Workshop attendees,
First, thank you all very much for attending the workshop, we feel it was a great success that produced many great ideas. This is the typed version of the handwritten notes taken on the day of the workshop. This is a very rough draft, so please take time to review the information for accuracy and make any comments you feel are needed. Steve Millett, workshop facilitator, is currently working on a more polished version of these notes, which will present the ideas in the form of a narrative, and will hopefully make them clearer. As soon as he is finished with this updated version, it will also be posted on the blog for you to view. Thank you for taking the time to look over these notes.
Ohio Transportation Working Group (OTWG)
Futuring Scenarios Workshop
DRAFT documentation
When: Thursday, October 25, 2007
Where: Ohio Department of Development conference room, 24th Floor,
Workshop Agenda: see Attachment A
Participants: see Attachment B
Hosts: Nikos Kaplanov Clean Fuels
Sam Spofforth Clean Fuels
Richard Stuebi
Facilitator: Steve Millett Futuring Associates
Topic Question: How might we achieve and sustain prosperity while moving people and goods where needed in
Methods: Idea generation, expert judgment and intuitive scenarios (scenario writing)
Idea Generation on the Most Important and the Most Uncertain Issues/Trends/Factors Relative to the Topic Question:
1. Redistribution of gasoline tax
- to other types of transportation than roads
2. Population changes (more or less)
- immigration
3. Resource restraints, especially fuel supplies
4. Status of transportation infrastructure
- costs, roads, rail, bridges, airports, etc.
5. Currency exchange rates – relative
- cost of oil, natural gas, energy resources in general
6. Rising fuel costs
7. Alternative fuels coming from
8. Transportation technology
- fuels (conventional and renewable)
- engines
9. Transportation funding system
- less reliance on gasoline tax
- more than one source
10. Connectivity – single and multiple modes
- can you get from here to there?
11. Mass transit attracts bad elements of society (target rich environment)
- mass transit security, from terrorists, criminals, et. al.
- sprawl (where people live)
- townships up, cities down
13. Political will to make necessary changes
14. Increase in freight movement – all modes
15. New and changing federal air emissions standards
16. Vehicle diversity
- heavy/light, long/short range, etc.
17. Carbon management and restrictions
18. Higher electricity rates
19. Consumer demand/spending
20. Climate change impacts – floods, droughts, fires, storms, growing season affected
21. Focus and direction of investment – private $/ public $
22. Bicycle infrastructure
- commuter/pedestrian program
- including places to park
23. Research & Development: leading to commercialization
24. Energy transportation system
- pipelines
- logistics/ distribution mapped to population
25. Economic growth/economic recession – economic vigor
26. Rising costs of new technologies to the consumer
27. Alternative energy for tourism and entertainment
28. Balancing local air quality, energy security, food prices, and greenhouse gas reduction
29. Growing interest in light rail and intercity (3 C’s)
30. Strong resistance to change in
- grown too comfortable with the status quo, complacency
31. Good roads and more roads lead to more energy consumption
32. Aging population
33. Increased poverty/ low income in cities and isolated rural areas
34. Growing gaps in distribution of income
35. Stability or lack of stability in the
36. Competing demand for energy in the developing world, especially
37. Competing interests (groups)
- societal trade offs
38. Federal program funding and impacts of war spending
39. $2 trillion rebuild transportation system
40. Work and commuting patterns of the future
41. Energy efficiency across the board
42. Definition of prosperity
- quality of life
43. Quality and access to education
44. Public safety
45. Security of energy sources and redundancy
46. Public perceptions of energy sources
47. Global competitiveness
- competition with other states
49. Home, family, community relationships
- lifestyle choices
50. Creating markets for new technologies and products
51. Consumer/ public attitudes regarding energy, transportation and change
52. Organization and institutions of governments and parties
- partnering, re-organization
53. Domestic peace/social stability
- violence?
54. A new transportation technology
- market game changes
55. “Not in my back yard”
The participants were asked to vote for the three ideas from the master list above that they judged to be the most important relative to the topic question. The four ideas that received the most votes (6 or more) were as follows:
- Resource restraints, especially fuel supplies (#3)
- Status of transportation infrastructure (#4)
- Land development patterns – spatial distribution of living/working/shopping (#12)
- Focus and direction of investment – private $/ public $ (#21)
Subsequently, the group decided to redefine “resource restraints” as “energy prices to end-users” and to combine “status of transportation infrastructure” with the redefined “investment in transportation solutions,” including both private and public sector investments in infrastructure and other types of transportation solutions. The group also decided that these two were the two that were both the most important and the most uncertain relative to the topic question. Therefore, these two became the structure for the scenario writing.
The entire group was then divided into four sub-groups and each was assigned one scenario to develop. Their scenario narratives are as follows:
Group 1 Scenario: High energy prices/low investment in transportation solutions
This group began with a hypothetical example from the year 2030. A number of employees in the greater
P & G continues to battle to find educated young professionals in
The head of product logistics is struggling secure long-term low cost options to move P & G’s goods worldwide, and keeping delivery schedules in
As the group carpools back home to
- Decaying infrastructure
- Decrease in discretionary spending
- Simple comparison to present day
- Possible high investment in other sectors
- Less sprawl – costs too much to travel further, transportation is not convenient
- Possibly cleaner scenario – energy consumption is polluting so demand is forcing less consumption
- Higher prices in consumer market since it costs more to make (energy cost) and move
- Potential increase in local production of goods
- No real significant shift of other transportation modes due to low investment
- maximize/exceed current capacity of those other modes but no real improvement
- Trade-off roads
- More congestion in growing urban areas due to a lack of investment in infrastructure
- ODOT priority – maintain status quo with little expansion
- High energy prices ßà consumer demand
- some shift towards more efficiency but not a dramatic shift
- Business not coming to
- Migration out of
Group 2 Scenario: High energy prices/high investment in transportation solutions
- Energy demand skyrockets
- relative scarcity – peak oil, natural disasters, human made
- Developing countries –
- Carbon constraints drive energy prices
- Higher population, need for local production
- Investment
- Power generation – nuclear, clean coal, hydrogen
- Investment in mass transit – electric rail, electric cars, electric grid
- Greater investment in upgrade and maintenance of
- lead to transportation funding shifts
- The way our communities are laid out – ex.
- deconstruction of 2007 infrastructure
- Higher environmental costs
- drought, heat, higher agriculture costs, shifts in agriculture/economic sector
- Greater investment in state and federal R & D
- Greater investment in private financing
- Significant changes in the tax structure – federal/state/private financing
Group 3 Scenario: Low energy prices/low investment in transportation solutions
Assumptions: No investment in rail, transit, alternative energy.
Low energy prices- more driving, higher energy consumption and road tax
No market driven investment because there is no demand
Depends on reason for low consumption
Other world wants leading to lower energy prices
Can’t sprawl, high demand for roads, more congestion, more crumbling infrastructure
Economy: more cars, more auto industry
Lower technology investment b/c of lack of demand – stagnant leaves
Assume 1) Government controls on energy cost
2) Other sources have been developed that ??? from outside external investment
1) if 1 ability to fund would come from taxpayer
2) if 2 net gain to consumer, could lead to
? à World of economic decline – jobs out, investment out from stagnation to decline
Us/World Picture:
Oh- If US P down, but only
g. could occur around existing arteries and city population would rise
Environmental Scenario:
1) System breakdown of environment
2) Alternative fuels/energy sources
3) Have our cake and eat it too, assumes someone else’s investment
- Money savings invested in some sort of high tech generation
“Something’s Going to Happen”
1) Low energy prices, low transportation investment
Doomsday scenario: no investment, congestion, people and jobs leaving the state, no R & D have to pay the piper
“Slow rough bumpy road downhill, until we hit the wall”
2) Low energy prices, low transportation investment
If energy prices are low because of outside discovery of alternative energy sources, net gain to consumers, additional money to invest elsewhere to improve quality of life in other areas
“Wishful thinking- we had our cake and ate it too”
Group 4 Scenario: Low energy prices/high investment in transportation
- High economic growth and high consumer spending generates high investments, including transportation solutions.
- Carbon management: virtually no cost, climate change not an issue, we don’t give a damn
- Increased sprawl and individuality
- “Next thing after oil” à “Cheap”
- Underrated technologies - geothermal heating and cooling, wind, etc.
- Breakthrough in IGCC/CS, high energy productivity
- Return to canals/ utilizing waterways
- Expanded hydro-power –
- ICT to drivers (real time)
- People working from home
- Graying society travels less
- Low energy prices à Status Quo OR Low energy demand à low prices?
- Mass transit
“Prosperity”
- Wind in
- Breakthrough in nuclear – hydrogen
- $$$ in electric/plug in tech’s vehicles
- Electric energy storage widely/cheaply available
- Lots of infrastructure money – Public and private (not enough public $$)
- Organizations to do this, coordination required, government as facilitator reinvented
- Moving sidewalks à More public transportation à Less fuel demand
- Energy diversity
- Diversified investment portfolio
- What you invest in makes all the difference
- Low price is more important than the type of energy, sustainability
At the conclusion of the four scenario narratives, titles and characterizations were assigned to each:
#1 Congestion rules, business as usual but more so, slow decline, stagnation, growing traffic congestion, more of the same (maybe)
#2 “Spend more, get less”, high rate of change, can’t catch up. The European model
#3 Opposite of green? More energy consumption, congestion.
a) It’s a slow bumpy road
b) Net gain to consumers, “wishful thinking”
#4 Tech breakthroughs, high R & D, “prosperity”, carbon not a problem, more sprawl, more supply or less demand, graying of society, more mass transit
When asked which one was the most likely by the year 2030, the group identified Scenario 1 or 2. When asked which one was the most desirable, the group identified Scenarios 4.
Potential “Black Swans” (or low-probability, high-consequence happenings or disruptive events)
Natural disaster – earthquake, tornado, drought, storms elsewhere (
Terrorist attack
Nuclear disaster
Energy infrastructure disaster
Energy war
Asteroid
Avian flu – pandemic
DOD closes Wright Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB) in
Embargo/ trade disaster
Nothing happens
Further consideration is required to assess how each of these “black swans” may change the scenarios.
Finally, the group discussed potential public policy implications drawn from all four scenarios:
Public Policy Implications
1. Infrastructure security and funding
a) roads/highways
b) rail
c) fuel/energy supply
d) redundancy
e) limited access “demand management”
A) Legislate standards
B) Surveillance
C) Tax credits/ incentives and costs
2. Diversity of supply
a) fuel standards
b) subsidies and tax incentives
c) fuel stations
d) R&D – overcome the valley of death
e) time of day metering of electricity
E-commerce logistic challenges
3. Public-private partnerships
- lack of public capacity for investments
- facilitator/coordination role
- governance structure
- new regional bodies – what is the framework?
- benefits: planning, systems implications, better service, lower costs?
4. Energy taxes
- over reliance on gasoline tax – based on gallons, not BTU
5. Permitting
6. Zoning
7. Powers of eminent domain
8. Cap and Trade legislation
- how to measure carbon impacts?
9. Vision and leadership – public/private partnership, public sector leadership initiatives
10. Information disclosure – apathy, education
Attachment A - Agenda
OTWG Futuring Workshop
Ohio Department of Development
24th Floor,
October 25, 2007
The futuring workshop will be held to guide the project in producing a policy framework for Ohio Policymakers for the future prosperity of the transportation sector and the state. We hope to assemble a number of people with diverse backgrounds and experiences in order to add credibility and reality to the futuring process.
9:30 Arrival and registration
10:00 Greeting and introductions
10:15 Review of the topic question:
How might we acheieve and sustain prosperity while moving people and goods where needed in
10:20 Idea generation: What are the most important and most uncertain issues/trends/factors relative to the topic question?
11:30 Scenario structure: Structure of the scenario analysis and divide into four future scenarios working groups.
11:45 Development of future scenarios: Done within each scenarios group
LUNCH
1:15 Group reports: Reports of future scenarios from each future scenarios group; Populate and tag the four quadrants/scenarios.
1:45 Black Swans: Quick brainstorming of unintended events or “black swans” and an examination of their impact on different scenarios.
2:00 Discussion of policy implications: What are the necessities for the state and other government entities for each scenario?
3:30 Review, conclusions, wrap-up
Ohio Transportation Working Group Online
Read & post comments at www.otwg.blogspot.com
Attachment B - Participants
Ohio Transportation Working Group
Future Scenarios Workshop
October 25, 2007
| Name | | Organization | Email | Phone |
| Dale | Arnold | Ohio Farm Bureau | DArnold@ofbf.org | (614) 246-8294 |
| Dan | Baer | Simply Living | dan.kenyonbrook@earthlink.net | |
| Elliott | Benson | General Motors | Elliott.Benson@gm.com | (313) 667-4165 |
| Lavea | Brachman | Greater Ohio | lbrachman@greaterohio.org | (614) 258-1713 |
| Andrew | Bremer | All Aboard Ohio | andrewbremer@allaboardohio.org | (614) 228-6005 |
| Jim | Coleman | Ohio's Tomorrow | jim@ohiostomorrow.com | (614) 225-6300 |
| Standish | Fortin | Miami Valley Sierra Club | standish7@yahoo.com | (513) 226-2020 |
| Kimberly | Gibson | ODOD | kgibson@odod.state.oh.us | (614) 466-2643 |
| Nick | Gill | MORPC | NGILL@morpc.org | (614) 233-4151 |
| Anne | Godge | PUCO - Biomass Energy Program | Anne.Goodge@puc.state.oh.us | (614) 644-7857 |
| Laura | Koprowski | MORPC | lkoprowski@morpc.org | (614) 233-4126 |
| Bob | Liedich | BP Oil | Robert.Leidich@bp.com | (216) 271-5289 |
| Ellen | Marrison | Greater Ohio | emarrison@greaterohio.org | (614) 258-1713 |
| William | McNeer | NetJets | mcneer@netjets.com | (614) 239-6008 |
| Scott | Miller | Consortium for Energy, Economics & the Evinronment | millers1@ohio.edu | (740) 593-0827 |
| Steve | Millett | Futuring Associates, LLC | smillett@columbus.rr.com | (614) 457-6632 |
| Sam | Spofforth | Clean Fuels Ohio | sam@cleanfuelsohio.org | (614) 292-5435 |
| Steve | Stolte | Union County Engineer | SStolte@co.union.oh.us | (937) 645-3018 |
| Richard | Stuebi | Cleveland Foundation | rstuebi@clevefdn.org | (216) 861-3810 |
| Matt | White | Edison Welding Institute | matt_white@ewi.org | (614) 688-5241 |
| Jim | Zuber | Ohio Energy Office | jzuber@odod.state.oh.us | (614) 387-2731 |
No comments:
Post a Comment