Recently I had the chance to listen in on a debate about the future of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) charging and the role that interoperability will play. In the context of the ORT and Interoperability Summit in Tampa, I thought you might enjoy reading portions of this debate. I’ve changed the names of the participants to protect their anonymity.
-- Pat Jones
Talker1: The concept of ubiquitous road pricing as proposed by the Infrastructure Financing Commission is both a potentially mortal threat to IBTTA as well as a huge opportunity. The threat is obvious. If road pricing is mandated by USDOT and every state needs to install a solution, then toll roads will be a minor part of the system without toll collection capability of their own, just receiving funding from the state government or they might just be incorporated into the state network, bondholder issues eventually resolved. Pretty dire.
On the other hand, toll roads can be in the vanguard of this trend by making themselves indispensable components and potential leaders of such a scheme. How to position for leadership is the key question.
One suggestion is to demonstrate the technology and its effectiveness. How accurate are various open road solutions? What are the best system designs?
How best to array cameras and detection? These and many more are the questions that will need to be answered but today even we can't answer them because neither the suppliers nor the users want to independently test the accuracy of ORT. So my suggestion is an IBTTA sponsored evaluation program that will publish test results as well as best practices.
Talker2: I agree fully with your opening sentence. There are a couple of challenges here. If ubiquitous tolling is adopted, our industry will look like two flat footed runners with two legs tied together trying to run in the Olympic 4 x 400 relay race!
By default the system for ubiquitous tolling would have to be primarily GPS based, and in North America we are not in that game. The one thin advantage we would have over the DOTs would be our general tolling experience.
If I was a betting man, I guess that Cordon Tolling will be applied to the larger cities and heavily used corridors. On this front, the question of efficient technology is important. But I think the bigger challenge is that we have managed to make interoperability so complicated and expensive. I think that if we could slay this particular dragon then our industry would be better positioned to lead the charge on at least phase one of the move "towards" ubiquitous tolling.
In short, I think whoever can deliver efficient and effective interoperability in the short term will be passed the baton – flat footed or not!
The two big problems we have are:
1. Not enough cars have transponders so we either go to electronic license plates or we charge a huge premium for video tolling.
2. We really need to get our act together on the low-cost/high-value "competitive" interoperability systems. I suspect that Visa and MasterCard do not operate 120 backroom operations across the country. Our industry should not have to do this either. Over the last 20 years, technology has dramatically changed the way we collect tolls. We as an industry have not done nearly as well at moving our business model forward. Technology is supposed to work for us, not the other way around. As an industry we should be much more focused on providing safe and efficient travel to our customers rather than "collecting tolls.”
So, to get back to your question about the technology demonstration, would this be somewhat like the shootout they ran in North Carolina? To me it feels a bit like doing a consumer evaluation report and I'm not sure if this is a roll we should play. Would we say have a conference where IBTTA and ASSHTO would do this jointly? I'm guessing that they are our audience.
Talker1: GPS tolling is very expensive and may have accuracy problems with location identification. So far only Germany has adopted it but in the US there is great interest in next generation toll tags because they can cover toll collection, in-vehicle services and active safety solutions
While there are many banks offering back office services, the diagram of how they interact under the surface is very complicated because the credit card networks were built on existing services, sort of like toll back offices
I also heard that AASHTO has started to talk about universal tolling. Worth a chat with them I would think. Bottom line is that all tolling expertise rests in our association. We can become part of the solution. Our problem is that even within IBTTA we are reluctant to honestly measure system performance, talk about leakage and think about standards. That's part of the discussion that I'd like to have.
Talker3: I was in Europe recently and would say that it is very premature to conclude that any ubiquitous road charging scheme in the U.S. will be based on GPS. Recent news suggests the U.S. military has dramatically cut funding for maintaining the public part of the GPS system and users are already starting to see degradation. Users in Europe, including toll systems, are looking into Galileo (E.U.) or GLONASS (Russia) as possible alternatives to GPS if the signal degradation continues. The E.U. is also actively pursuing 5.9 GHz VII systems, which include a tolling component.
I tend to see the growing interest in a VMT road charging scheme as one of the greatest opportunities we (IBTTA) have ever been presented. Our members, including associate and sustaining members, are the experts at all aspects of road user charging. While the role of traditional toll agencies is questionable under a VMT/ubiquitous charging scheme, whoever is responsible for collecting the VMT based user charges and processing those transactions will look to IBTTA members for expertise. We invented the technology and business processes and have been doing it successfully for decades.
I believe IBTTA needs to "own" the VMT issue. I don't think we need to commit to GPS or 5.9 GHz or any other technology at this point. We need to be the "go to" source of information and ideas on the whole universe of ubiquitous road charging. I believe if we miss this opportunity, we may become irrelevant pretty quickly because some other organization will quickly fill the void. I think partnering with AASHTO and others with an interest in this arena is essential. Given the possible changes in the role of traditional toll agencies, IBTTA needs to be open to changes in structure and operation to make sure we remain positioned as the authority on the subject.
Talker4: I don't believe we (IBTTA, the toll industry, our allies and friends, together or separately) can "own" VMT any more than Google, Microsoft, Facebook, or Twitter can "own" the Internet. Indeed, most companies don't even "own" their own brand. The customers own the brand, as Coca Cola discovered when they introduced "New Coke" and tried to phase out the original formula for Coke; then after a public backlash from their customers they re-introduced the original formula as "Coke Classic." Therefore, I'm leery of us trying to "own" anything. Having said that, I do believe we should be as "involved" as we possibly can in influencing the direction of the debate over VMT and showing how the toll industry can be the foremost solution provider. I think the gist of ALL of our comments so far (Talker1, Talker2 and Talker3) is that we in the toll industry have some very powerful tools and experiences with tolling and road pricing and we don't want the world to try to solve the transportation funding problem without consulting us. That's a given.
Having said all of that, I think I must agree with Talker2 that the toll industry is its own worst enemy when it comes to figuring out how to get to ubiquitous road user charging. The fly in the ointment is getting to real interoperability. We like to say the problem is political and business rules and not technology, but we're really only telling half the truth when we say that. To put it bluntly, each technology vendor wants the whole world to use only its own technology and every toll operator (who secretly might be happy with a one vendor solution to solve "interoperability") is reluctant to embrace interoperability because of the cost of migrating from “what I have now” to “something that I don’t have or understand that will cost me a lot of money to acquire.” Because of all this, we're stuck. We see that technology can solve many problems, and we can blame the politicians for not being more open to embrace tolling over the fuel tax. But even if the politicians would all lay down their arms and say, "I give up; let's move over to VMT as soon as possible," we in the toll industry still don't have the silver bullet that will solve all of the technology problems that continue to stand in the way of interoperability.
European interoperability is an interesting case. They have as many flavors of interoperability as Baskin Robbins has ice cream flavors. They have ETC interoperability for southern Europe; they have a separate interoperability system for the Alpine countries; they have yet another interoperability system for the Scandinavian countries; they have DSRC interoperability; and they have satellite-based interoperability. And never the twain shall meet! We in the toll industry have created (or allowed to emerge...) a big mess when it comes to ETC interoperability. What happens when 10 or 15 or 100 members of Congress turn to us and say, "Okay, we want tolling everywhere. You guys have been working on the technology and business rules of ubiquitous tolling for two decades now. I'm ready to buy your (ONE) solution." What do we do then?
This is a big problem. And, getting back to Talker1's original point, we're not going to solve it by having another technology demonstration. We need a solution that isn't so balkanized by the desire to protect parochial interests that it looks like Swiss Cheese that's been picked over by an army of mice. Before we can get to a solution that really works, at the very least we have to be honest with ourselves (the toll guys, inside the room, behind closed doors) about how far from a solution we actually are.