1 UTA & Alternative Fuel Vehicles GOVERNOR’S ENERGY DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT JUNE 2014

2 Strategic and Board Goal Alignment 2020 Strategic Plan ‘Operate a balanced fleet of alternative fuel vehicles’ 2014 Board Goal ‘Complete construction of an on-site CNG fueling facility’

3 Why Alternative Fuels? Vehicle fuel consumption is the second largest operating expenditure at UTA (Labor is #1) Spread risk associated with future fuel volatility Participation in new funding resources: Utah Clean Cities Coalition – nearly $2 million in alternative fuel vehicles Better air quality Leveraging evolving efficiency technologies Since 1995, use of diesel fuel at transit agencies across the country has decreased more than 20% while the combined used of alternative fuel types* has increased more than 800% * * Includes electricity for rail propulsion * * GNC, LNG, gasoline, and Bio-diesel

4 UTA’s Fleet Mix Today 2023* * Based on 2014 Bus Replacement Schedule

5 Fuel Volatility *Assumptions 2010 Diesel (MPG): 4.3 CNG (MPGe): 3.5 Electric 2.3 kWh/Mile)*: 17 Source: ANNUAL ENERGY OUTLOOK 2014, US Energy Information Administration

6 Diesel Buses Currently four hundred fifty five (455) in the UTA Fleet Pre-2006 Diesel Vehicles – 239 “Clean Diesel” Vehicles – 216 Most common, reliable, highest horsepower technology available Existing infrastructure for fueling and maintenance

7 CNG Buses Currently twenty four (24) in the UTA Fleet Technology is being used by more than 40 transit agencies in North America Fuel can be locally sourced Lower emissions of criteria air pollutants Compared to a model year 2000 diesel bus, a model year 2012 CNG bus emits: 80% less NOx 99% less PM 100% less Hydrocarbons

8 Hybrid Buses Currently thirty two (32) in the UTA Fleet Technology is being used by more than 60 transit agencies in North America Diesel-electric technology combines two energy converters: An internal combustion engine Electric battery powered drive

9 Electric Buses Current Top Manufacturers Proterra BYD Compete Coachworks Charging Technologies Conduction Overhead Embedded (WAVE) Overnight (Plug in) Current US Agencies Using the Technology Proterra BYD Complete Coach Works

10 Capital Cost Comparisons

11 Electric Buses – Capital Costs Proterra BYD Complete Coach Works * Costs are for one (1) bus and (1) set of Infrastructure, economies of scale can be realized with larger fleet sizes

12 Projected Lifecycle Operations and Maintenance Cost Comparisons *Assumptions: -Twelve (12) year vehicle life -34,000 annual miles (UTA average) -7% annual fuel price increase -3% annual electricity cost increase -At least one (1) battery replacement for electric vehicles -Bus systems and infrastructure estimated to last 8 years; 8 year amortization for all systems & infrastructure -Numbers shown are in Net Present Value (NPV)

13 Depot District Service Center Sustain operations Support maintenance and fueling of existing fleet in a safe, efficient, well-designed facility Increase options Allow expansion of Central Garage fleet Facilitate exploration of other fuel types Conduit for charging future electric vehicles Flexibility to accommodate other vehicle types

14 Key Issues Initial capital costs Operations & Maintenance Training Facilities Additional public infrastructure required Unproven Technology

15 Thank you! G.J. LaBonty Manager, Long Range & Strategic Planning Utah Transit Authority