables show a possible classification of the 15 Good Practices by keyword or topic and by Driver & Barrier categories. This type of classification may prove useful in guiding the potential user in early scrutiny of the experiences documented.

Keyword / topic

Relevant Good Practice(s)

Research

1.1

Training

1.2

Testing

1.3–4.3

Planning

2.1–6.2

Standards and technology platform

2.2

Cost Benefit analysis

3.1–4.1

Mobility on demand

4.2

E-bus passenger satisfaction

4.4

Governance / Interurban cooperation

1.4, 6.1, 9.1

Smart Grid

9.2

Fig. 5 Good Practises by keyword or topic 27

Drivers & Barriers’ category

Relevant Good Practice(s)

Political

1.4, 6.1, 9.1

Social

4.2, 4.4

Economic

1.1, 3.1, 4.1

Technological

2.1, 6.2, 9.2

Service management

1.2, 1.3, 4.3, 2.2

Environmental

-

Fig. 6 Good Practices by Drivers & Barriers category

As a final note, Good Practices very closely related for their specific content are 3.1 and 4.1 concerning Cost Benefit Analysis. The first Good Practice (3.1) relates to a practical application in Malta with specific relevance to assessing the demand for a local park and ride system and also the feasibility of using electric buses for this system; the second Good Practice (4.1) constitutes a more methodological example of an evaluation model available for different kinds of application including e-bus investment appraisal.

5.3 Good Practice experiences transferred This section of the report will be filled in at a later stage in Phase 1, when each Partner will undertake the formulation of his Action Plan based on the selected experiences as acquired from the other partners.

28

Appendix 1 Readiness Indicator table The following table shows the final outcome of the joint work to set up a model to classify and record Readiness Indicators in a particular context (being it a region, town or else).

More details are available in Sub-section 4 of the present Report.

29

Fig. A.1 Readiness Indicator table

Appendix 2 Knowledge pool TWG1 collected all sources of information relevant to the Drivers & Barriers theme in a knowledge pool. The resulting table summarizes a series of articles, thesis, research papers, manuals and other documents relevant to TWG1 themes, classified as follow: Author/Title/Year of publication/Type of document/ Link to download/ relevant Key words.

32

Fig A.2 Knowledge pool table

34

This project report reflects the author's views only and the Interreg Europe programme authorities are not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.