skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Designing a Successful Transportation Project: Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects

Abstract

The largest source of funding for alternative fuel vehicle and infrastructure projects in the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program's history came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). In 2009, the 25 cost-share projects totaled nearly $300 million in federal government investment. This effort included the involvement of 50 Clean Cities coalitions and their nearly 700 stakeholder partners who provided an additional $500 million in matching funds to support projects in their local communities. In total, those 25 projects established 1,380 alternative fueling stations and put more than 9,000 alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles on the road. Together, these projects displaced 154 million gasoline gallon equivalents (GGE) of petroleum and averted 254,000 tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while supporting U.S. energy independence and contributing to regional economic development. During post-project interviews, project leaders consistently cited a number of key components - ranging from technical and logistical factors, to administrative capabilities - for accomplishing an effective and impactful project. This report summarizes the high-level project design and administrative considerations for conducting a successful transportation project.

Authors:
 [1];  [1]
  1. National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Vehicle Technologies Office (EE-3V)
OSTI Identifier:
1397158
Report Number(s):
NREL/TP-5400-68140; DOE/GO-102017-4955
DOE Contract Number:
AC36-08GO28308
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION; 33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS; American Recovery and Reinvestment Act; ARRA; Clean Cities; transportation project; lessons learned; alternative fuels and vehicles; alternative fueling infrastructure

Citation Formats

Kelly, Kay L., and Singer, Mark R. Designing a Successful Transportation Project: Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.2172/1397158.
Kelly, Kay L., & Singer, Mark R. Designing a Successful Transportation Project: Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects. United States. doi:10.2172/1397158.
Kelly, Kay L., and Singer, Mark R. 2017. "Designing a Successful Transportation Project: Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects". United States. doi:10.2172/1397158. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1397158.
@article{osti_1397158,
title = {Designing a Successful Transportation Project: Lessons Learned from the Clean Cities American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects},
author = {Kelly, Kay L. and Singer, Mark R.},
abstractNote = {The largest source of funding for alternative fuel vehicle and infrastructure projects in the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program's history came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). In 2009, the 25 cost-share projects totaled nearly $300 million in federal government investment. This effort included the involvement of 50 Clean Cities coalitions and their nearly 700 stakeholder partners who provided an additional $500 million in matching funds to support projects in their local communities. In total, those 25 projects established 1,380 alternative fueling stations and put more than 9,000 alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles on the road. Together, these projects displaced 154 million gasoline gallon equivalents (GGE) of petroleum and averted 254,000 tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while supporting U.S. energy independence and contributing to regional economic development. During post-project interviews, project leaders consistently cited a number of key components - ranging from technical and logistical factors, to administrative capabilities - for accomplishing an effective and impactful project. This report summarizes the high-level project design and administrative considerations for conducting a successful transportation project.},
doi = {10.2172/1397158},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 9
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • The largest source of funding for alternative fuel vehicle and infrastructure projects in the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program's history came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). In 2009, the 25 cost-share projects totaled nearly $300 million in federal government investment. This effort included the involvement of 50 Clean Cities coalitions and their nearly 700 stakeholder partners who provided an additional $500 million in matching funds to support projects in their local communities. In total, those 25 projects established 1,380 alternative fueling stations and put more than 9,000 alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles onmore » the road. Together, these projects displaced 154 million gasoline gallon equivalents (GGE) of petroleum and averted 254,000 tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while supporting U.S. energy independence and contributing to regional economic development. During post-project interviews, project leaders consistently cited a number of key components - ranging from technical and logistical factors, to administrative capabilities - for accomplishing an effective and impactful project. This report summarizes the high-level project design and administrative considerations for conducting a successful transportation project.« less
  • Each Clean Cities project award under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included a diverse group of stakeholders who worked together to lay the foundation for their communities to adopt alternative fuels and petroleum reduction strategies. This document provides a snapshot of the impact of each project and highlights the partners and Clean Cities coalitions who helped transform local and regional transportation markets through 25 projects impacting 45 states.
  • One of the most significant developments in the world marketplace in the 1990's has been the increase in strategic partnering. Industry after industry has moved towards collaborative research and joint product development. Going it alone has become less and less viable. One powerful tool to bring companies together for collaborative research and production is the consortium. Recently, the Technology Reinvestment Project (TRP) invested more than $450 million to help integrate the defense and commercial industrial bases using consortia. The effectiveness of the consortia sponsored in the first round of the TRP, and those that will be financed in subsequent rounds,more » will heavily influence the success of the TRP.« less
  • The purpose of this document is to report on the evaluation of geothermal resource potential on and around three different United States (U. S.) Air Force Bases (AFBs): Nellis AFB and Air Force Range (AFR) in the State of Nevada (see maps 1 and 5), Holloman AFB in the State of New Mexico (see map 2), and Mountain Home AFB in the State of Idaho (see map 3). All three sites are located in semi-arid parts of the western U. S. The U. S. Air Force, through its Air Combat Command (ACC) located at Langley AFB in the State ofmore » Virginia, asked the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) for technical assistance to conduct technical and feasibility evaluations for the potential to identify viable geothermal resources on or around three different AFBs. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is supporting FEMP in providing technical assistance to a number of different Federal Agencies. For this report, the three different AFBs are considered one project because they all deal with potential geothermal resource evaluations. The three AFBs will be evaluated primarily for their opportunity to develop a geothermal resource of high enough quality grade (i.e., temperature, productivity, depth, etc.) to consider the possibility for generation of electricity through a power plant. Secondarily, if the resource for the three AFBs is found to be not sufficient enough for electricity generation, then they will be described in enough detail to allow the base energy managers to evaluate if the resource is suitable for direct heating or cooling. Site visits and meetings by INL personnel with the staff at each AFB were held in late FY-2009 and FY-2010. This report provides a technical evaluation of the opportunities and challenges for developing geothermal resources on and around the AFBs. An extensive amount of literature and geographic information was evaluated as a part of this assessment. Resource potential maps were developed for each of the AFBs.« less
  • In March 2010, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) joined two other labs receiving ARRA funding, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the National Renewable National Laboratory (NREL), to began weekly conference calls with the goal of coordinating a joint lab solicitation to support the ARRA-funded CBP project. Two solicitations were identified for: 1) new CBP Partners; 2) technical contractors to provide technical assistance and measurement and verification (M&V) contractors. The M&V contractors support the work by providing model reviews and conducting monitoring studies to verify building performance. This report documents the process used by the labs for the solicitations, andmore » describes the process and outcomes for PNNL, selection of candidate Partners, technical teams, and M&V contractors.« less