Step 4. Measure and compare the total costs and impacts of each transport mode, and of the entire system as a whole

Without performance measures in place, all further investment runs the risk of reinforcing an already out-of-balance transportation system. A crucial step for building a comprehensive freight transportation strategy will be to develop a new set of metrics that apply to these four areas intrinsically linked to freight transportation:

• Commerce – Commerce is one of the motors that drives a society, and is the underlying reason to establish a strategic freight business plan. Especially in the current economic climate, it is imperative that public and private entities partner with one another in ways that (1) maximize the benefits of commercial growth to a society, yet (2) also make best use of limited public sector dollars. Commercially-relevant performance measures must be put in place to ensure that these two objectives are adequately met.

• Land Use – Freight movement, much like passenger transit, has significant implications on the way land is used for goods production, distribution, warehousing, and, of course, for transportation. A new freight transportation strategy would incorporate a freight land-use zoning plan, employing land-use relevant performance measures in order to mitigate the effects of sprawling, unguided development.

• The Environment – Transportation contributes considerably to global production of greenhouse gases and the depletion of fossil fuel resources, and adversely affects air and water quality. Advances in transportation technology and planning would have far-reaching implications for environmental policy, provided a new freight transportation plan is implemented with environmentally-relevant performance measures.

• Communities – The public is transportation’s most important stakeholder. A new freight system plan, if successful, should broadly benefit the communities it serves, without putting citizens in danger or saddling them with a disproportionate financial burden. As much as performance measures are useful to evaluate the effectiveness of freight operations, they must also take into account community well-being.

Applying these metrics, OnTrackPennsylvania can establish the current status of our freight transportation system as a baseline for future progress. This information will allow us to conduct an honest assessment of the business agendas of transportation providers and developers, convening multiple stakeholders in a facilitated process to align on goals—and timelines to meet them—in order to optimize freight for these four areas.

These metrics and performance measures will also be used to gauge the success and progress of legislative actions, regulatory programs, and private-sector operational innovations. The creation of business plans that are synchronized around these performance measures, which will require unprecedented levels of alignment among the private and public sectors, allows for truly innovative, system-level financing approaches, and a true public-private partnership for Pennsylvania’s freight transportation system. The following examples do not constitute a complete list of metrics, nor a complete assessment of their effectiveness in guiding OTPa’s business plans. The most intelligent performance measures will only emerge from consensus-based deliberation and negotiation processes conducted among the stakeholders, who will evaluate for themselves and for each other the utility of each metric. We offer these ideas, compiled over years of observing the dynamics of the transportation industry, for the purpose of moving the discussion closer to the ultimate goal of a wholly-optimized freight transportation system.

Example Metrics for Commerce

• Total costs to ship ($/ton/mile)

How much does it really cost to ship a ton of freight? In any situation which demands a cost-benefit analysis, it is essential that the total costs be reflected in a final course of action. This is a comprehensive metric, as the cost to ship includes more than the obvious costs of fuel, tolls, and shipping—it must also account for the cost of labor, insurance, loading, unloading, and extra drayage. To determine this metric, accurate data must be compiled from a variety of sources including shippers, carriers, receivers, DOTs, even truck drivers and locomotive engineers. Some components that must be included:

- Loading/unloading/drayage costs

- Product damage costs

- Tracking ability, ease, and accuracy

• Service reliability

Reliability cannot simply be expressed as an on-time performance percentage. Reliability metrics must also measure pick-up dependability. Delays could be weighted by severity, or by the danger a delay poses to the condition of the cargo. “Just-In-Time” delivery revolutionized the shipping industry dynamic as the trucking industry responded effectively while the rail industry continues to lag in this important service delivery aspect

• Direct rail, truck, and water service

In addition to identifying the number of facilities served directly by mode, or even going so far as to turn this number into a percentage of the total number of facilities within a designated statistical area, this metric should reflect the volume and value of freight that receives direct service from each mode. Each shipper would supply data on volume and value shipped by each mode to a central analyst. Statistical areas can then be indexed by a percentage of volume and/or tonnage shipped directly by mode. A municipality can then establish the goal, for example, of reaching a specific percentage of domestic outbound freight tonnage shipping by each mode.

• Inefficiency of modal interchange

Generally, when cargo has to be moved from one mode to another, our supply chain is weakened. Each modal shift adds time, costs, the likelihood of damage, and further use of space. While this metric would be taken into account in the True Total Costs to Ship figure, identifying it independently could prove valuable to customers who have no choice but to ship by a mode that does not serve them directly. This figure would vary from interchange point to interchange point; tracking it could very well encourage competition in third-party transload and intermodal businesses to drive down costs in order to make certain corridors more attractive than others to such customers.

• Economical, equitable access to maximum market geography for sourcing and distributing material and products

Truck transport pricing is primarily mileage-based. Therefore, by using truck transport, our state’s shippers can access the entire geographic marketplace equitably. Railroads’ freight rates, on the other hand, vary greatly, depending on the origin-destination set, even over comparable distances. Rates are also much higher when shipping to points that require the use of two major carriers. Consequently, shippers restrict their sourcing and distribution of materials and products to a subset of the market. This pricing protocol depresses our state’s utility as a commercial hub. A new metric for equitable access to market geography is essential to improving this important dynamic.

Example Metrics for Land Use

• Footprint per tonnage shipped

Truck transport, rail transport, and intermodal interchange all require space. A one hundred car train of cargo takes approximately one mile of track moving on its own right-of-way. The same cargo requires 280 tractor trailers in a 27-mile convoy moving on roads and highways. Distribution centers, warehouses, rail, truck, and intermodal facilities all have a land footprint. The total shipments in the Commonwealth as distinguished by mode, and interchange, can be calculated into a footprint per tonnage metric that would reflect the space efficiency of the overall system, forming the basis for new freight transportation/land use strategies and codes.

• Impact on transportation system congestion

Rail and highway capacity is finite, measurable, valuable, and costly. Rail transport directly impacts road congestion at crossings, while truck transport impacts road congestion on every mile of its route. These comparative impacts can be measured and mitigated, so as to best conserve and utilize system capacity.

• Industrial and commercial concentration/sprawl

Freight transportation service and the siting of new production, warehouse, and distribution facilities are inter-related private- and public-sector decisions with major implications for industrial and commercial concentration/sprawl. The metrics for this freight-oriented development can be converted from the parallel fields of transit-oriented development and community planning.

Example Metrics for the Environment

• Air emissions per ton-mile

There already exists a wealth of knowledge regarding vehicle emissions, with a number of stringent standards already in place. Data is also available that compares freight modes by the amount of emissions they produce per ton-mile (see below). A new surface freight transportation action plan can include performance metrics for the overall emissions of the entire system guiding us toward optimizing the use of each mode.

• Impact on water quality

This metric is not as developed as its air-pollution counterpart, but a transportation system does exert considerable impact on water quality. Runoff from paved surfaces such as parking lots and roadways, the proximity of heavy industry to water sources, and waste disposal protocols all contribute to local and regional water quality concerns. Local, state, or federal environmental departments are best equipped, at present, to monitor and regulate these effects, and would play an important role in achieving OnTrackPennsylvania’s new freight plan’s environmental goals.

Example Metrics for Communities

• Jobs and economic revitalization

Freight rail and truck service are key components of many commercial, industrial, and natural resource opportunities. Thoughtful integration of public policy with commercial development and transportation service can generate much more than an individual project’s jobs. OTPa’s agenda can result in whole new industries and services that revitalize entire communities and regions. A new metric is needed to capture such comprehensive economic revitalization efforts.

Long a staple metric of economic development, it is also important to consider the jobs retained by developing a freight transportation system that discourages businesses from moving or outsourcing out of state or out of country. This metric is, by definition, difficult to monitor in the short term, as it concerns events that do not take place, but, over time, a trend should become evident in the slowing departure of state industries.

• Noise, vibration, and light pollution

In order for freight access to be maintained and expanded, freight will inevitably have to move near or through residential areas. Plans to expand traffic in such areas often draw the ire of residents concerned about the increase’s effect on their quality of life. To better address neighborhood concerns, while acknowledging the importance of freight mobility, metrics need to be established for the extent of noise and light pollution as well as the effects of vibration on humans and wildlife.

• Public safety

Besides the effects of vibration, noise and light pollution, all efforts must be made to ensure pedestrian and motorist safety along a freight transportation system. Truck and rail transport create much different safety concerns, given the shared, versus separate, right-of-ways. Some organizations, such as Operation Lifesaver, already exist to promote transportation safety. A traffic safety performance measure appropriate to each mode will be essential to any new freight plan.

• Public tax burden per ton-mile by mode

This is another component of the True, Total Cost to ship. It represents the cost to the Pennsylvania taxpayer to maintain the public infrastructure and services essential to freight transportation. This may include the individual tax burden from maintenance of local, state and federal highways, as well as debt service on infrastructure financing, and security and law enforcement along the routes throughout the system. This figure will allow us to see how much of the True, Total Cost for private businesses to ship freight is actually borne by the public.