Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

15
Smart transports for public services in remote Australia Bruno Spandonide, Nick Holyoak, Branko Stazic, Rocco Zito Flinders University School of Computer Science, Engineering and Mathematics Ninti One Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation

Transcript of Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Page 1: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Smart transports for public services in remote

Australia

Bruno Spandonide, Nick Holyoak, Branko Stazic, Rocco Zito Flinders UniversitySchool of Computer Science, Engineering and MathematicsNinti OneCooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation

Page 2: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Transport Futures Project

Page 3: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Remote Australia: A resource limited context

Canning Stock Route. Photo by Tim Acker (3)

Page 4: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Car/Ride/Transit Sharing systems

Page 5: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Fleet sharing in the Bush: a real life system

Page 6: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Methodology

1. Analysis of a service provision business case study for three remote communities in Central Australia.

2. A transport simulation with estimated fleet management system costs, and a succinct evaluation of wider benefits.

Page 7: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Case study background

Figure 1: Field sites of the Transport Futures survey, Google Maps 2015

Locations Population Distance Climate Transport

Hermannsburg (Ntaria) 625 Locality around 120km from Alice Springs Semi-arid Sealed road, bus services

Lajamanu 656 Very remote locality 560km from Katherine Sub-tropical Unsealed road, bus services

Santa Teresa (Ltyentye Apurte) 555 Locality around 90km from Alice Springs Semi-arid Unsealed road, bus services

Page 8: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Case study vehicle key findings

Service delivery vehicles

Capital (million AUD)

Average occupancy

Alice Springs/Katherine 100 1 1.9

Lajamanu 25 0.3 2.2Santa Teresa 20 0.25 2Hermannsburg 20 0.2 1.8

Page 9: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Case study trip key findings

Average distance per year (km)

Average return trip (km)

Average distance per day (km)

Average duration per day (hrs)

Utilisation rate (%)

Peak (%)

Validated number of trips per day

From Alice Springs/Katherine

28,000 440 450 3.9 40 55 95

Lajamanu 32,000 500 750 6.7 30 45 13Santa Teresa 21,000 230 200 2.5 50 85 21Hermannsburg 24,000 320 280 2.7 40 80 24

Page 10: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Simulation

Canning Stock Route. Photo by Tim Acker

Page 11: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Financial Benefits

Travel reduction from fleet sharing

Total kilometre travelled per day per community

Total annual road maintenance cost (AUD)

Impact of fleet sharing on variable costs (AUD) per year

Lajamanu 1,750km per day 7-9,000km per day 2-4 million 150-200,000

Santa Teresa 400km per day 4-6,000km per day 1-2 million 50-100,000

Hermannsburg 500km per day 9-12,000km per day 6-8 million 150-200,000

Ngaanyatjarra Lands, WA Courtesy Tim Acker

Page 12: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Wider Benefits

Fleet sharing trips per year

Average trip duration (with the 10% increase)

Average passenger numbers

Average wage

Time costs

Annual cost benefits of 5% productivity increase (AUD)

Lajamanu 1,000 7.3 3.1 50 75,000 105-115,000Santa Teresa 300 2.75 2.9 50 11,000 105-115,000Hermannsburg 700 3 2.7 50 30,000 26-32,000

Canning Stock Road Ngaanyatjarra Lands, WA Courtesy Tim Acker

Page 13: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Conclusions

Artwork by Niningka Lewis from Pukatja (SA) Courtesy of Tjanpi Desert Weavers, Photo by Tim Acker

Capital costs

Operational Costs

Health and Safety Benefits

Maintenance Benefits

Productivity benefits

Regional development benefits, and land value

Community wellbeing (decreased disturbance, pollution and emissions

Total

Lajamanu 0.06 0.06 0.23 0.15 0.11 0.15 0.04 0.8

Santa Teresa 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.03 0.55Hermannsburg 0.045 0.05 0.2 0.1 0.03 0.15 0.02 0.6

Page 14: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

Conclusions

Fleet sharing benefits per year (AUD)

BCA (for AUD50,000 fleet sharing system cost and time costs)

Lajamanu 800/900,000 7:1

Santa Teresa 550-650,000 12:1

Hermannsburg 600-700,000 8:1

Page 15: Smart transports for public services in remote Australia

AcknowledgementsThis research is conducted by Flinders University, Ninti One and the Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation.

Contact:

Bruno SpandonideResearcherNinti OneCooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic ParticipationFlinders UniversityEmail: [email protected]

For further information Transport Futures Reports:

http://www.crc-rep.com.au/resource/CW026_PreferredTransportFuturesRemoteAustralia.pdf Spandonide B. 2015. Preferred transport futures in remote Australia. CRC-REP Working Paper CW026. Ninti One Limited, Alice Springs.

http://www.crc-rep.com.au/resource/CW017_TransportCostsInRemoteCommunities.pdfSpandonide B. 2014. Transport systems in remote Australia: Transport costs in remote communities. CRC-REP Working Paper CW0017. Ninti One Limited. Alice Springs.