gxceed
← 論文一覧に戻る

A Data-Driven Framework for Fleet Electrification Planning: Integrating Total Cost of Ownership Analysis for University Facilities Management, Interagency Conflict in U.S. Climate and Vehicle Emissions Policy Before Massachusetts v. EPA

データ駆動型フリート電化計画フレームワーク:大学施設管理の総所有コスト分析とMassachusetts v. EPA以前の米国気候・車両排出政策における省庁間対立 (AI 翻訳)

Nick DiCintio

Libra📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-05-08#EV・輸送Origin: US
DOI: 10.18130/azy2-cw48
原典: https://doi.org/10.18130/azy2-cw48

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本論文は、大学の車両フリートの電化計画におけるデータ駆動型フレームワークを提案し、総所有コスト分析を用いて排出削減とコストのトレードオフを評価。同時に、Massachusetts v. EPA以前の米国気候・車両排出政策における省庁間の対立とその影響を歴史的に分析する。技術分析では、電化が69~82%の排出削減をもたらす一方、運用プロファイルに応じた戦略的導入の重要性を示す。政策的には、制度的断片化が有効な気候行動を遅らせたと論じる。

English

This paper presents a data-driven framework for fleet electrification planning for a university's facilities management, integrating total cost of ownership analysis with telematics data. It finds that strategic replacement of high-emitting vehicles can reduce emissions by 69-82%, but cost-effectiveness varies with utilization. The accompanying STS research examines interagency conflict in U.S. climate policy leading up to Massachusetts v. EPA, arguing that fragmented authority delayed effective regulation.

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters

日本のGX文脈において

本論文は、フリート電化におけるコストと排出削減のトレードオフを定量化する手法を提供し、日本企業や自治体の電動車両導入判断に応用可能。また、米国の政策事例から日本における省庁間連携の重要性を示唆。

In the global GX context

This study offers a practical methodology for fleet electrification that can inform corporate and municipal decarbonization strategies globally. Its STS component highlights how interagency conflicts shape climate policy, relevant for any country pursuing coordinated climate action.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Useful for researchers working on vehicle fleet optimization and the political economy of climate policy.

🏢実務担当者:Fleet managers can apply the TCO framework to evaluate electrification opportunities.

🏛政策担当者:Provides insights on institutional barriers that can hinder effective emissions regulation.

📄 Abstract(原文)

Tradeoffs are apparent in every aspect of our society. In the U.S., efforts to reduce emissions and promote sustainability continue to conflict with economic and efficiency goals. As of right now, organizations are under growing pressure to balance efficiency and productivity with environmental responsibility. Yet, while technologies have advanced rapidly, the broader regulatory and institutional systems have often struggled to align around shared environmental goals. I am aiming to explore and address this imbalance between efficiency and sustainability from two perspectives. My technical project involves the use of telematics data to analyze and improve the overall performance of UVA’s fleet of vehicles. By optimizing vehicle selection and operations, we seek to demonstrate how data-driven insights can reduce emissions while maintaining or even improving productivity. My STS research project, meanwhile, investigates how interagency coordination and conflict among federal departments influenced the development of U.S. climate and vehicle emissions policy leading up to Massachusetts v. EPA. My research will highlight the political and organizational actions that shape how environmental policy is made and explore what can be learned about aligning institutional goals with sustainable outcomes today. My technical project developed a data-driven decision-support framework to evaluate electrification strategies for UVA Facilities Management (FM), which oversees over 400 vehicles. The framework identified which vehicles were suitable candidates for replacement with plug-in hybrid vehicles or battery electric vehicles and quantified trade-offs between cost and emissions. The methodology combined vehicle-level telematics data with a supporting machine learning based modeling approach that learned patterns in vehicle usage and energy consumption from historical telematics data for future fuel and energy estimates. Sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate uncertainty in key parameters such as fuel prices, electricity rates, charging availability, and vehicle utilization. Results indicated that a subset of high-emitting vehicles, often characterized by repeated excessive idling, contributed disproportionately to overall fleet emissions but were not always suitable candidates for electrification based on their operational profiles. Case studies of real FM replacement decisions demonstrated that while electric and hybrid alternatives offer meaningful emissions reductions of 69–82%, their higher upfront acquisition costs mean the total cost of ownership premium of electrification varies substantially by vehicle utilization, and targeted replacement strategies are more cost-effective than uniform fleet-wide electrification. These findings demonstrate that the framework provides FM with a structured, data-grounded tool to evaluate when electrification is economically justified and when operational emissions reduction should take priority. My STS research paper examines how internal dynamics within the federal government shaped the development of U.S. climate and vehicle emissions policy leading up to Massachusetts v. EPA. While existing research highlights the slow and often ineffective progression of emissions policy, this paper focuses on the underlying cause of fragmentation and disagreement between regulatory agencies and executive leadership. Using a historical analysis of primary sources such as government memos and reports, along with secondary academic literature, the paper traces how these dynamics unfolded over time. The analysis shows that divided authority across agencies like the EPA and DOT created a fragmented policy structure, making coordination difficult and leading to inconsistent priorities. Executive branch oversight further intensified these challenges, as political leadership often influenced which scientific findings were prioritized and whether regulatory action was taken. Applying the Social Construction of Technology framework, the paper argues that different government actors functioned as competing social groups, each with their own understanding of the problem and preferred solutions. As a result, closure and stabilization around vehicle emissions policy were delayed. Over time, these patterns of fragmentation and political influence contributed to a lack of meaningful federal action, even as emissions remained a growing concern. This inaction ultimately prompted states to pursue their own policies and legal challenges, culminating in the Supreme Court’s decision. Working on these two projects together provided a perspective that neither would have offered on its own. The technical project showed that improving emissions outcomes is not simply a matter of adopting new technology, but requires careful evaluation of tradeoffs between cost and operational needs. At the same time, the STS research made it clear that even when technical solutions exist, their implementation depends heavily on how institutions define standards, prioritize goals, and coordinate action. This connection became especially clear when considering why more efficient solutions are not always adopted at scale. The technical work emphasized that data-driven decisions can identify practical, targeted ways to reduce emissions without sacrificing performance. However, the STS research highlighted that similar opportunities at the national level have historically been limited not by a lack of technology, but by fragmentation and disagreement within government. Together, these projects reinforced that technological capability and institutional alignment must work in parallel. The experience ultimately showed that addressing sustainability challenges requires both strong technical tools and coordinated decision-making structures.

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録(無料・3キーワードまで)。

gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。