Abstract
To better understand the problems and benefits of using biodiesel, E85, propane, natural gas, and hybrid vehicles in smaller communities, a survey of 115 small urban and rural transit agencies was conducted. This study describes the use of alternative fuels and hybrids by these transit providers; identifies motivating factors and deterrents for adoption; describes the experience of transit agencies that have adopted these alternatives, including costs, maintenance, reliability, and overall satisfaction; and examines differences between those agencies that use these alternatives and those that do not, as well as differences between rural and small urban areas. Larger agencies and those operating in urban areas were found to be more likely to adopt alternatives than smaller, rural providers. Beliefs about the benefits of emissions reductions, improved public perception, and cost savings were the greatest motivating factors for adoption, and concerns about infrastructure costs and fuel supply were the most likely to negatively influence adoption.
DOI
http://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.15.3.3
Recommended Citation
Mattson, Jeremy.
2012.
Use of Alternative Fuels and Hybrids by Small Urban and Rural Transit.
Journal of Public Transportation, 15 (3): 43-59.
DOI: http://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.15.3.3
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/jpt/vol15/iss3/3
