Hybrid technology offers an attractive option for transit buses, since it has the potential to significantly reduce operating costs for transit agencies. The main impetus behind use of hybrid transit vehicles is fuel savings and reduced emissions. Laboratory tests have indicated that hybrid transit buses can have significantly lower emissions compared with conventional transit buses. However, the number of studies is limited and laboratory tests may not represent actual driving conditions, since in-use vehicle operation differs from laboratory test cycles. This paper describes an on-road evaluation of in-use emission differences between hybrid-electric and conventional transit buses for the Ames, Iowa transit authority, CyRide. Emissions were collected on-road using a portable emissions monitoring system (PEMS) for three hybrid and two control buses. Emissions were collected for at least one operating bus day. Each bus was evaluated over the same route pattern, which utilizes the same driver. The number of passengers embarking or disembarking at each stop was collected by an on-board data collector so that passenger load could be included. Vehicle emissions are correlated to engine load demand, which is a function of factors such as vehicle load, speed, and acceleration. PEMS data are provided second by second and vehicle-specific power (VSP) was calculated for each row of data. Instantaneous data were stratified into the defined VSP bins and then average modal emission rates and standard errors were calculated for each bus for each pollutant. Pollutants were then compared by bus type. Carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions were higher for the regular buses across most VSP bins than for the hybrid buses. Nitrogen oxide emissions were unexpectedly higher for the hybrid buses than for the control buses.

Intersection-related crashes account for approximately 31% of fatal crashes in Minnesota and roughly 37% of those occurred at night, dusk, or dawn. Nationally, intersection-related fatal crashes accounted for 21% of all fatal crashes and 40% of those crashes occurred during dark, dusk, or dawn light conditions while only 25–33% of the vehicle miles traveled occur at night. Furthermore, Minnesota experienced 70% of its fatal crashes in rural areas, as compared to 58% nationally. As a result, rural intersections at night are at higher risk for fatal crashes than other locations in Minnesota. This research was part of Research Rep. No. MN/RC-2006-35, “Safety impacts of street lighting at isolated rural intersections—Part II.” This research evaluated the effectiveness of roadway lighting in reducing nighttime crashes at isolated rural intersections. A before-and-after study was used to evaluate the impact of lighting at 33 intersections with 3 years of before data and 3 years of after data. A Poisson regressi...

Intersection crashes during nighttime hours may occur because of poor driver visual cognition of conflicting traffic or intersection presence. In rural areas, the only source of lighting is typically provided by vehicle headlights. Roadway lighting enhances driver recognition of intersection presence and visibility of signs and markings. Destination lighting provides some illumination for the intersection but is not intended to fully illuminate all approaches. Destination lighting has been widely used in Iowa but the effectiveness has not been well documented. This study, therefore, sought to evaluate the effect on safety of destination lighting at rural intersections. As part of an extensive data collection effort, locations with destination/street lighting were gathered with the assistance of several state agencies. After manual selection of a similar number of control intersections, propensity score matching using the caliper width technique was used to match 245 treatments with 245 control sites. Negative binomial regression was used to evaluate crash frequency data. The presence of destination lighting at stop-controlled cross-intersections generally reduced the night-to-day crash ratio by 19%. The presence of treatment or destination lighting was associated with a 33%–39% increase in daytime crashes across all models but was associated with an 18%–33% reduction in nighttime crashes. Injuries in nighttime crashes decreased by 24% and total nighttime crashes reduced by 33%. Property damage crashes were reduced by 18%.