With a full pipeline of projects promising industrial renewal and a clean energy future, America is on the cusp of an offshore wind energy revolution. The Biden Administration has set targets of 30 gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind (OSW) in United States waters by 2030 –enough to power 10 million homes with clean energy. They are also targeting 15GW of floating OSW by 2035, to complement the modest 0.042GW of installations that exist today. The Administration is supporting the plan with financial measures and environmental stewardship to underpin the vast investment required to unlock OSW’s full potential.

Thanks to pioneering OSW development across the globe, in particular northern and western Europe, harnessing the powerful gusts that blow over the oceans is now an efficient and increasingly affordable technology to decarbonize energy supplies and minimize further climate change impact.

For a vibrant offshore wind industry to take off in the United States, one critical element cannot be overlooked: the need for port infrastructure that can handle the enormous scale of the project components. Recent years have seen staggering growth in this technology, with turbine sizes increasing rapidly to reduce the levelized cost of energy. These are massive machines: the world’s largest, currently under construction in China, sweeps 10 football fields with every spin. In the United States, GE is constructing manufacturing facilities for the Haliade X’s blade that is longer than a football field with a rotor that sweeps seven football fields every spin.

Ports are essential to the development of offshore wind. They are where offshore wind turbine generator (WTG) components, foundations and other equipment get transported, stored and assembled. Ports are where floating substructures are assembled and turbines are erected prior to delivery to the offshore project site, where OSW equipment manufacturers setup their fabrication and storage yards, and where operation and maintenance activities are led. Ports are a hub for the industry, as the massive equipment involved makes marine transport essential. With the rapid development of new technologies in the green energy sector, the role of ports is also becoming increasingly prominent in the generation and distribution of renewable hydrogen.

The OSW industry in the United States is complicated by the Jones Act ^[1], also known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920. Designed to protect the American shipping industry from foreign competition, the law limits trade between two ports within the United States to American flagged ships. In short, the Jones Act protects the shipping industry from foreign competition. While similar laws are found in other countries and often apply to intra-national shipping by sea, air, or truck, for the emerging United States offshore wind industry, the Jones act adds significant complexity as there are currently no United States flagged vessels in the existing global fleet of offshore wind installation vessels.

Under the accepted interpretation of the Jones Act, the offshore wind farm or project site is considered a United States port, and as such, only United States flagged vessels can transport materials between the marshalling port and the project site. Many developers appear to have addressed this challenge by engaging local tugs and barges to transport the equipment from the marshalling yard to the foreign flagged installation vessel which stays within the project site – avoiding violation of the Jones Act. This generally adds cost due to the need for supplemental vessels and increases risk due to the added number of vessel interfaces and additional materials handling.

There are several alternate strategies being considered in the industry. Ports need to be designed to accommodate today’s ocean-going barges, while also preparing to accommodate tomorrow’s United States flagged wind turbine installation vessels (WTIV) – the first of which is scheduled for delivery in early 2024. Solutions will look different across geographies based on water depths, installation equipment and turbine characteristics, so careful consideration of all factors is critical.

A technical challenge and a financial conundrum

While the OSW opportunity for ports is sizable, so are the challenges. Current OSW ports are being built or adapted to handle turbines that are rated up to 12-14 megawatts (MW), with nacelles ­– the component which houses all the generating elements of a wind turbine – weighing nearly 700 tons, the blades are more than 330 feet in length (approximately 100 meters) and the towers taller still. In the future, it is projected that ports will have to make room for even larger machines with rated generating capacities of 22MW or more.

OSW farms require several types of ports: for storage, marshalling and assembly of WTG components, foundation, cable, anchors, substations during the construction phase, installation and then ports for operation and maintenance during the asset life. While technical requirements vary depending on the planned usage, most are rigorous relative to standard port requirements. For the current generation of WTGs, an installation port requires up to 70 acres, with a minimum of two heavy lift berths of 650 feet (200 meters) each with a depth at berth, turning basin, and along the access channel of at least 36 feet (11 meters).

While early mover construction activity in the United States has been limited to ports in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey, as many as thirteen coastal states are actively developing prospective ports for OSW. To date, port construction has been concentrated along the United States’ Eastern seaboard, which is shallower than the West Coast and therefore more suitable for fixed-bottom turbine installations. The floating technologies planned for the West Coast will drive unique port requirements and substantial investment due to port space, load capacity and lifting equipment required for floater assembly and storage prior to transport for offshore installation.

A recent report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory describes current OSW port capacity as “inadequate” and states that “half of the existing pipeline is at risk of not being installed by 2030 because of limited port and vessel availability.” ^[2]  It estimates that achieving President Biden’s goal of 30GW by 2030 will require a roughly $6 billion investment in ports and vessels.

This is where the economics of OSW become increasingly challenging. Advances in technology have made OSW competitive with other energy sources, but significant upfront investment is still required to develop a supply chain that can support the sector’s growth. It can take more than a decade for an offshore wind farm to advance from conception to operation, leaving a significant gap between investment and revenue generation, and limited capacity for project developers to fund port infrastructure development.

For port developers considering OSW, there is a further complication in the form of necessary return on investment. To recover the significant investment in port development, installation ports will need upwards of 10 to 20+ year revenue streams associated with leasing and terminal operation. However, OSW developers are typically interested in short-term (2-5 year) lease periods that are commensurate with the offshore wind farm construction or installation window. This leaves a big financial gap for port owners unless they can line up a series of developers that will commit to use the port’s facilities over a cumulative span of a decade or more. Right now, few developers are willing to commit resources that far ahead, particularly given the limited insight into leasing rounds beyond 2025.

Leveraging global expertise for United States development

In November 2022, after more than a decade of infrastructure development that transformed the country, the sporting world watched a successful soccer World Cup play out in Qatar. A crucial element of this was a $5 billion project to build Hamad Port in Mesaieed, Qatar. This was the world’s largest greenfield port development, for which we acted as program management consultant ^[3].

Relocating the port from central Doha, Qatar was key to unlocking the logistical challenge of building the infrastructure for the World Cup, including roads, bridges, a mass transit system, and stadiums. Bringing the port project together in time to support other infrastructure development necessary for a successful tournament required expertise in planning, procurement, risk / schedule management, cost control, safety, quality assurance and more. The lessons we learned in Qatar are relevant to the challenges of building OSW ports in the United States as these ports are catalyzing OSW development.

This significant global expertise is being utilized to develop the necessary OSW port infrastructure already underway in the United States, where AECOM Tishman is managing the construction of the New Jersey Wind Port in Salem County^[4]. New Jersey has plans to become a hub for the OSW industry and the New Jersey Wind Port together with the Port of Paulsboro are central to those plans. The New Jersey Wind Port will support the manufacturing, fabrication, marshalling and assembly of WTGs, whereas the Port of Paulsboro will continue supporting the fabrication of fixed bottom monopile^* foundations. While the Port of Paulsboro is undergoing Phase 2 development, ground was broken in 2021 for the New Jersey Wind Port’s 220-acre parcel, which was previously a dredge material placement.

Both the New Jersey Wind Port and Port of Paulsboro are public-private partnerships (PPP) – a model for financing and developing infrastructure that could unlock the financial resources necessary for OSW infrastructure development elsewhere in the United States. The state of New Jersey has invested more than $500 million to kick-start development at Paulsboro and the New Jersey Wind Port^[5] and hopes the combined facilities will support 11GW of OSW projects by 2040.

That level of commitment, along with development funding, will help give the private sector the confidence to invest. Paulsboro has had success already by attracting leading manufacturers within the OSW industry supply chain. Specifically, EEW, a German manufacturer, is investing in the construction of a 70-acre monopile fabrication facility^[6] at the site, which creates approximately 260 local jobs.

Finding the right funding support

At the federal level, the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act (IIJA) signed into law in November 2021 by President Biden also recognizes the potential of OSW to stimulate economic activity. Three specific provisions impact OSW: 1) increased funding for vessels, of which there is a shortage; 2) among other OSW impacting provisions, the IIJA program includes over $600 million in port grants through the Maritime Administration’s Port Infrastructure Development Program^[7]; 3) the regulatory authority to permit energy storage on the Outer Continental Shelf, which could allow the development of hydrogen production from OSW and is regarded as an important mechanism for extending the potential of wind power beyond electrification.

Growing pains

 Political commitment, climate change and technological advancement have created a rich opportunity for OSW in the United States. The installation and maintenance of 45GW of fixed and floating wind projects over the next two decades offers an enormous opportunity for economic growth in coastal communities across the entire continent. The Biden Administration targets the creation of 77,000 new jobs, the revitalization of old, underachieving ports as hubs for the OSW industry, and a cleaner, more affordable energy transition in the long run.

As discussed, to achieve these targets the United States OSW industry will need to overcome substantial legal, logistical, technical, financial, and environmental challenges. Overcoming these barriers requires expertise that is both broad and deep, covering disciplines from port design and construction to environmental management and brokering alternative delivery models like PPPs, as well as expert grant writers helping in the application process. We have developed expertise over decades of working in the maritime market planning, designing, and delivering ports across the world, as well as enabling the energy transition through commitment to the OSW market. We believe in the sustainable, decarbonized future that renewable energy promises, and we are committed to working with all those helping to bring it closer.

* Monopiles are mega scale steel pipe piles (i.e. 40-feet in diameter) that are driven into the seabed and act as foundations for the tower sections of offshore wind turbines to sit upon.

The post Building wind ports for the new giants of the sea appeared first on Without Limits.

Below are just a few of the highlights from the report which shows how we are providing truly sustainable solutions for our clients informed by decades of experience, industry-leading ESG expertise and, above all, a drive to do good and be good.

—

Progressed toward our goal of science-based net zero by 2040, a target validated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)

We reached operational net zero in fiscal 2021, while reducing Scope 1 and 2 emissions which cover fleet and office energy, respectively, by 47 percent from our full year 2018 baseline year, using key travel and real estate initiatives. In accordance with the new and even more rigorous SBTi net zero standard, we have also set an updated 2040 net zero target which emphasizes decarbonization over offsets. This ambitious target places us among the forefront of companies globally.

Launched our ESG Advisory Services, supported by decades of expertise

One of our signature milestones this year has been the launch of our ESG Advisory practice, which deploys our depth of expertise to navigate our clients through this rapidly evolving space and realize their ambitious visions. Working with organizations at the forefront of the green transition globally, including the United Kingdom’s Network Rail and Airport Authority Hong Kong, our Advisory Services are mitigating risk, building trust and improving long-term outcomes worldwide.

Advanced ScopeX initiatives to accelerate our ESG offering for clients and cut carbon in our work

ScopeX is a core offering of our ESG services and will be one of our greatest contributions to tackling the climate crisis. By accounting for materials, site locations, logistics and construction methods, it will help reduce and eliminate the impact of projects on the natural environment. With ScopeX, we aim to reduce the carbon impact of major projects by at least 50 percent.

Acted on equity, diversity and inclusion (ED&I) by addressing equity challenges globally and regionally

We continue to make progress towards greater equity, diversity and inclusion. We’re nearing our target for women to compose 35 percent of our workforce, with women in 18 percent of leadership roles and making up 33 percent of our overall workforce. We have also fostered a culture of inclusivity that has been recognized by organizations like the Human Rights Campaign— which has named us a Best Place to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality in the United States. Our ED&I commitments efforts extend to the communities we serve, where we’ve implemented locally relevant workplace diversity and pay equity goals.

—

Beyond a commitment

In just one year, we’ve made objective progress on our targets and have set even more stringent ones so that we can lead for our clients and our people. But what can’t be quantified is our sense of purpose.

For us, ESG is so much more than a commitment—it’s something we see every day in our work, where its impact is truly felt. I invite you to see that impact for yourself in this year’s report and explore each of our accomplishments as we continue to deliver Sustainable Legacies worldwide.

Read the report

The post Our 2022 ESG Report: a year of Sustainable Legacies appeared first on Without Limits.

High-speed rail in Australia has been frequently promised through different election cycles and faced many false starts. However, the broad case for high-speed rail in Australia remains compelling if it progresses with a clear definition and purpose for investment.

Since the deregulation of commercial aviation in Australia in 1990, the east coast golden triangle of Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane has been the holy grail of long-distance travel, driving airline travel demand and profitability. The Melbourne to Sydney corridor, one of the world’s top 5^[1] busiest air travel corridors, has logically been the focus of several previous efforts to establish high-speed rail in Australia. Still, despite a strong domestic travel market on this corridor, key challenges remain: the cost of land, complex land ownership and stakeholders, challenging topography, existing road and rail infrastructure, natural environmental features like mountains, rivers, wetlands, and protected environments, mean a high-speed rail corridor has proven too great a challenge.

So, is there any case for high-speed rail? And can it play an effective role in Australia’s transport network?

The benefits

1/ Economic and social vitality
High-speed rail creates broad economic benefits for regional centres. High-speed rail construction, operation and maintenance require significant investment, creating skilled job opportunities in engineering, construction, and manufacturing. Unlike airports and major motorways, which often become a blot on a landscape, high-speed rail corridors require less land acquisition and can enhance urban environments. The permanent infrastructure assures private and public investors, can spur development in regional areas, and the increased connectivity provides better access to employment, education, healthcare, and recreational facilities. With greater access to amenities, we could reduce the concentration of population and economic activity in major cities, leading to more balanced regional development and addressing urban sprawl.

2/ Adjusting to our changing work habits

The significant shift to hybrid work-from-home models, amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic, means more people are moving to regional areas. High-speed rail offers comfortable, affordable, and productive regional commuter travel, and the ability to viably work while travelling on a high-speed rail service means transit time can be used as valuable work time. Unlike air travel, with the right technology solutions, commuters can experience minimal downtime while travelling, making longer-distance commuting more attractive and improving work-life balance.

3/ Sustainability and resilience
Globally, the transport sector is responsible for approximately one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions^[2]. High-speed rail can be powered by renewable energy and offers an efficient alternative to carbon-intensive transportation options for travellers. It provides a more sustainable travel option that can alleviate increasing congestion on highways and airports and help reduce reliance on fossil fuel-powered vehicles. Rail offers significant value for energy expended. The International Energy Agency reports that rail carries 8% of the world’s passengers and 7% of freight, yet accounts for just 2% of transport energy use^[3].

Effective mass transit, high-speed rail networks also support decarbonisation efforts and, in some cases, form the basis of ambitious climate policy. To cut carbon emissions, the French parliament is leveraging the established high-speed rail network, passing a bill to ban short-haul flights where a train alternative of 2.5 hours or less exists.

Shifting perception – where does high-speed rail have a role?

International high-speed rail network development case studies demonstrate how a broader program of high-speed rail networks could be developed in Australia in jurisdictions with similar planning, environmental, and socio-political systems.

Many systems have been developed using building blocks and staged implementation, leveraging existing connections between towns and cities, both intra- and inter-regionally, including existing rail networks. They build upon existing land use, travel demand patterns, and infrastructure to create high-speed rail networks for the future.

Recent global high-speed rail developments such as Brightline Florida, Stage 1 (115 kilometres) and California High-Speed Rail, Stage 1, Section 1: Bakersfield to Fresno (175 kilometres) have followed this exact path. Doing so creates an implementable, cost-effective staged plan for delivery, with significant potential for further development of the rail system and land use at key nodes. These projects follow a similar pathway to many European high-speed rail systems in operation or development, such as:

• Paris to Lille in France (LGV Nord, one of the earliest European examples, opening in 1993, at 220 kilometres)
• Seville to Cordoba in Spain (140 kilometres, one section of the longer Madrid – Cadiz high-speed rail corridor)
• High Speed 1 in the UK (110 kilometres, the UK section of the longer London to Paris high-speed rail)
• High Speed 2 in the UK (180 kilometres).

In the Australian context, these case studies present parallels to corridors in consideration such as Sydney to Central Coast (60 kilometres) and Newcastle (120 kilometres total), Sunshine Coast to Logan (120 kilometres) or Melbourne to Geelong (80 kilometres).  We must shift our perception of what high-speed rail should be and consider where it is both achievable and logical. In Australia, this means reconsidering high-speed rail in a regional context rather than long-distance inter-city rail between state capital cities. Instead, inter-regional rail would connect our growing regional centres to cities.

With more achievable distances compared to inter-city rail, inter-regional rail could be delivered using a program of works approach and, where possible and practical, utilising and upgrading existing rail corridors and infrastructure to significantly higher speeds to form part of a high-speed rail network.  

Ultimately, inter-regional rail does not need to preclude any major intercity connections but can catalyse these longer connections when we are ready. Globally, many successful high-speed rail projects are designed to connect urban centres that are modest distances apart, around 150 kilometres. Continually, cost is the key barrier to delivering high-speed rail and focusing on shorter distances makes these projects attainable.

¹ According to: https://www.oag.com/busiest-routes-right-now

² According to: https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/energy/what-we-do/transport

³ According to: https://www.iea.org/reports/the-future-of-rail

The post Not a pipe dream? Why high-speed rail has a role in Australia appeared first on Without Limits.

Last year, Mark Harper, the Secretary of State for Transport, made clear his expectations of the UK rail industry. Accelerated delivery by more efficient means is top of the agenda to deliver for the public purse, passengers and the planet.

The private sector supply chain has a critical role to play in helping Network Rail meet these objectives. So, how can we work collaboratively to overcome blockers that are currently impacting the drive towards ever more efficient delivery?

We put that question to colleagues and peers in a LinkedIn poll ahead of two major rail conferences in 2022. The results showed a clear direction of travel.

An overwhelming 63 per cent agreed that a focus on scope and requirements is where we can have the most impact.

But how do we do that? As trusted partners to the UK rail industry, here’s what effective requirements management looks like to us.

Interrogate and challenge

The governance change from GRIP to PACE is mandating the drive for scope clarity, and the private sector supply chain must step up, challenge the norm and focus on outcomes that benefit customers of the railway, both passengers and freight.

Here at AECOM, Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is our guiding principle. However, you can’t successfully design for MVP unless you relentlessly interrogate the brief and scope.

The earlier this is done in the project lifecycle the better. There are times when it’s hard to resist the urge to move straight into construction (especially when there is pressure to deliver), but the benefits for passengers (in the form of less disruption) and for the planet (less resources used) are strong drivers for change. These include reduced disruption for passengers, and a decrease in resources used. Naturally, money goes further, too – another important incentive in the context of a finite funding envelope.

Put simply, an empowered supply chain has the confidence to step back, interrogate the requirements and be vocal in driving ever more efficient approaches to project delivery.

Outcome-driven requirements are the future

To be empowered to generate lean and value-driven solutions, we would like to see a move away from over-prescriptive requirements. If the brief is over-subscribed, then opportunities for efficiency become limited and innovation stalls. In addition, there is a real risk to project budgets if requirements are over-prescriptive.

That’s why we think that outcome-driven requirements are the future. Instead of designing to budget, we need to be delivering outcomes to budget.

Considering the abovementioned point, it is much easier to interrogate the brief and scope if the outcomes — and budgets — are clearly defined.

Collaboration and trust drive value

As my colleague Conor Linnell demonstrates here, collaboration and efficiency go hand-in-hand. That relationship certainly extends to effective requirements management.

Collaborative models and frameworks that contractually embed a one-team approach like the Southern Rail Systems Alliance provide a non-competitive environment and ‘safe space’ for all parties to interrogate the requirements to generate value-driven, innovative solutions that meet the wider outcomes.

Trust can, of course, be fostered outside of an alliancing model. We are working with Scotland’s Railway Supply Chain partners such as BAM Nuttall and Siemens on a range of projects — including the recently-opened Inverness Airport Station — where a great working relationship and collaborative mindset are empowering us to de-risk, simplify and streamline the design and construction of schemes such as East Linton station (see case study below).

Doing things differently

Ultimately, we must do things differently if we are to embed a culture of productivity and efficiency within the UK rail industry.

Change is not easy — and we must challenge ourselves not to revert to type, especially in pressured situations. It’s important as a collective that we build on the lessons learned from Control Period 6 and acknowledge that there will be bumps in the road to more efficient delivery. Ultimately, delivering the best for the planet as well as customers — both passengers and freight — is what drives us.

The post The requirements revolution in rail is here. Time to get on board. appeared first on Without Limits.

Americans drive. In fact, they covered more than 3.2 trillion miles — on more than four million miles worth of roads in one year alone. In addition to people, over 70 percent of the nation’s goods journey across the United States’ road network every year. This transportation system is foundational to the livelihoods of millions of citizens and the broader economy.

Today, roads are largely paid for through the gas tax. These revenues, taken by federal, state and local government at the pump, are redistributed nationally to support the maintenance and operation of roads and mass-transit systems.

Gas tax receipts have fallen in recent years as some turn to hybrid and electric vehicles that consume less gas or none at all. In a country where more than 43 percent of public roadways are in “poor or mediocre” condition¹, revenue generated from the gas tax can no longer keep pace with the investment needed to maintain the nation’s transportation system. A recent study forecasts that by 2031 less than half of transportation will continue to be funded by the gas tax, compared to what is available in the Highway Trust Fund today.²

With growing imperatives to cut congestion and greenhouse gas emissions caused by transportation, a new approach to funding our transportation system is required.

Charging drivers per mile

Advanced technology, coupled with the urgency of securing long-term funding models and incentives to bring the trillion-dollar Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to action, have come together to create fertile ground for rapid growth. The IIJA has provisions for research, technology and innovation. It also includes funding for a national pilot on user fees per mile driven.

Oregon, recognizing the future solvency issues of relying on the gas tax, launched the nation’s first road usage charge system in 2015, Oregon Department of Transportation stated: “This new funding model weans us off fossil fuels using a modern, technology-based solution that combats climate change while assessing drivers fairly for their road use.”¹

Several states nationwide, from California to Utah and Virginia, have also developed road usage charge pilots that count the miles traveled and assess a driver’s fee per mile utilizing a variety of technologies. Drivers upload their data through a selection of systems, from pay-as-you-go using GPS, to quarterly post-pay facilitated by information uploaded from the car. There are also non-automated approaches such as submitting a photo of an odometer reading.

Adoption challenges and benefits

Technology alone will not be sufficient to drive a widespread adoption of new funding models. Setting up programs nationwide takes cooperation and planning in the deployment of infrastructure and technology, as well as support from drivers and other influential groups.

The first significant challenge is consumer acceptance. The gas tax is currently hidden from sight as drivers pay at the pump. For most, its existence is either unknown or long forgotten and broadly uncontentious. A per-mile charge brings the cost of road use into plain sight in the form of an expense linked directly to miles driven. Few new user charges are instantly popular and, in some cases, require legislation to effectively implement. That said, where such alternatives have been introduced, like in Oregon, they have drawn understanding and interest from road users.

Benefits need to be clearly communicated to encourage acceptance of the new system. In many instances, road usage charges can be more equitable than a gas tax, which by its nature collects more revenue from people driving older, less fuel-efficient vehicles than those in newer hybrid models.

Technology’s role

Today, more than 91 percent of vehicles sold are connected. LTE/5G connectivity enables data collection around distances traveled, locations, driving behavior and other information. Using this embedded connectivity to participate in a road user charge program will necessitate answers to many questions, including who the data belongs to and what they are able to do with it. Does the data in the car belong to the driver? Or to the car manufacturer or software companies who might then be able to extract further value from it?

Data distribution to third parties is the subject of some commercial sensitivity and drivers need to be convinced that it is a worthwhile trade-off to provide their information in return for better service. Oregon Department of Transportation is again leading the way by piloting a process to evaluate how connected vehicles can participate in the road usage charge program.

Given that tolling enterprises are equipped with new technologies to detect vehicles, infrastructure capable of interacting with vehicle telematics systems, and a significant history and business structure to manage financial transactions and customer services, they could also be a significant participant in the deployment of a road usage charge program. At present, several studies and pilots are looking to integrate tolling and road usage charging to enable standards that support data sharing between systems. In fact, the Society of Automotive Engineers has developed a standard “that identifies the communications interface between road user, connected vehicle and tolling service provider to support road-user charging.”²

Policy and incentives can drive behavior change

Utilizing technology that interacts directly with drivers, several states are also engaging road usage charge programs to encourage change. Congestion and air pollution, for example, can be remedied by dynamic charging which can help manage demand and encourage travel during non-congested periods or carpooling. Road usage charge program technologies could build on a model deployed in Tennessee where an app-based program pays people per mile traveled in carpools or on transit. An additional benefit of these programs could be more equitably delivering mobility-related assistance, such as reduced fees for qualified individuals.

Today, both Utah and Oregon provide incentives in their programs, in some cases highlighting environmental benefits, and in both emphasizing the fair and equitable approach that road usage charging brings to funding the transportation system. In Oregon participants using combustion engines earn fuel-tax credits. In Utah, where the program is only for electric vehicles at present, a 1 cent per-mile charge replaces a flat vehicle registration, with the state promising: “You’ll never pay more in the program, but you may pay less.”

Global expertise

Keeping America moving encompasses challenges from climate justice to social equity, feasibility to public outreach and so much in between. Our extensive global experience in tolling and user-fee practice, policy development and implementation, as well as our physical and digital design integration, enable us to accompany our public authorities and partners on this essential innovation journey.

We’re working with transportation authorities and other key partners around the world to stimulate action. We’ve helped facilitate cordon pricing in London, visitor toll tags in Florida, and recently helped to deploy express lanes and user fee infrastructure on the vital route between San Francisco Airport and Silicon Valley. Today, we’re working with California to deploy its latest road charging pilot, facilitating actual payments between road users and the state. As designers and deployers of world-class user payment systems, we’re using technology to build and fund the smarter, safer and more efficient transportation systems of the future enabling a climate-friendly tomorrow.

[1] https://www.oregon.gov/odot/programs/pages/orego.aspx

[2] https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3217/r/

The post Road-user technology offers U.S. states alternative to the gas tax appeared first on Without Limits.

Railways have a key part to play in the UK government’s plan for long-term economic growth. That was the core message in the publication of the Statement of Funds Available (SoFA) and the High Level Output Specification (HLOS) statement, in which Mark Harper, Secretary of State for Transport committed 44 billion pounds to fund operational development and maintenance across railways in England and Wales between 2024-29 – otherwise known as Control Period 7 (CP7).    

In the statement, the transport secretary makes it clear that he expects Network Rail to achieve greater value for money during CP7 through “a strong, sustained, and effective approach to the delivery of greater cost efficiency”. It comes as no surprise that Harper refers to the efficiency drive as a “crucial underpinning” of the statement, given the challenge of building and maintaining a resilient, safe, and sustainable rail network in the current constrained fiscal environment. 

Keen readers will have noticed the phrase “ambitious yet realistic” which is used multiple times to describe the approach that the government wants the rail industry to take to do more under difficult circumstances. The transport secretary also expects “clear evidence of the use of broader initiatives to ensure accelerated delivery and more efficiency [sic] delivery, to drive improvement, as well as close, effective collaboration with the supply chain to drive efficiencies.”   

Listen to Conor Linnell’s insights in a panel discussion with industry leaders at the 2022 TransCityRail North event in Manchester.

Clear evidence that collaboration drives efficiency

Our experience shows that collaborative working is key to meeting the efficiency challenge. As a recognised trusted partner to the UK rail industry, we are collaborating on some of the first rail projects and programmes to be delivered through “ambitious but realistic” industry initiatives that are challenging traditional methods and processes such as Project SPEED (Swift, Pragmatic and Efficient Enhancement Delivery) and PACE (Project Acceleration in a Controlled Environment), as well as through alliancing models. 

While implementation is not yet standard practice, these initiatives and alliancing models are showing positive results, examples of which can be seen below. All clearly demonstrate that collaboration and efficiency go hand-in-hand. 

Paving the way for a more efficient rail future

While implementation challenges remain, these projects show a positive way forward. As the transport secretary rightly pointed out, the industry made good progress in Control Period 6. Now however, we must take these lessons forward into CP7, embracing collaborative ways of working to deliver on the government’s long-term vision for rail.  

The post Three ways collaboration is driving efficiency across the UK rail industry appeared first on Without Limits.

Looking back at 2022, we saw the wrap of several organizations focused on the deployment of automated vehicles (AVs) with the closing of Argo.ai being the most recent. The combined forces of inflation and potential recession have driven up the cost of investment funding, and the United States is facing intense global pressure related to the development of automation. Vehicle automation also has the additional burden of being a safety-forward technology and safety solutions have traditionally shown a lower return on investment. This economic environment is leaving a strain on start-ups entering the market as well as organizations currently operating in the AV market.

Where does this leave automation? How can AVs prove their safety reputation while delivering on their promising investment to market? More importantly how do we continue to advance a technology and strategy that can help us tackle the significant loss of life caused by our existing modes of transportation that connectivity and automation could help solve.

Continued investments from global giants like Google’s Waymo which recently launched full-fledged robotaxi services in Phoenix, GM and Cruise which launched commercial services this last fall, or Baidu and Pony.ai which have won the right to deploy automated taxis in Beijing point towards a continued growth in a tightening global market.

Infrastructure owners and operators (IOOs) could equally have a significant investment in how to accelerate automation. Over the past few years, IOOs have worked to find their role in the deployment of automated vehicles. For the past decade, AV manufacturers have consistently messaged to IOOs that their vehicles are able to function in environments built for human drivers; however, minor adjustments to the infrastructure, particularly in the form of extra-vehicle situational awareness provided via communications, would allow for AVs to function more optimally. AV operators have explained that infrastructure consistency is important providing an environment that minimizes conflict with other road users. Until now, IOOs have not had a significant role in the deployment of AVs.

What if IOO’s and the AV industry could invest together to identify a set of minimal functional requirements for automation, better accelerating the safety frameworks for deployments, and thereby support automation developers and operators during a time when their funding is tight?

There are a handful of AV operational needs that are common across most platforms and approaches. If IOOs could develop some of these common factors, AV developers may be able to use their limited funding for other automation development. Equally IOOs would be playing an investment role in accelerating the deployment of safety benefits brought by the automation technology.

Some of the key areas of cooperation and support from the IOOs may include:

• Localization support
• Object detection and classification
• Common elements of path planning – such as sparse high-precision GPS waypoints, and high definition (HD) mapping.

If the AV industry can harmonize on these attributes across operational design domains (ODDs), AV developers may use investments to support more specific automation capabilities required for that developer’s specific business needs.

Localization and mapping

Many IOOs are considering creating high-definition maps of their geographies and several are considering integrating these with digital twins that also allow the IOO’s to convene digital policy, rules of the road and insights. As part of their efforts to improve safety in Utah, Utah Department of Transportation has already created HD maps of the entire state. Not all AV operators or designers use mapping the same way, and most AV OEMs create their own maps.  If IOOs were to undertake an effort to understand the minimal set of data attributes needed for these maps, there may be opportunity to provide some harmonized basic mapping protocols that could be used by AV operators.  If IOOs can increase safety with an investment in mapping, that may also allow AV operators to invest in other areas of operation, thereby proliferating safety and mobility improvements and improving automation technology.

IOOs should also work with the AV industry to determine what information can be shared from the industry back to IOOs if, for example, minimal map data is generated and shared with the AV industry, perhaps the industry could reciprocate with high-precision GPS corrections to the position of map elements. A thorough understanding of potential shared data needed to support automation could also be a part of an IOO effort to create digital twins of infrastructure.  If an IOO can work with AV operators to understand data needs, digital twin design can be harmonized to accept and use data from vehicles.

Harmonized asset data

Roadway assets, specifically lane markings, signage, and traffic control devices, are not the same throughout the world.  If IOOs can work together on developing and approving a harmonized dictionary for roadway assets and create a data exchange for this information, this could enable safety capabilities of AVs. This concept is already being pursued in the Department of Transportation Work Zone Data Exchange (WZDx), and for other infrastructure-based information such as signal phase and timing (SPaT) through the USDOT Joint Program Office (JPO) Operational Data Environment (ODE). Expanding on the WZDx idea, AV truck operators have also requested a Weigh Station Data Exchange (WSDx), which is another area where IOOs could add a spark.

Likewise, precise localization is a challenge for both automated and connected vehicles, specifically in “urban canyon” areas where tall buildings inhibit direct line of sight to GPS satellites and the GPS signals are reflected.  Tunnels also provide a specific challenge for automated and connected vehicles for blocking GPS entirely, and due to the extreme lighting contrast for machine vision systems when entering or exiting a tunnel. Even in the complete absence of GPS information, AVs have the benefit of numerous onboard sensors, which are used to provide precise localization data to AV systems, such as the path planner. However, the effectiveness of this is tightly coupled to the algorithms used within the AV software stack. The USDOT-sponsored connected vehicle deployments have shown significant challenges in urban areas with tall buildings, specifically in New York City.  In that pilot, the noisy GPS data was addressed using a novel method of measuring time-of-flight from Roadside Unit (RSU) to offset GPS signal error and verified using a vehicle mounted laser pointer. This would be possible by precisely measuring the GPS position of the RSU, which can be transmitted to On-Board Unit (OBUs) or stored in an onboard map of the AV or CV system. This is another example for how automated and connected vehicle systems can inherently improve each other, and how IOOs may be able to better support automation.

Like the RSU solution NYC used, GPS corrections can also be provided using a technology called real time kinematics (RTK), which uses a precisely positioned base station and broadcasts a correction that devices can use to overcome the error in the GPS signal. IOOs could provide something similar as a service to augment GPS precision equipment, which may include any kind of roadside equipment that is able to be precisely located and transmit a simple message with its location and a timestamp; however, regardless of the information an IOO is able to provide, the automated or connected vehicle devices will still need a minimum level of capability to process the data available effectively.

Path planning

Path planning is one of the fundamental components of an AV. In essence, this function is responsible for evaluating all available paths the vehicle could take in both the short-term and long-term planning horizons, and then selecting the “best” path.  This occurs many times each second for short-term planning, which allows a vehicle to correct for small deviations in the vehicle’s position versus its previously planned position, and to react to immediate or predicted hazards that have been detected by the AV’s perception pipeline. Long-term path planning is akin to route planning and may never be revaluated once a route is set; however, a flexible path planning architecture will have the ability to replan a route based on unforeseen circumstances.  To the extent an IOO can support fundamental path-planning which is something AV developers could potentially share.

One of the limitations of today’s AV systems is their inability to drive on roadways that have not been previously mapped by the AV developer using proprietary methods and data structures.  This limits scalability and operational flexibility, but according to the previous mention on minimal map data requirements, IOOs could provide a sparse GPS waypoint data layer, accessible through a permissioned API for example, that would provide the AV developer with an idea of the contours of the roadways that a new route could be created within their system.  The first time a vehicle travels on a new roadway using only the sparse GPS waypoints, it could proceed more cautiously relying more on its onboard sensors to navigate the environment, but as its traversing this new route, it can be recording all the data needed for the AV developer to create its own version of a map.  The AV industry could then contribute back to the IOO information such as corrections to the sparse waypoints, further improving the accuracy of these, and expediting the use of the roadway for others in the future.

Together IOOs and the AV industry have an opportunity to use ingenuity and transferable solutions-thinking to integrate data, systems and mapping that can improve the safety ROI needed to ensure the livelihood of the AV market. Investors, developers, public and private organizations all should be working together to enable the future of automated transportation.

The post Automation lives: transportation agencies can spark AV advancement appeared first on Without Limits.

Despite clear public interest in speeding the delivery of infrastructure improvements in the United States, it can take as many as 4½ years on average to receive environmental approvals that clear the way for major federal projects.

The Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act (IIJA) establishes an approach to reduce these delays, and other permitting reform efforts are being pursued by government to deliver needed highway, rail, water, new energy and utility projects more quickly. At the same time, new cloud-based, interactive digital platforms like AECOM’s PlanEngage can be influential  to help reduce by half the cumulative review time and improve transparency and public engagement. In fact, lawmakers in Congress are considering policies to encourage the use of digital tools in the review process.

Making regulatory documents more accessible

While the review requirements set out in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are critical to protect communities and habitat, a combination of factors over time has combined to extend the environmental review process – leading to costly delays and even dooming worthy projects. Environmental Impact Statements that were as once as short as 10 pages now average 600 pages, plus appendices that typically exceed 1,000 pages. Understaffed regulatory agencies often working across multiple jurisdictions and juggling input from the public, consultants and other stakeholders can bog down under the sheer weight of the review process.

Online digital platforms like PlanEngage essentially make NEPA documents more accessible, expanding stakeholder engagement and transparency, while enabling interactivity and edits in real time between regulatory agencies and the public that can speed up reviews.

How PlanEngage made collaboration easier in Arizona

This was the case in Arizona where PlanEngage was first used by the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) during review of a 280-mile interstate highway segment between Nogales and Wickenburg. Instead of navigating dense, static, two-dimensional PDF documents, the platform allowed users to search headings and subheadings through a navigation bar and provide input. Readers could pop out graphics, see photos and visualizations in a separate window on their devices, and provide input.

In addition to promoting more efficient reviews, online digital platforms allow for better collaboration between agencies that can identify and resolve conflicts earlier in the process, which also reduces the number of formal comments on the draft EIS. In the case of Arizona’s I-11 expansion, it also unlocked new opportunities.

Arizona officials said the results achieved through the interactive process will guide their efforts on future studies.

With as much as $1.2 trillion in new federal infrastructure spending hitting the market, and greater demand by the public for input and more equitable ways to deliver it, the timing is right for increased uptake of online digital platforms. In a process where debate is limited to formal written submissions or public hearings, interactive, mobile-phone friendly documents and engagement, can draw higher levels of interest, reach a broader audience and allow for a wider diversity of voices in real time.

What’s more, officials say, is that better public understanding of projects leads to more substantive comments, less ambiguity and fewer delays or challenges related to not being able to find information in a timely way.

Reducing costs, speeding up delivery

The core goals of environmental review and public participation remain as important as ever in the review process. Delivering an ambitious infrastructure program requires a new approach that aligns with the original intent of NEPA requirements and helps get projects off the drawing board.

A 2015 analysis prepared by Common Good, a nonpartisan reform coalition, found that a six-year delay in starting construction on public projects cost the nation nearly $4 trillion, a sum far in excess of the amount needed to modernize America’s infrastructure. Today’s inflationary economy has already begun eating into the spending power created by IIJA and client project decision-making.

Regulators and clients alike can play a role in encouraging innovation and moving from the approach of previous generations for environmental reviews to an interactive, cloud-based platform approach appropriate for 21st century infrastructure. The outcomes can lead to better projects delivered faster and more economically, while ensuring the environmental protections that keep our communities safe and thriving.

The post Online review tools mean better outcomes for infrastructure appeared first on Without Limits.

As the Elizabeth Line prepares to open, the benefits it will bring are not only a mark of the journey the Crossrail project team and its supply chain has been on, but they demonstrate just how far civil engineering has evolved since those initial designs were produced.

Back then, I started what would come to be one of the most exciting projects I’ve ever worked on: Farringdon’s Elizabeth Line Station. We would be involved in elements of the scheme including architecture with Aedas, civil and structural engineering and project management, which was led by Crossrail.

But when the ink was drying on the original contracts, phrases such as net zero, social value or even the concept of equity were barely on the edges civil engineering’s lexicon, let alone a standard procurement requirement. That’s why, at the time, the thinking of both Crossrail and Farringdon Station’s design was so bold.

Take accessibility and equity of journey. Farringdon Station has been designed so that someone who can’t use escalators will have the same user journey as someone who can, thanks to the installation of inclined lifts adjacent to the escalators.

Farringdon Station is a hub, connecting airports, Thameslink and the wider London Underground and rail routes, improving transportation for millions across London and the capital region. Back in 2008, the design was all about improving connectivity, with the West Ticket Hall integrated with the new Thameslink station entrance. It was already clear the benefit this would have on the outlying communities who would use this station to reach places faster, bringing them closer to the economic opportunities and cultural possibilities offered by London.

Decarbonisation and air quality are fundamental to London transportation schemes today, but back in 2008, the scale of the climate emergency was not as fully understood. Crossrail has always had a strong sustainability vision and the completed Farringdon station will incorporate a number of environmental features such as LEDs, ground source heat pumps, and strict materials sourcing and will have a BREEAM excellent rating. But again, in today’s context, the scheme brings further important environmental benefits. Infrastructure designed for smoother, faster journeys is critical to increasing public transport use and thereby bringing down carbon emissions and improving air quality: a critical part of a green recovery.

Without doubt, the big thinking behind Crossrail will pay off and in ways that we couldn’t have predicted back in 2008. This tells me two things: first, investment in big public transportation projects is still needed and the transformational impact will be felt for years. Second, engineers need to be ambitious and push boundaries if their designs are going to meet what will become fundamental requirements of generations to come.

So, where are the next boundaries that engineers and architects need to push in terms of station design? What should we incorporate into designs now, which will become standard by 2035?

We already know new stations need to be designed be built and operate at net zero. In addition, they will need to cope with longer, drier summers and warmer, wetter winters. Management and use of water, including surface water, will be critical. It may also be that we can incorporate regenerative design into stations and finding future ways they could make a net contribution to the environment, through, for example, water collection and reuse or air filtering.

Part of future thinking will be informed by how we expect our cities to evolve. As Aecom’s London 2070 vision identified, urban areas will increasingly become polycentric and this will be reflected in a network of stations rather than transportation centred around a terminus. Cities may see clusters with specific offerings such as civic centres, innovation centres or areas focusing on leisure and cultural activities. These new stations will be digitally hyper-connected, as flexibility of work location increases – could we see bookable meeting spaces in stations as they increasingly become focal points for businesses with a geographically disparate workforces, perhaps with immersive technology?

We’re already seeing the use of stations change because more companies are adopting a hybrid working model post pandemic. In the future we expect to see more people using stations, but those people commuting less frequently. We also expect their destinations to become more varied and a ‘mesh’ of routes, rather than the same linear suburb to city routes used on a repetitive basis. Engineers will increasingly need to factor in mobility on demand and connected and autonomous vehicles.

Major infrastructure projects take decades to come to fruition, which is why those engineers who have the privilege to work on them need to be so forward looking when it comes to design – as the Elizabeth Line now proudly demonstrates.

This is reproduction of an article which originally appeared in New Civil Engineer

The post Engineers today need to replicate Crossrail’s bold thinking appeared first on Without Limits.

In just over 100 years, we’ve made great advances in aviation — from flying people around the world to sending astronauts to the moon. However, those advances come at a cost: aviation is responsible for introducing an average of 7.3 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere each year and contributing to climate change. Fully electric aircraft known as electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOLs) is the next great aviation leap and could help blunt this impact. These new aircraft take off vertically like helicopters and fly horizontally like traditional airplanes and hold the potential to transform the aviation industry.

What makes eVTOLs different from airplanes and helicopters?

Initially known as tiltrotors in the military, eVTOLs are a cross between an airplane and a helicopter. Constructed using the latest aviation technology including highly sophisticated single-pilot avionics and advanced lithium battery technology and in some instances tiltrotor type powerplants, there are major differences between eVTOLs and traditional aircraft.

Most notably eVTOLs are battery powered and can be charged from clean energy sources, providing the potential to reduce carbon emissions resulting from flight. While eVTOL have a shorter range than traditional aircraft, they can effectively provide intercity and intracity transportation — recently, an eVTOL flew 150 miles on a single battery charge.

Nimbler than an aircraft, eVTOLs are cheaper than a helicopter and are being designed for widespread public use. At operational maturity, eVOTLs could cut a typical one-hour train or car commute to a 10-minute “hop” for around the same price as an UberXL or Lyft, while reducing roadway congestion. The aircraft will also improve connections for rural communities making it a faster and easier commute to larger cities for work opportunities, shopping or to have goods delivered.

eVTOLs and traditional aircraft are similar in one key aspect: adherence to safety. Before going into service eVTOLs must pass the same rigorous aircraft certification process as every other public transport aircraft. While this process can take years, it ensures each aircraft component meets or exceeds the safety standards needed for safe flight and that the thorough certification process is in place for the pilots and mechanics that fly and maintain the aircraft.

Are new air terminals required?

In short, yes. Two passenger transportation models are currently under consideration: one based on so-called vertistops, designed for short trips in urban locations; another designed for longer, intracity trips with vertiports.

Some manufacturers and infrastructure developers are considering developing freestanding terminals, while others would place these facilities atop existing infrastructure like parking garages, where structures allow. Developing standardized vertistop and vertiport models for multiple eVTOLs aircraft would reduce costs and enable rapid market development. Standardization would also enable state-specific adaptation, for example, seismic retrofitting in California or hurricane fortification in Florida.

Our team has created a prototype that is lightweight and replicable, delivered as a kit of parts that can be enlarged are needed by simply adding another bay.

What demands will eVTOLs place on our energy grid?

With each charging eVTOL’s airframe potentially consuming more power in 20 minutes than 10 homes on a summer day, these aircraft require substantial power draws from the energy grid. Similar to the broader electric vehicle sector, with the introduction of the International Electrotechnical Commission 61851 standard for electric vehicle conductive charging systems, the advanced air mobility industry must consider measures that allow the utility companies and potential hosts to plan for evolving market needs, including battery type and proprietary charging methods on the energy grid.

For long-term economic viability, we should also plan for new energy sources such as fuel cells, which could reduce peak demand on utilities. The system could also be designed to support wider communities’ energy needs. For example, making use of the onsite energy system as a grid asset when eVTOL demand is low.

How will we integrate eVTOLs into our existing transportation regulatory network?

Like all modes of transport, the eVTOL network must connect into the wider transportation system. While the regulatory process is multi-layered and complex, the first step toward integration is establishing national flight and safety standards.

NASA is taking the lead on this process, developing harmonization guidelines that will be administered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Cities and states are also considering their own eVTOL flight standards and regulations. Our specialists are currently helping to develop national standards, and this combined with our experience serving local markets will help municipalities, manufacturers and developers understand and incorporate the unfolding national, state and city regulations.

Vertistops and vertiports will require their own permits, with reference to FAA regulations as well as state and local rezoning and permitting requirements. Recognizing this, we’ve developed a unique tool to concurrently track permits across all sites, expediting the approval process and enabling infrastructure to be completed when the eVTOLs are ready to fly.

Seizing the potential

Advancing this new means of flight and ensuring the process unfolds in a safe, strategic and sustainable manner will require collective work from the industry — manufacturers, developers and designers, partnering with all levels of government. Done correctly, eVTOLs will connect rural communities, decrease greenhouse gas emissions and democratize fast and efficient air travel, transforming how we travel and move goods and potentially even how our economy grows.

The post Ready for takeoff: preparing electric aircraft for launch appeared first on Without Limits.

When the producers of one of the BBC’s biggest shows called and asked whether they could feature autonomous pods from a project we’ve been recently working on, along with our colleagues at Westfield Autonomous Vehicles, we were initially hesitant. It’s not that we didn’t want to raise the profile of future mobility, but when we say that profile would be in the hands of nine candidates vying to be Lord Sugar’s apprentice, you’ll understand why.

Nevertheless, we decided to go for it, with the candidates being tasked to brand their own autonomous pods and much of the filming undertaken at AECOM’s London Aldgate offices. Like most viewers, I cringed my way through the episode as the candidates pitched their branded pods to a range of potential clients – and very good sports – including AECOM clients High Speed 2 (HS2) and Network Rail, with some success.

But what happens on The Apprentice stays on The Apprentice. While the pods pitched by candidates will, of course, never see the light of day at HS2 and Network Rail, it does raise the question of whether autonomous pods will soon become a common part of our transport infrastructure?

The episode came about after the show’s producers spotted the AECOM-led Capri Mobility project on the news, which was a research project looking at how autonomous vehicles could work as part of a wider transport system.

Autonomous vehicle technology is already here and well developed, but there are a range of social, legal, and technical issues that will make their wider deployment more challenging to achieve. So, what did we learn from the candidates and how far off the mark were their brands?

One of the most important barriers to consider is public perception. Industry will need to understand their fears, concerns, ideas and aspirations to ensure future services are designed to meet their needs and make them feel safe. What the show demonstrated was that the perception of how pods could potentially be deployed was diverse – from a green transport solution to an experiential activity.

A hugely important discussion about how autonomous transport interfaces with society and technology is currently unfolding and ongoing. The research we’re undertaking in this area has been crucial, as it helps us understand what we need to do, as an industry, to make this technology applicable to real life. These decisions about real life application have to grapple with answers to questions such as what are the right priorities for which types of roads, considering how best to balance the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, autonomous vehicles such as pods, and freight?

These answers will, in turn, raise the question of where investment in autonomous pods is best placed. For example, if its focus is in taking carbon out of the ‘last mile’ of journeys, should we, as a society, pursue in preference current policy to promote active travel modes increasing walking and cycling? As we evaluate the viability of investment returns, we may start to see the focus shift towards other challenges such as the potential to aide freight decarbonisation, or improve the customer experience of mass transit.

Societal reactions are often shaped by the media response and decisions will feed into government policy around the roll out of this technology. Mapping the algorithms that control the vehicles with a clear and consistent policy approach will be crucial to enable these systems to realise their potential. Last night’s episode was a tiny part of that discussion, but it will certainly help raise awareness of the debate around how we’ll get around in the future. In the same way those of us of the Tomorrow’s World generation recall the technology introduced to us by Maggie Philbin, it will be interesting to look back on this episode in a decade’s time and see how much it has dated.

In the episode the candidates were tasked with the fun element in the evolution of our deployment of autonomous vehicles, exploring the potential markets. At AECOM we’re working at a wider and deeper level, considering the societal and technological challenges and researching the interface of this technology with the market and regulation. We’re playing a pivotal role in developing our understanding of what we need to do to put autonomous vehicles into operation.

But we’ve got more in common with those on The Apprentice than you might think. Just like Lord Sugar, we’re looking for a diverse range of the brightest and most innovative minds to join us and help society navigate what the future might look like. And just like the candidates, there’s still so much to learn about the part autonomous vehicles will play in our mobility future, that it’s fair to say we’re all still apprentices.

This is an edited version of an article that first appeared in New Civil Engineer’s online edition.

The post In the development of autonomous transportation, we’re all apprentices appeared first on Without Limits.

The recent transport debate – cast as roads versus public transport – needs a clearer perspective if we want to create a sustainable and efficient travel system which improves quality of life as the population grows and behaviours shift.

To reach the Irish government’s goal of halving transport carbon emissions by 2030 we need to make the most of the roads we have, organising space on them differently. After all, they have been constructed at significant environmental and economic cost. Renewed investment gives us the opportunity to maximise their value to society by repurposing them for a new, more sustainable, era.

The process of greening Irish transport is already underway. National Transport Authority (NTA) and Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII)-led initiatives include €360 million annual investment in safe walking, cycling and affordable active travel programmes as set out in the government’s upcoming Sustainable Mobility Policy. They also include multi-billion schemes like BusConnects across cities which, with new infrastructure, design and vehicles, underpin a clean network.

“Transport has a critical role to play in our daily lives, and how we travel has a direct bearing on our carbon emissions,” said Minister for Transport, Eamon Ryan TD in response to the overall allocation of €3.4 billion to the department in the Budget 2022. “By reorienting our investment towards walking and cycling, sustainable public transport in both urban and rural areas, and electric vehicles, we can make it easier for people to make changes that benefit us all.”

However, success depends on finding new ways to create a clean and smooth-running transport system. This article looks at three ways that this can be done: implementing permanently some of the temporary road use principles adopted during the coronavirus pandemic; by reimagining older, underused roads; and considering how essential goods can best be moved around a road network that has been optimised for active travel and public transport, as part of a wider review on freight within Ireland.

Coronavirus as a sustainability catalyst

Public acceptance of a different, greener use of road space in our towns requires a mindset shift. Historically, this was a thorny task because the public associated permanent changes with lengthy roadworks and disruption. During the pandemic however, temporary measures were installed at pace to allow more room for people and cyclists. Footpath areas were widened for shoppers, while side roads were closed to private motorists to improve pedestrian priority. These short-term, low-cost, but high-impact remedies allowed social distancing and al fresco dining around local shops and cafés, keeping businesses open once lockdowns lifted. They also gave the public a chance to experience an urban environment where cyclists and pedestrians are given priority, but minus the roadworks and disruption.

Figures show that the response was positive. Despite many people working from home, bicycle sales in Ireland grew 30 per cent between January 2019 and September 2020, and bicycle usage rose more than 40 per cent year-on-year in 2020. Furthermore, figures from the Canal Corden Report by the NTA show that walking and cycling in Dublin have been rising steadily over the last decade.

By enhancing local street furniture and greenery, as well as installing better lighting and signage, we have a chance to bake in these positive behaviours, and lay the foundations for more permanent design changes that are needed to create a more sustainable transport network.

Anne Graham, NTA’s chief executive, shares this vision. She says, “Quick-fix solutions such as the coronavirus mobility measures have created space on our streets and kept us safe. They are a golden opportunity to show first-hand how wonderful our town centres can be when we make different, sustainable transport choices which allow them to be more open.”

The Bray Seafront Plaza scheme in Dublin, designed by AECOM and funded by the NTA, encompasses the principles of making permanent short-term coronavirus mobility measures. The plaza is a focal point on the seafront, and has been transformed with redesigned on-street parking, widened footpaths, and the addition of landscaping, public lighting, and cycle parking. According to Wicklow County Council, public feedback has been overwhelmingly positive.

A before and after video of the Bray Seafront Plaza scheme of improvements

New ideas for old roads

There has long been an understanding that achieving a reduction in carbon emissions would be dependent on an imaginative overhaul of the way we use the national road network. For example, arterial roads are important routes for goods and people, and we can capitalise more fully on the investment already made in them.

One particularly successful, low-cost strategy involves converting hard shoulders to bus lanes. This has been done on the M1 and M2 busways around Belfast and is now being considered by TII for the N11/M11, amongst other national roads. Such adjustments provide clean alternatives for people looking to travel longer distances without a car.

Another option is to include these roads in sustainable corridors. The N2 Rath Roundabout to Kilmoon Cross scheme in County Meath is a good example: the existing road network will be repurposed into a high-quality active travel scheme to enhance sustainable connectivity between local communities and the regional centres in Ashbourne.

We have taken a similar design approach to the Lucan to City Centre BusConnects scheme, which breathes new life into the Old Lucan Road adjacent to the N4 national road. The proposals for a new two-way cycle route along the old road should encourage end-to-end sustainable journeys for local (and longer distance) trips in the Palmerstown area. New bike rack facilities at future bus stops for sustainable transport integration are a feature of this proposal.

The National Cycle Network plan, which we are currently developing with TII, will take this approach one step further by linking retrofitted national roads to cycling infrastructure in towns and cities and to the Greenways network of urban and rural cycle paths. Due to be published this year, the plan aims to encourage greener, safer personal transport choices.

Peter Walsh, TII CEO, comments: “Transport Infrastructure Ireland’s delivery of sustainable mobility solutions will continue in 2022 and beyond, specifically with the development of Greenways and the National Cycle Network plan, in addition to expanding light railway infrastructure and services.”

Managing heavy goods transport

Any clean transport reset needs to factor in freight, not only in terms of how to reduce vehicle emissions, but also how to best segregate heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) from cyclists and pedestrians on urban roads that have been optimised for public transport and active travel use.

Our analysis for TII indicates that an HGV creates six times more emissions than a small car in urban conditions. There are still significant barriers to fleet mass electrification, however initiatives such as last mile delivery – where goods are taken to distribution hubs on city outskirts and then taken into the centre using e-bikes, cargo bikes and smaller hybrid vans – is providing a solution, not only to lowering emissions levels but also reducing the number of HGVs on inner city roads. Nevertheless, restrictions on HGV operating hours in urban areas may be necessary to create safer, more pleasant conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and bus passengers.

In addition, there is an opportunity for rail freight to provide some alternative support and we have worked with Irish Rail to formulate plans to introduce a new scheme to boost rail transport. Still, given that HGVs are likely to remain a key part of intermodal freight transport in the future, their role will be best considered in the context of the Department of Transport’s forthcoming haulage strategy.

Ultimately, roads have a key role to play in the transition to cleaner and greener transport alternatives. By organising space differently and reimagining how we use them, we have an opportunity to maximise a highly valuable resource.

The post Roads reimagined with people and planet in mind appeared first on Without Limits.

Throughout 2021, the UK freight industry has remained in the national spotlight. The lasting impacts of the coronavirus pandemic and Brexit have had considerable influences on the way the industry has evolved and developed, whilst other key bearings such as the lasting commercial vehicle driver shortage and the UK ‘fuel crisis’ have considerably affected the way the sector has operated as well as how it is perceived by the wider public.

Especially in the context of COP 26 and the signing of the Glasgow Climate Pact, the decarbonisation of all freight modes and the chartering of a path to net-zero continues to be a priority for all modes. Some modes are closer than others – and effective strategies such as appropriate modal shift and the greater prevalence of alternative vehicles are all important tools in the armoury for the freight and logistics sector.

AECOM’s annual Freight Matters report discusses these pressing challenges and brings together the latest, and most critical, high-level industry data for road, rail, water and air freight transport from a range of credible sources, alongside expert insight from AECOM’s freight and fleet specialists.

The report is of value to those working in the freight industry, involved in freight activity and/or interested in the sector’s growing contribution to the UK economy. It can be used to help inform decision-making, policies and projects. Insights include:

Coronavirus: presenting opportunities to create a more sustainable future

By stepping up to ensure the continuous movement of goods in the face of changing demand, the freight and logistics industry has played a hugely important role in the response to the challenges presented by coronavirus.

As the UK and many other countries have a better grip on the pandemic, there is an expectation that the industry will return to pre-pandemic normality (or close to it). Our report considers that it may be better for the industry to examine the potential opportunities that coronavirus has opened up and looks at how these could be highly beneficial if taken.

Post-Brexit the UK needs a national freight strategy

Brexit has dominated political discourse for some time and continues to do so as the UK transitions from a paid-up full member of the European Union to a future as an independent trading nation. This has created the need to consider trading patterns, both with Europe and the rest of the world, and how these changes may affect supply chains.

With so many questions remaining unanswered regarding the future of freight and logistics in the UK, we call for a national freight strategy that reflects these challenges and opportunities and helps put in place the infrastructure required to facilitate new trading relationships. We also call on policy makers to support the efforts of the freight sector, and the vital role it plays, by providing the infrastructure and skills needed to do this effectively.

The post Freight and logistics in the UK: looking back on an exceptional year appeared first on Without Limits.

In the UK, climate change and the levelling up agenda are forcing a rethink on infrastructure investment. That is certainly the case in Scotland, where legislative framework for emissions reduction is underpinned by a legal commitment to deliver a ‘just transition’.

The Scottish government defines a just transition as ‘both the outcome – a fairer, greener future for all – and the process that must be undertaken in partnership with those impacted by the transition to net zero’. To deliver on its policy commitments, the Scottish government has set up a dedicated Commission who will be tasked with undertaking ‘meaningful engagement’ with local communities as well engaging and collaborating with ‘with other sources of expertise’, including relevant Scottish government advisory bodies on climate change and inequality amongst many others.

As Colin Wood, AECOM CEO for Europe and India said recently at the launch of the UK COP26 Presidency’s ‘Visions for a Net Zero Future’: “Efforts to tackle climate change will have limited success without the involvement of local citizens; leveraging that local knowledge will be key to achieving a resilient, net-zero future.” As infrastructure and built environment consultants, we are committed to delivering sustainable legacies. Listening to community voices to achieve a deeper understanding at a local level helps our multidisciplinary teams gather evidence to find the best solutions to our clients’ most complex challenges.

In this article we explore three different approaches that can be used to create equitable infrastructure needed to meet wider levelling up and net zero ambitions. We take Glasgow as our starting point, then draw on strategically-important transport planning, active travel and flood management projects across other major UK cities including Edinburgh, Manchester and Birmingham.

Enhancing engineering-led schemes through nature-based solutions

Managing flood risk is a priority for Glasgow. Climate Ready Clyde estimates that 21,500 extra homes will be at risk of flooding by 2080.

Several schemes of strategic importance that manage excess surface water have been initiated in the city region under the Glasgow City Region City Deal and through the collaborative Metropolitan Glasgow Strategic Drainage Partnership (MGSDP).  One of these projects is in Drumchapel, an area of deprivation identified as needing further support to tackle complicated socio-economic issues. As well as protecting areas downstream from flooding, the project needed to deliver additional social value for the people of Drumchapel.

Embedding the landscape team (which included our in-house ecologists and arborists) with the planning and engineering team from the outset enabled us to deliver additional benefits, as having a multidisciplinary capability meant that we were able to use natural restorative processes to cost-effectively enhance traditional engineering solutions.

For example, we knew that local people had difficultly traversing the site, so we installed robust bridges to make accessible crossing points over the Garscadden Burn, ensuring that the footpath gradients were suitable for wheelchair users. In some cases, a light design touch was all that was needed: boulders were retained to provide simple, natural play opportunities.

Any design solution must work for the local community in the longer term. Looking at flood management schemes through an environmental lens builds this resilience. We reshaped some of the retained soil to create naturally contoured berms so that they would act as an emergency reservoir in times of extreme rainfall. In addition, we chose native species to replicate the natural habitat, and planted an understory of native ground cover, a wetland meadow mix and trees that will need minimal intervention over the five-year implementation period. To be successful however, this approach requires hard evidence and a very firm understanding of existing soil, hydrology, weather and climate conditions.

These environmental interventions are communicated in a highly pictorial and visual way by new interpretation panels on The Drumchapel Way, which have been developed in conjunction with Glasgow City Council’s access and biodiversity officers with input from Forestry and Land Scotland.

Placing a higher weighting on socio-demographic factors

During the stakeholder consultation for the recently-conducted Strategic Transport Projects Review (STPR2) for the Glasgow City Region, the climate emergency was cited ‘as an opportunity to make transport investment decisions that encourage people out of private vehicles through better active travel provision and better public transport’. To make this a reality, active travel across Scotland has just received a huge injection of funding. By 2024-5, at least £320 million will be allocated to active travel, taking the proportion of total spend from 3.5 per cent to ten per cent.

Historically, transport investment has been targeted using traditional factors, such as economic growth, congestion and road safety. By placing a higher weighting on socio-demographic objectives, active travel and public transport accessibility indicators however, transport planners have an opportunity to identify schemes in many new locations that meet levelling up and environmental agendas. This offers potential to create a more balanced infrastructure delivery plan.

In England, we used this novel approach during a macro study of the Key Route Network (KRN) in Birmingham and the wider region undertaken on behalf of Transport for West Midlands (TfWM). By linking our evidence-led assessment process with the emerging environmental and socially inclusive agenda, we were able to deliver 44 conceptual scheme plans that clearly indicate sites where investment would enhance local conditions for active travel, improve the immediate environment and improve residents’ health and wellbeing. The approach also ensured areas of low long-term investment were brought to the fore. Early business case style-documents were developed for each scheme to discuss the key connectivity challenges identified and suggest indicative costing and high-level delivery timescales for targeted measures. The study also included the development of five area-wide, thematic propositions on the subjects of 15-minute neighbourhoods and mobility hubs, electric vehicle charging and digital connectivity.

The process was designed to demonstrate alignment with a broader set of strategic objectives, to inform short, medium and long-term delivery plans, and to enable best use of future funding opportunities. We are now assisting TfWM in the development of a KRN delivery plan and monitoring framework.

An evidence-led approach to low traffic neighbourhoods

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTN) create safer and more comfortable street environments to walk, cycle, wheel and spend time in by reducing the volume and speed of traffic.  They are key elements within wider city net zero transport strategies that encourage and increase the use of sustainable and active modes of transport, and are fundamental to Glasgow’s Liveable Neighbourhoods.

However, the coronavirus pandemic has taught us that LTNs can be challenging to implement successfully. By their nature, an LTN encourages and enables fundamental modal shift away from a reliance on private car use. Despite many of the benefits including encouraging ‘active travel’, air quality and safer community-focussed streets, they have been seen to be contentious and divisive as they can fundamentally change how local residents are able to move around their neighbourhoods.

To give local authorities the confidence to make robust decisions on LTNs and to communicate effectively with communities, planning and designs should be evidence-led. Gathering comprehensive data, such as traffic levels, speed, school travel plans as well as sat-nav origin destination analysis for example, provides a clear documentation trail that can be referenced easily. Furthermore, the presentation of data should be simple and legible to allow communities to understand it to build trust in the process.

Increasing conduits into communities directly affected helps gather better information and understand local issues and aspirations. Digital engagement tools are now so advanced that they can include 3D visualisations and map-based feedback. We have been using these tools on proposed active travel schemes across the UK including in East Lothian and in The Bee Network in Manchester to increase the demographic range involved in the consultation process.

Steering groups are another effective route into the community. Corstorphine Connections is an LTN in Edinburgh that has just been approved by Edinburgh Council. As part of a six-month period of intense community engagement, we founded a Community Reference Group (CRG) during  the early stages to help set the objectives and provide an additional way for the community to express their views. The CRG included members from community groups, parent councils, businesses, housing associations, bus user groups, the Living Streets group and the council’s Access Panel.  Members gave us valuable insight and local knowledge that we fed into the designs.

Initially, the Corstorphine LTN will be delivered under an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO). During the trial period, the CRG will continue to meet and feedback on the scheme. We are currently developing a detailed monitoring and evaluation programme that involves a variety of metrics including air quality, traffic impacts, noise and how people feel about and use the new community spaces. In this way, data and evidence will continue to inform the decision-making process while the scheme is in its trial period.

Leveraging local knowledge to achieve a just transition

To achieve a just transition to a low carbon urban economy, new infrastructure must have a positive impact on the communities it serves. Within the public and political environment of delivering transformational net-zero strategies, it is essential that decisions regarding new infrastructure must be transparent, robust, and backed by well-researched hard evidence, of which local knowledge and community feedback must be a huge part.

The importance of continuous monitoring and evaluation of schemes, and listening to those affected, will only improve how projects are delivered in future by building confidence and strengthening the case for change.

The post COP26 in Glasgow: tools for creating a just transition in the UK’s major cities appeared first on Without Limits.

At AECOM, we often cite agility as being a key attribute of a successful program management (PgM) model. We define PgM as being a disciplined, systematic approach to orchestrating resources to plan, design, construct, and deliver a collection of projects in a coordinated way to obtain benefits for the owner not attainable if managed separately. When we talk about agility in terms of PgM however, we are thinking about the PgM model itself, and how it should be molded closely to program and client requirements. It is also a mindset that program leaders must possess when applying that model to delivering a defined client outcome.

In this article, we’ll be looking at why agility was and continues to be such a powerful tool and what it looks like on the Purple Line, a complex infrastructure program in Maryland, US. The new stretch of light rail is one of the largest transportation programs in the US, the second-ever such program to be funded through a P3 public-private partnership, and – at a design and construction cost of approximately $9.5 billion – the largest program in Maryland’s history.

Agility defined

Major infrastructure delivery programs of work are usually complex. An off-the-shelf, prescribed PgM model rarely works well. Without fully understanding a client’s needs, expectations and establishing desired outcomes right from the very start, it is hard to build a responsive PgM model that can flex as the program moves through planning, design and construction, through to effective operations and maintenance. Pre-planning is an essential step in this process, however program set-up and implementation must allow for and anticipate change.

The delivery of long-term programs of work rarely goes just as planned, often running into funding issues or other delays, and the program leadership team must be agile enough to manage these uncertainties to minimize impact on program delivery and cost. This involves understanding the critical issues, assessing them quickly and recommending a solid course of action, as well as reading the leading indicators and pivoting the program team (from the client down) to the shifting conditions. A focus on maintaining the vision is essential throughout.

Our evolving role on the Purple Line

As the lead firm in a tri-venture program management team, AECOM has been heavily involved with Maryland’s Purple Line since 2010.

Having drawn up the initial environment assessments and then overseeing the development of the preliminary design for the entire alignment, our role evolved as the program progressed from planning to construction. The design-builder – Purple Line Transit Constructors (PLTC) – was selected in 2016, and since then, the AECOM-led team has served as Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Transit Administration’s (MDOT MTA) program manager, managing planning, design and construction, along with the integration of all stakeholder requirements.

However, despite the improvements to passenger experience that the Purple Line is expected to bring, local tensions, claims and other challenges have threatened program success. Eventually, PLTC departed the program citing financial challenges, leaving the State of Maryland with the huge legacy program on their hands without a builder to complete construction. While the new design and builder was procured, we stepped forward to keep the work on track supporting the accelerated delivery of the technical and early works elements, as well as overall management of the program. This also involved managing more than 150 subcontractors that were assigned to MTA when the design-build team left.

Agility in practice

Our PgM model on the Purple Line is very agile and enables us to:

1/Call on subject matter experts

Integrating the depth and range of our global technical strength and capabilities to bring programmatic solutions to our clients’ big infrastructure delivery challenges is an integral part of our PgM capability and approach.

Since the Purple Line is only the second transit-oriented program to be delivered under a public-private partnership in the US, the program team reaches out to colleagues in Europe and elsewhere to engage key subject matter experts (SME) whenever needed. For example, our SMEs supported the program team to identify various options that could be evaluated and/or implemented to keep the program moving forward when the original design-builder departed the program.

2/Scale up or scale down

As program managers, we understand that the program will evolve and that resources need to scale up and down, so getting the right level of staffing at the right time is critically important. On the Purple Line, we were cautious and measured in bringing new people onto the program team so that we were never out of balance with requirements.

Crucially, our agile PgM model enabled us to scale at pace to manage the huge number of subcontractors that were suddenly assigned to our client when the original design-builder vacated the program.

The program team had to grow from 50 full-time staff to about 130 overnight. Together with our partners, we quickly assembled a range of specialists from quality control to cost, expanding the commercial team as well as planners, construction managers, field coordinators and systems engineers to name just a few. The ability to implement such a rapid scale-up was due largely to keeping the joint venture leadership team well informed of the needs so that each key partner and our DBE firms could assign staff to support the overall deployment.

3/Retool as needed

Understanding program requirements is critical along with working ‘hand in glove’ with client leadership to slot the right program leaders in at the right time along the program lifecycle. On the Purple Line, our program leadership has changed to match the particular demands of each stage, enabled by strong succession planning to ensure continuity.

Agility is as much about adjusting the team to respond to program and client needs as understanding that the program will be led at different times by different disciplines and being able to transition seamlessly between them. To do this effectively, it’s important to stay focused on delivery and anticipate requirements.

Our agile PgM model has been key in elevating our offer from initial services to program solutions on the Purple Line. All early milestones were met on schedule and delivered within budget. Former Purple Line Program Director William A. Parks, commended the PgM team saying, “Each aspect of your team’s involvement has been conducted with superb professionalism. The leadership and supporting staff have been exceptional.”

Ultimately however, no matter what and where the program is, the first step is always to understand the client’s greatest needs, expectations, political ramifications and define the desired outcomes. Many may tout agility, but that alone is not enough: the program team must understand how to pivot and implement the best PgM model and options available. This only works if the client and program team have mutual trust and are aligned and adhere to the three ‘Cs’ – communication, cooperation and collaboration for the program’s success.

The post Three reasons why agility is a powerful instrument in the program manager’s toolkit appeared first on Without Limits.

The energy market in Australia is moving fast, with economic drivers and customer preferences outpacing government policy. State and territory governments are introducing policies to encourage the uptake of low or zero emission vehicles. There have also been several recent investment commitments from the private sector, state, and federal government to support advanced biofuel and green hydrogen projects. 

The choices we make in the next few years with regards to these assets have the potential to shape the energy sector for decades to come.  

Unlocking the potential  

Our domestic consumption of petroleum products, including petrol, diesel and jet fuel, is supported by a network of fuel storage terminals. Over time hundreds of smaller city and regional facilities have been consolidated into larger installations spread around the Australian coastline.  

These facilities are positioned to provide optimal access to the markets they serve and the necessary supporting infrastructure such as port, power, water, gas and fuel infrastructure. Over the years these facilities have become integrated into well-established industrial areas where there is community acceptance of their industrial land use. With the right planning and investment, all these sites have the potential to play an extremely valuable and important part of the future clean energy supply chain.  

From fuel storage to energy generation 

We predict that the strategic value of our petroleum fuels storage terminals will see them progressively transition to the generation, storage or transmission of renewable energy and future fuels. To make this a reality the right forward planning and investment will be key. 

To understand the strategic value of these fuel storage terminals, and the role they may play in our energy future, AECOM analysed the strategic attributes of 58 sites across Australia and New Zealand. We assessed each site potential future utility and what role it could play in the generation, storage or transmission of renewable energy and future fuels.   

The future fuel unicorns 

The fuels storage terminal sites are all well positioned to meet current fuel demands, but they vary greatly in their suitability to support our future energy needs. Although all sites potentially have a role to play as part of our energy future, only seven achieved “future fuel unicorn” status, awarded to highly connected and versatile sites, ideally suited to supporting the energy transition. These seven sites had a rare combination of good access to power, water, gas, port infrastructure, combined with land available to generate renewable energy.  

 Key findings: 

Renewable energy superpower  

For Australia to reach our potential as a major exporter of renewable energy we will need to find commercially viable means of domestically distributing and exporting our vast renewable energy resources to global markets. 

Many of these sites have good wind resource and solar irradiance, located in the vicinity of other large energy consumers, and the electricity transmission network. This ability to connect into the grid for both import and export of high volumes of electricity presents numerous opportunities including onsite energy generation and/or storage.  

The storage, domestic distribution, and export of renewable energy in the form of hydrogen is predicted to become commercially viable in the next few years. Many of these sites are ideally located to support this emerging hydrogen market, including though the generation and injection of hydrogen directly into the gas network or export via the existing hydrocarbon transmission infrastructure.   

Fuel storage terminals located at ports in North Queensland, the Northern Territory and Northern Western Australia may well be the best suited for the production and export of hydrogen due to abundant renewable energy resources and proximity to the key hydrogen markets in Singapore, Korea, China and Japan. 

Whether it’s side-by-side with petroleum fuels during a transition period or via a substantial transformation into renewable energy and future fuel generation, storage and export, these sites have a key role to play.  

We think now is the time to look beyond the current horizon and consider a far more radical future for these sites as the infrastructure of our energy transition and low carbon future.  

The post Fuelling the future appeared first on Without Limits.

Maryland’s Purple Line was always destined to hit the headlines. The new stretch of light rail is one of the largest transportation schemes in the US, the second-ever project to be funded through a P3 public-private partnership, and – at a cost of approximately $9 billion – the largest project in Maryland’s history. Add to the mix the scheme’s proximity to the White House and it’s easy to see why it has stayed in the national spotlight. Yet, right from the start, the Purple Line has attracted attention for other reasons entirely.

Ambitious in scope, the light rail line traverses east to west across two counties, several Maryland suburbs and 16 miles of densely populated, socially and economically diverse urban communities. The new line will link up with four Washington Metro stations on three lines, saving users in that part of the Washington Metropolitan Area a trip in the centre of the city to connect once complete. Despite these expected improvements for passengers, tensions have run high, and the project has been beset by claims and challenges since the start.

All seemed to be on track when construction finally began in 2017. Then, in June 2020, the unimaginable happened. Following a series of setbacks and project delays, the design-build team decided they had had enough, and walked off the job, leaving the State of Maryland with the huge legacy project on their hands, and no one to finish building it. The scheme hit the headlines again.

Step forward James Mitchell who, as Project Director, is leading AECOM’s program management team on the Purple Line. He rose to the challenge of supporting the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) to get the project back on track. This involved not only keeping work going on site, but also supporting the MTA to appoint a new design and build concessionaire at pace so that full-scale construction could resume as soon as possible. (The task of selecting a new design and build team was completed in Autumn 2021 and the financial close/notice to proceed was issued in Spring 2022.)

Keeping the momentum going

“Looking back to 2020, the line was 30-40 percent built and we had no contractor. That was unprecedented in US history,” says Mitchell.

“When the contractor downed tools, the MTA took over day-to-day management of the project and had suddenly picked up around 150 subcontracts,” he adds.

“It wasn’t within our client’s normal wheelhouse to manage that kind of workload, so, as program managers on the project, we stepped in to pick up the pieces and take on all the subcontracts on their behalf. Our project team went from 50 full-time staff to about 130 overnight.”

In addition, AECOM supported the accelerated delivery of both the technical elements, as well as overall management for the project while the new design and build concessionaire was procured. All of the extra effort was done while the coronavirus pandemic took hold so managing enabling works safely during lockdowns was a significant challenge.

“There was a lot of pressure to keep the job going,” he says. “The project is within eight miles of the White House and The Capitol in Washington, DC, so attracts a lot of attention – not all of it good. The hardest thing is staying focused on delivery, and to not get distracted.”

From the start, the priority was to identify elements of the work that would de-risk the next tender and keep the contractors moving over an eight-month period.

“We were never going to be building the major assets before a new design-build concessionaire was procured. The focus was always on protecting and progressing work that was partially complete. So, we focused on completing critically important utility diversion work, partially completed structures, and other discreet elements. In the end, we completed approximately 200 utility relocation packages across 16.2 miles.”

Mitchell also leveraged AECOM’s global expertise to resolve other challenges that arose.

“The Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) fleet had to be stored and warranties extended until the project was ready to receive them in the fall of 2023,” says Mitchell. “We were able to reach out to our colleagues in AECOM’s Madrid office for support during the negotiation period to resolve a key issue and purchase additional LRVs as well at overall cost savings to the MTA.”

Early involvement

As the lead firm in a tri-venture program management team, AECOM has been heavily involved with the program since its early days, having drawn up the initial environment assessments, and having overseen the development of the preliminary design for the entire alignment. Following the selection of the design-build concessionaire in 2016 – Purple Line Transit Constructors (PLTC) – AECOM’s role evolved as the project went from planning to construction, with the AECOM-led team serving as MTA’s program manager to manage design and construction, along with the integration of stakeholder requirements.

Adapting quickly

So how was the team able to adapt so quickly to the increase in program management scope following PLTC’s departure? “It helped greatly that we were operating as an extension of MTA’s staff,” says Mitchell, “so we were perfectly placed to respond, bringing in a depth of expertise as well as resources. Plus, we had designed our PMO model to be really flexible, so we were able to bring in those resources at pace.”

The good working relationship between AECOM and MTA played a huge part too, with the client praising AECOM for “the outstanding services provided” and describing the leadership as “exceptional”.

Procuring a new design-build concessionaire

Mitchell and his team have also supported MTA to procure a new design-build concessionaire. This very large contractual change event was accomplished in just ten months (a typical tender can take 18-24 months).

“We provided the technical resources to support both the concessionaire and the MTA in adjusting the P3 Agreement and design-build contract to reflect the current state of the project including unprecedented complex risk transfers/regimes, renewing project level insurance policies in an extremely tight insurance market, and how to address the risk associated with partially completed work in a fair and balanced manner, as well as preparing the tenders and procurement requirements,” says Mitchell.

The team also progressed uncompleted civil and systems design work, which helped the new design build concessionaire to mobilize quickly once appointed.

“The project is in a much better place now,” says Mitchell. “With full-scale construction now back in full swing, the project can advance forward to deliver the State’s promise to the citizens of Maryland and those that live and work in Montgomery and Prince George’s counties.”

Note: This article was updated on November 14, 2022. The original article was published in April 2021. 

The post Tales of the unexpected: keeping Maryland’s Purple Line on track appeared first on Without Limits.

In November last year, HM Treasury reported the findings from its review of the Green Book, the UK government’s overarching guidance on how to appraise policies, programmes and projects.

The review was announced as part of the Spring 2020 Budget and was initiated in response to concerns that the government’s appraisal guidance may mitigate against investment in poorer parts of the UK and undermine the government’s ambition to level up.

The findings of the review are wide-ranging. They cover the whole business case process, with an emphasis on how strategic cases could be improved. The review is particularly vocal about the way strategic cases are made in investment proposals, pointing out a failure to demonstrate how projects contribute to wider government goals, and criticising a lack of well-defined objectives, which in turn undermines the option generation and assessment process. It also found that strategic cases don’t adequately explore economic and social impacts, or how projects interact with other strategies, programmes and developments in given areas.

In addition, the review highlights an overdependency on the use of the Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) to quantify benefits, drawing attention to the fact that it works well for benefits that are easy to put a monetary value on, yet risks ignoring costs or benefits for which there may be good evidence, but are difficult to monetise. It also highlights that this emphasis risks giving a misleading impression of the level of certainty in the estimates, and often doesn’t identify the beneficiaries.

If implemented, the recommendations set out in the review could lead to significant changes in the way that transport projects are generated, developed and appraised when they are fed into the Department for Transport’s (DfT) own supplementary appraisal guidance, which sets out how the Green Book should be applied across the sector in England. In this article we take a deeper look at some of the areas identified for improvement, the recommendations and discuss how they may be implemented.

Setting the right objectives

The review is correct to identify the need for improved quality and clarity around project objectives. Many business cases include objectives that are too generic, containing limited references to specific evidence of problems or opportunities. As a consequence, when potential scheme options are being assessed, they are of limited use.

Furthermore, objectives are often framed through the lens of a pre-determined intervention and its potential impacts. A good example is when engineering-related feasibility work for a scheme option is progressed prior to objectives being set, and the business case is developed at a later date.

Instead, it is important that objectives are outcome-based so that a wider (and potentially more effective) range of scheme options can be assessed.  The revised Green Book includes strengthened guidance on setting objectives in relation to Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time based (SMART) principles and identifies that only those options performing well against the objectives should be progressed to the shortlist for detailed appraisal.  For their part, organisations must in turn begin to incorporate strategic case development and objective setting prior to commencing technical feasibility work on scheme options.

Focusing on the strategic case

A key attraction of using the BCR to inform funding decisions and approvals is that it provides a single standardised metric which can be easily applied in comparing and prioritising projects. However, the new emphasis on improving how strategic cases are made will require funding bodies to look more closely at the contribution of projects towards wider goals, and make decisions regarding the relative strengths and weakness of the projects competing for funding.

So, what constitutes a strong strategic case? Opinions vary considerably – and this is where the next challenge lies. Given that contexts vary enormously and that each project is unique, we know that cases cannot be judged on a purely mechanistical level using metrics like the BCR. This realisation has highlighted the need for an enhanced shared understanding amongst both practitioners and decision makers about what a strong strategic case needs to demonstrate.  Whilst this challenge isn’t discussed specifically in the review, it does note that government now needs to show what ‘good looks like’.

There is also the issue of quality, which varies significantly between schemes. In some instances, there may be a compelling need for a particular scheme or intervention, but unless the strategic case is well articulated and evidenced, it is unlikely to be prioritised for funding.  It is vital therefore that practitioners have the right skills to ensure that, when the underlying case for intervention is strong, the strategic case is well made so that the scheme progresses through the prioritisation and approval processes. The review recognises a need to upskill and build capability amongst practitioners. Crucially, it also identifies a shortfall in capacity, understanding and experience within Whitehall to undertake consistent and rigorous scrutiny of business cases. Both must be met for real progress to be made.

Distinguishing between Benefit-Cost Ratio and Value for Money

As it stands, bids can be ranked solely on the BCR metric, and this information can inform key government processes such as spending reviews. The review highlights this as an area for improvement, further pointing out a lack of transparency around the assessment process: it is often not clear whether evidence of bids meeting strategic government objectives has been considered.

In the case of transport projects, this issue has been recognised previously, to a degree, and some mitigation measures have been taken.  For example, the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Value for Money (VfM) Framework guidance[1] identifies that the assessment of VfM should consider non-quantifiable impacts and uncertainty around key assumptions.

Notwithstanding this, a strong focus on the monetised BCR remains, including a common misconception that BCR is the sole determinant of VfM. Scheme promoters typically seek to demonstrate a BCR of two or above (rather than high VfM) when projects are submitted for funding approval.  The review recommends that a low BCR should be accepted if an option offers the best VfM in terms of meeting the objectives, marking a clear shift in emphasis from recent practice.

However, there was room for the review to go further. While business care appraisals cover economic, environmental and social criteria, assessments are still reported under the Economic Case heading. This invariably leads to more emphasis on economic criteria – those that are most easily monetised – to the detriment of environmental and social criteria. Using a Sustainability Case heading instead, comprising three pillars of equal weight: economic, environmental and social factors, would help redress the imbalance.

Delivering change

The review rightly recognises that changes in guidance on their own are not sufficient to deliver the desired changes in practice. It identifies a number of actions to take from incorporating the recommendations into the Spending Review process to building capacity and capability in the Civil Service, as well as enhancing transparency.

Ultimately, the impact of the review will need to be judged on the extent of changes to the prioritisation and funding of projects. For example, in the case of transport, the revised guidance should assist higher cost public transport schemes, particularly those outside of the core cities, which typically perform less well in terms of VfM.

Looking ahead, there is a need for the recommendations to be fully embedded in the DfT’s own business case guidance, in addition to the appraisal guidance set out in the Transport Appraisal Guidance (TAG). If this can be delivered in conjunction with changes and improvements in practice by scheme promoters and funding bodies, better and more balanced decision making that helps spread opportunity across the UK should follow.

[1] Value for Money Framework, DfT (2017)

A version of this article was first published in the February 2021 edition of Smart Transport.

The post The new Green Book and what it means for transport planning and projects appeared first on Without Limits.

In times of crisis, government often turns to infrastructure to stimulate economic recovery. Throughout 2020 – a year of constant crisis – infrastructure investment was again recognised as a way of maintaining economic activity and protecting jobs. This led to governments across Australia and New Zealand, increasing spend on existing projects and finding additional funds to bring new projects to market sooner.

Importantly, throughout the pandemic, project staff were classified as essential workers enabling the design and construction of major transit projects to continue at pace. Together, these factors managed to shore up sector confidence, protect jobs and soften the financial impact of lockdowns.

But success throughout 2020 served to highlight and, in many cases, exacerbate, pre-pandemic challenges relating to shortages of talent and materials, risk imbalances and pipeline uncertainty. All these factors contribute to cost overruns, project delays and capacity concerns.

While small cost overruns on small projects can be challenging, today we are in the era of the ‘mega’ transport project (those costing AU$1billion/US$775m or more). Where overruns account for hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars.

According to the Grattan Institute report, ‘The rise of megaprojects: counting the costs’, ‘Australian governments are committing to a record number of ‘mega’ transport projects, and that exposes taxpayers to mega risks of cost blowouts. Ten years ago there was just one transport infrastructure project in Australia worth more than $5 billion. Today there are nine, and costs have already blown out by AU$24 billion on just six of them.’

Over the past two decades, Australian governments spent AU$34 billion more on transport infrastructure than they originally planned to, that equates to three times the AU$11.5 billion annual Federal Government infrastructure spend committed to in the 2020-21 budget.

As vaccines continue to roll out and economic disruption dissipates, the onus is on our industry to ensure that the investment unlocks as much potential as possible. To do this we need to fix long term structural issues impacting confidence, productivity and efficiency. Or face the prospect of infrastructure investment and delivery continuing to underperform and constrain long-term economic growth.

In the following section we address two long-running issues, exacerbated by the crisis, which threaten to curb the benefits infrastructure can bring.

Talent constraints

The road and rail industry face significant talent shortages which are expected to drive up wages in the next 12 to 18 months. Some of the most challenging roles to fill are essential to project delivery, and the inability to source talent from overseas may cause delays. Typically, global engineering professionals are very mobile, but caps on international arrivals and restricted quarantine capacity make it extremely difficult to access this talent pool.

The main challenge is the lack of experienced and qualified individuals available in the local talent market, according to a December 2020 survey by Consult Australia, the industry body that represents the design, advisory and engineering businesses in Australia.

For large transit projects, it is standard practice to recruit international technical experts to support, train and develop the specialist local capability. Given the number of complex metro projects in the works across Australia and New Zealand, there are shortages of skilled people with experience in rail systems, underground station design, tunnelling, construction and project integration.

In the years prior to the pandemic, AECOM Australia and New Zealand recruited up to 15 per cent of critical technical talent on large projects from overseas. This has dropped to 1 per cent in the past 12 months. The ongoing ban on international travel contributes to a lack of talent that threatens the delivery timetable for the current pipeline of major projects.

The domestic engineering and construction workforce – and particularly those skills across road and rail – will also see their value soar as the market fights for talent, significant wage inflation will be the result.

When global talent is not available or specific technical skills may not be on hand locally, AECOM uses its network of international design centres to augment the local talent.

Unfortunately, various state and territory government restrictions on the percentage of work permitted to be completed outside of Australia (often limited to 5-10 per cent) mean there is a limit to this model’s effectiveness in addressing current onshore skills shortages.

We would welcome the easing of these restrictions in response to the current lack of international flights or economic migrants. This is the ideal time to differentiate between local content ratios for professional consulting services (i.e. design engineers) and site-based contractors or trades.

 Unsustainable delivery risk

Many of the largest contractors based in Australia and New Zealand are at, or nearing, capacity. They are facing the same talent shortages and are increasingly likely to decline to bid major new projects as a result of the increasing risk burden under certain procurement models.

These issues contribute to a lack of competitive tension in the marketplace, project costs are driven up, commercial models require adjusting, and project delays are the result.

As confidence and economic activity return to pre-pandemic levels, national government in New Zealand and state and territory governments in Australia may find that the markets view on the need to share delivery risk is hardening.

Encouragingly, there has been a return to more collaborative, alliance-style contracting models in many jurisdictions, perhaps a recognition of their effectiveness in procuring most of the mega metro and transit projects. That said, the transit industry thrives on certainty, and there is at present a lack of it across three main areas:

• Certainty of delivery model: considering the length of time mega projects take to be scoped and procured providing certainty to the industry about the commercial model is likely to create more competitive interest from the market and a better outcome for the taxpayer
• Certainty of timing: enhanced pipeline visibility allows better resource planning
• Certainty of design: a detailed and rigorous reference design can help respondents better understand and manage risks that they are expected to own

With more certainty – projects can be delivered with more confidence.

Collaboration is the key

Governments across Australia and New Zealand are committed to delivering an infrastructure pipeline to meet the post-pandemic challenges. And in turn support jobs that sustain economic recovery.

But without the skilled workforce to deliver these infrastructure projects, and without the certainty of robust delivery models, or pipeline visibility the positive impacts of additional infrastructure investment may not be realised. After such a difficult 12 months, I’m sure no one wants to waste this year’s big opportunity.

The post Unlocking the benefits of infrastructure investment appeared first on Without Limits.

When people talk about program management, they often focus on the processes rather than the people involved. But if you want a disparate group of people who aren’t used to working together to operate as one, the first step is establishing a culture of collaboration.

Human-centered design is key for adopting technology that is right for the program, rather than trying to retrofit a program around new technology. A common operating culture should be the platform on which the technology is built. Digital tools and systems should then be set up to process and share data from multiple sources in a single source of trustworthy, reliable, real-time information. The objective is to make it easier for designers, contractors, and supply chain to collaborate.

At AECOM, we deliver capital programs of critical national and international importance in aviation, roads and highways, rail, water, ports, power, energy and environmental clean-up, and have been key in shaping many of the major infrastructure programs and cities of today. That experience has taught us the importance of taking time to build a structure that brings the interests and actions of different stakeholders together right from the start.

There are three reasons why building an integrated culture is increasingly important

Complexity: Infrastructure programs are growing in scale and complexity, a reflection of the increasingly complex world they inhabit. This means working with a vast range of organizations and people at local, regional, national, and even global levels, many of them with competing interests. All the while you must consider specific political, geographical, social, cultural, linguistic, and economic climates.

Sustainability: Unlike other types of programs, capital programs create infrastructure that will exist for a very long time. To be sustainable, programs should be built to serve future as well as current generations, avoiding the need to expensively retrofit or rebuild. Endeavoring to provide intergenerational equity and a legacy through sustainable planning, design and construction is vitally important. This could be as simple as leaving space for new walkways or carriageways, or envisioning cycle routes in the skies.

Technology: At the same time, it’s important to keep pace with technological change. The objective should be to establish a connected system that brings consistency and value to an entire pipeline of work. From the very beginning, all the program information should be held in a common data environment (CDE) and kept up-to-date. Each team member across all disciplines should know how to navigate, store, and collect data within the CDE, including contractors or supply chain at each phase of the project. To properly prepare the teams, we implement a structured ‘fast start’ mobilization process, increasing the certainty of delivery on time and on budget.

Program management: five lessons learnt

While each program requires a bespoke solution, we have distilled five lessons from our experience in Integrated Client Partner roles on major infrastructure programs such as improving San Francisco’s water system (see case study, below).

1/Narrative: The first task should be to define the vision and program outcomes, informed by the client ethos, values and strategic objectives. This is turn will inform the scope of the capital program and its objectives. Creating a narrative to fit this will form a platform to develop the program and give it direction.

2/ Operational structure: A connected step is identifying, categorizing and engaging with the different stakeholders involved, with a view of establishing a ‘one team’ structure, where organizational badges are left at the door. The degree of control that the client requires is of course an important consideration when deciding on the most suitable structure, which should be shaped to suit. Due to complexity and duration of major infrastructure programs, which often span over five to ten years or more, collaboration across the supply chain is paramount to successfully ensure delivery.

3/Information management: The effective use of virtual design tools such as BIM (Building Information Modelling) during the design and construction stages can help all parties efficiently manage huge amounts of information and develop knowledge. BIM also means that building or logistical issues can be resolved before getting to site — avoiding potentially expensive retrofits or rebuilds. BIM model data, stored in the non-proprietary COBie (Construction Operations Building Information Exchange) format, can then be integrated with the client’s asset management software allowing a seamless transition of information to the operations and maintenance (O&M) team.

Managed well, data should flow freely between asset lifecycle phases through to O&M. Indeed, placing an emphasis on the O&M stage often leads to the gathering of better data early on which improves stakeholder interaction and engagement.

4/Embracing ambiguity, uncertainty, dynamism and risk: By their nature, major infrastructure programs often require cultural and organizational transformational change which involves a degree of uncertainty and risk. Working in such an environment requires dynamism — which should be encouraged by the organizational set-up of a program. Certainty will grow as the program progresses, but even so, we are living in a period of flux where technology and customer needs are constantly evolving. Flexibility is key and the Integrated Delivery Partner model provides flexibility in both capacity and capability of resource.

5/Sustainable accounting: It’s increasingly clear that traditional approaches to business case planning are failing to fully quantify impacts and risks, particularly when it comes to socioeconomic and environmental considerations over the long-term. In addition to financial reporting, we should take account of other metrics such as carbon. Where possible, we recommend a ‘six capitals’ approach, putting a monetary value on manufacturing, human, social, intellectual, natural and financial capital.

Once program management was about seeking delivery of an objective through a collection of projects — with the knowledge that the end point was uncertain. With so many variables involved there was a recognition that achieving the desired objective could not be guaranteed. That was not necessarily a bad thing: the skilled program manager would look to exceed expectations, where possible. Today, however, programs are all about certainty. Objectives need to be ultimately defined before anyone says yes; business tools offer ways to measure precisely all the known ingredients. All this achieves is constraining programs to what we can predict. That means many fall short.

Ultimately, it is people who make programs work and success depends on getting the most out of them. The first step is to agree on a clear vision and define the project outcomes to create a compelling narrative that aligns strategies and actions, providing a platform for a ‘one team’ approach. Success relies on communicating the narrative to influence behaviors from the bottom up.
In addition, to be sustainable more thought has to be given to the evolution of a program, allowing for a range of possible future uses. Our integrated delivery model is designed to address the entire program lifecycle, creating legacies for generations to come.

Case study: Water System Improvement Program (WSIP), San Francisco

As Integrated Client Partner to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), we implemented a ‘one team’ approach to upgrading the 80-year-old Hetch Hetchy water system. This collaborative approach enabled WISP to be delivered safely on time, on budget and with no disruption to the service for over 2.7 million customers in San Francisco and the Bay Area.

As the program construction manager, our team was responsible for overseeing and supporting the uniform and consistent application of the construction phase management plans, processes and procedures. As part of this we were responsible for delivering over 80 construction contracts spread over 290 km on an active public water supply system. This included construction contract administration, technical and quality assurance, cost and schedule control, supplier quality surveillance, risk management, formal partnering coordination, training and construction safety management. For the during of the program, we co-located with the SFPUC.

With over 200 scheduled supply outages on a live water supply system serving 2.8 million customers, there was no room for error. Maintaining communication, coordination and collaboration consistently across all processes and procedures was essential. Using Construction Management Information System (CMIS) software, our team maintained a detailed master program schedule which was continuously updated from project inputs. We used this information to lead monthly coordination meetings between system operators and all regional and program level management.

Success was demonstrated by the following results at completion of construction:

• No stoppages of construction work
• No claims litigated
• Over 9,300,000 construction hours with zero fatalities and low reportable incidents below national average.
• No impact to water supply quality or reliability over 200 shutdowns
• No public lawsuits or protests in an area known for activism
• Numerous national awards and recognition for excellence.

The post Successful program management and the importance of building a culture of collaboration appeared first on Without Limits.