School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China; Center for Energy & Environmental Policy Research, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China; Collaborative Innovation Centre of Electric Vehicles in Beijing, Beijing 100081, China; Sustainable Development Research Institute for Economy and Society of Beijing, Beijing 100081, China.
School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China; Center for Energy & Environmental Policy Research, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China.
Sci Total Environ. 2020 May 1;715:136847. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136847. Epub 2020 Jan 21.
In recent years, bicycle sharing has become more popular in cities and towns around the world. Public bicycles are one of the important forms of bicycle sharing. The use of public bicycles instead of motor vehicles has brought about changes in environmental benefits for the society, and at the same time, it has also changed the travel time of residents. Because these changes are potential and cannot be measured directly, we put forward the calculation methods of environmental benefits and time costs of public bicycles according to the concept of opportunity cost. Taking Hohhot, the capital city of Inner Mongolia, as an example, according to the streaming data of 9.76×10 valid orders of public bicycle trips in 2016, we found that the use of public bicycles could reduce consumption of standard coal by as much as 5,796.11 tons (accounting 0.16‱ of the total coal consumption in Inner Mongolia) and carbon emissions were reduced by 4,381.28 tons (accounting 0.30‱ of the total carbon emissions in Inner Mongolia). However, the promotion of public bicycles is not without disadvantages. The use of public bicycles has increased the average travel time of residents by 0.06 hours, which is neglected in previous studies. The contribution of public bicycles to saving 1kg standard coal corresponds to 0.10 hours of travel time waste. Thus, reducing 1kg of carbon emissions is corresponding to a waste of 0.14 hours of travel time. The use of public bicycles varies among different income groups, which is caused by the value of travel time. Low-income groups use more frequently than high-income groups. Generally speaking, low-income groups bring more environmental benefits to society through the use of public bicycles, but bear more time costs. Therefore, we propose a carbon tax on high-carbon transportation modes to encourage green travel and balance the environmental benefits and time costs of public bicycles.
近年来，自行车共享在世界各地的城市和城镇变得越来越流行。公共自行车是自行车共享的重要形式之一。使用公共自行车代替机动车，给社会带来了环境效益的变化，同时也改变了居民的出行时间。由于这些变化是潜在的，无法直接衡量，我们根据机会成本的概念提出了公共自行车的环境效益和时间成本的计算方法。以内蒙古自治区首府呼和浩特市为例，根据 2016 年公共自行车出行 9.76×10 的有效订单流数据，我们发现使用公共自行车可以减少标准煤消耗多达 5796.11 吨（占内蒙古总煤炭消耗的 0.16‱），减少碳排放 4381.28 吨（占内蒙古总碳排放的 0.30‱）。然而，公共自行车的推广并非没有缺点。公共自行车的使用增加了居民的平均出行时间，这在以前的研究中被忽视了。公共自行车每节省 1 公斤标准煤的贡献相当于浪费 0.10 小时的出行时间。因此，减少 1 公斤碳排放相当于浪费 0.14 小时的出行时间。公共自行车的使用在不同收入群体之间存在差异，这是由于出行时间的价值造成的。低收入群体比高收入群体更频繁地使用公共自行车。一般来说，低收入群体通过使用公共自行车为社会带来了更多的环境效益，但承担了更多的时间成本。因此，我们提出对高碳交通方式征收碳税，以鼓励绿色出行，平衡公共自行车的环境效益和时间成本。
