1. Md Zia Uddin and MIZUNOYA Takeshi
Impact of Road Intersection on Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gases Emission on Dhaka-Chittagong National Highway
Md Zia Uddin and MIZUNOYA Takeshi
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences
University of Tsukuba, Japan
15 January 2018

2. BANGLADESH GHG contribution per capita < 0.35%2
BACKGROUND
BANGLADESH
Total Population Million
COUNTRY PROFILE
Total Area 147,570 km2
GDP per capita $1384
Annual GDP $ billion
Current market price ( )1
GHG contribution per capita < 0.35%2
1Ministry of Finance, 2016
2MoEnvironment and Forests, 2015

3. Roads and Highways Department ROAD NETWORK3
BACKGROUND
Dhaka-Chittagong
National Highway NH1
217.0km
Roads and Highways Department ROAD NETWORK3
National Highway ,813 km
Total Roads ,302 km
DHAKA
Figure 1: Composition of RHD Road Network
CHITTAGONG
3http://

4. BACKGROUND
Dhaka-Chittagong National Highway (NH1) is crucial to the Bangladesh Economy
81% of Bangladesh’s total export earnings from Ready-made-garment (RMG) industry through the Port of Chittagong using the NH15
Chittagong port handles 92% of all of the country’s imports and exports with the bulk of this trade being transported by road using the NH1 with few or no alternatives5
Prospective route for Regional Connectivity (Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal (BBIN) and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM)
5Routh, S.K., Superintending Engineer, Roads And Highways Department, Bangladesh, PPTX on Dhaka Chittagong Expressway on PPP Basis
Chittagong Stakeholders’ Meeting, (2013)

5. Figure 2: Yearly Traffic Growth Rate4 (Average 10.30%)
BACKGROUND
Figure 2: Yearly Traffic Growth Rate4 (Average 10.30%)
4Ullah et al., (2013) and the author

6. Figure 3: Vehicle wise Traffic Growth on NH14
BACKGROUND
Figure 3: Vehicle wise Traffic Growth on NH14
4Ullah et al., (2013) and the author

7. Figure 4: Energy Consumption Supported by Different Sources6
BACKGROUND
Figure 4: Energy Consumption Supported by Different Sources6
6 Sources: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 2015.
The 2015 Global Climate Legislation Study – Bangladesh.

8. Figure 5: Sector wise CO2 contribution in Bangladesh (Year 2012)7
BACKGROUND
Figure 5: Sector wise CO2 contribution in Bangladesh (Year 2012)7
7 Sources: WRI CAIT 2.0, 2015; FAOSTAT, 2015
Note: Percentages do not add up to 100% due to rounding

9. about 1.96 % of the country’s GDP
BACKGROUND
Bangladesh imported million ton of petroleum fuel costing US $1.99 billion8
about 1.96 % of the country’s GDP
16 % of current account balance
Total consumption of petroleum is about million ton (MT)8
2.03 million ton is for transport sector
8Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation, (2009)

10. Figure 6: Road sector fuel demand under Business-as-Usual scenario9
BACKGROUND
Figure 6: Road sector fuel demand under Business-as-Usual scenario9
9Alam et al., (2013)

11. BACKGROUND
CO2, NOx, SOx
CO2, NOx, SOx
Figure 7: The existing Dhaka-Chittagong National Highway

12. Rationale
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Frequent delays through traffic intersection, road side GHG emission, temperature rise etc.
Travel times from Dhaka to Chittagong by truck average 7hrs with an average speed of 35km/hr

13. Calculating total delay time for vehicles at an intersection
METHODOLOGY
Calculating total delay time for vehicles at an intersection
Calculating cruise time for non-intersection road section
Calculation of fuel loss for AADT based on vehicle speed during the loss time
Calculating GHG emission for different driving condition
Comparing GHG emission for engine type during the stopping time (vehicle idling)

14. v
Study Area Layout Plan
Dhaka-Chittagong National Highway Number of Traffic Congestion Hotspots5
Study Area length km
Major traffic congestion hotspots
5Routh, S.K., Superintending Engineer, Roads And Highways Department, Bangladesh, PPTX on Dhaka Chittagong Expressway on PPP Basis
Chittagong Stakeholders’ Meeting, (2013)

15. BACKGROUND
CO2, NOx, SOx
CO2, NOx, SOx
Table 1: Time and Distance covered during before, at and after crossing the intersection
Time (Second)
Distance (meter)
Perception reaction
2.5
20.833
Deceleration
2.13 (avg)
8.858
Complete Stopping
66.0
Incremental delay
2.74 (avg)
Acceleration
2.78 (avg)
11.593

16. ts+ti = stopping time + incremental delay ta = acceleration time
RESULT
LOSS TIME
td = deceleration time
ts+ti = stopping time + incremental delay
ta = acceleration time
Figure 8: Distance-Time Graph

17. RESULT
LOSS TIME
INCREASES
Figure 9: Velocity-Time Graph

18. Time Loss/10 intersection
RESULT
Table 2: Total Time Loss and Fuel Loss Calculation for Traffic in 2022 (without project)
Vehicle
Mode
Number of Vehicle
Time Loss/10 intersection
Total time loss
Velocity
Fuel efficiency
Fuel Loss
Nos
hr/veh
hr/year
kmph
km/liter
liter
Motor Cycle
351,139
0.198
69,525.6
30.0
52.5
39,728.92
Scooter /
Tempu
731,917
144,920 42
103,513.95
Car / Jeep
1,477,909
292,626 10
877,877.80
Micro /
Pickup
1,805,257
357,441
8.33
1,287,302.42
Mini Bus / Coaster
727,851
144,115
5.0
864,687.07
Bus
839,099
166,142
3.33
1,496,770.76
Truck
2,515,826
498,134
3.125
4,782,082.92
Trailer
196,525
38,912
2.62
445,557.05
Toll Free
653,252
129,344
1,481,036.51
Total
1841,158
11,378,557.42
11RHD Road User Cost

19. Time Loss/10 intersection
RESULT
Table 3: Total Time Loss and Fuel Loss Calculation for Traffic in 2022 (with project)
Vehicle
Mode
Number of Vehicle
Time Loss/10 intersection
Total time loss
Velocity
Fuel efficiency
Fuel Loss
Nos
hr/veh
hr/year
kmph
km/liter
liter
Motor Cycle
147,479
0.205
30,233.1
60.0
52.5
34,552.12
Scooter /
Tempu
307,405
63,018 42
90,025.77
Car / Jeep
620,722
127,248 10
763,487.66
Micro /
Pickup
758,208
155,433
8.33
1,119,563.01
Mini Bus / Coaster
305,697
62,668
5.0
752,015.73
Bus
352,421
72,246.4
3.33
1,301,736.99
Truck
1,056,647
216,613
3.125
4,158,963.03
Trailer
82,540
16,920.8
2.62
387,499.62
Toll Free
274,366
56,245
1,288,052.97
Total
800,625
9,895,896.91
11RHD Road User Cost

20. 13.03% Reduction of Fuel Loss
RESULT
56.52%
Reduction of Travel Time
13.03% Reduction of Fuel Loss
Figure 10: Comparison of Travel Time Loss and Fuel Loss

21. RESULT Table 4: Effect of Driving Condition Change on CO Emission
Project Case (AADT)
Mode of Driving CO
Rate* (mg/sec)
Time
(sec)
Emission
(tons/year)
Total (tons/year)
Effect
Without Project (25476)
Cruise 10
2.50
2.32
19.22
(-) 41.74%
Deceleration
7.5
2.13
1.49
Idle
1.5
68.74
9.59
Acceleration
22.5
2.78
5.82
With Project (10700 using NH1)
2.5
0.98
11.39
5.15
1.51
68.41
4.01
5.56
4.89
*Source: Frey et al. (2001)

22. RESULT Table 5: Effect of Driving Condition Change on NO Emission
Project Case (AADT)
Mode of Driving NO
Rate* (mg/sec)
Time
(sec)
Emission
(tons/year)
Total (tons/year)
Effect
Without Project (25476)
Cruise
1.25
2.50
0.84
1.96
(-) 58.16%
Deceleration
0.5
2.13
0.10
Idle
0.1
68.74
0.64
Acceleration
1.5
2.78
0.39
With Project (10700 using NH1)
2.5
0.12
0.82
5.15
68.41
0.27
5.56
0.33
*Source: Frey et al. (2001)

23. RESULT Table 6: Effect of Driving Condition Change on HC Emission
Project Case (AADT)
Mode of Driving HC
Rate* (mg/sec)
Time
(sec)
Emission
(tons/year)
Total (tons/year)
Effect
Without Project (25476)
Cruise
0.6
2.50
0.14
2.10
(-) 50.00%
Deceleration
0.4
2.13
0.08
Idle
0.25
68.74
1.60
Acceleration
1.1
2.78
0.28
With Project (10700 using NH1)
0.6 
2.5
0.06
1.05
5.15
68.41
0.67
5.56
0.24
*Source: Frey et al. (2001)

24. Figure 11: Effect of Expressway Project on Emission Reduction
RESULT
Figure 11: Effect of Expressway Project on Emission Reduction
12Frey et al., (2013)

25. RESULT Table 7a: Calculation of Engine wise AADT for BAU Scenario
Without Project
With Project
AADT (veh/day)
Vehicle composi tion
Engine wise AADT (veh/day)
Vehicle compositio n after Diversion
MFI
25476
53.63%
13663
10700
5738
EFI
46.37%
11813
4962
Table 7b: Emission on Vehicle Idling at BAU Scenario
Mechanical Fuel Ignition (MFI)
Electric Fuel Ignition (EFI)
Emissions
Rate* (gm/hr)
AADT
Without project (ton/year)
With project (ton/year) CO 35
13663
33.33
5738
14.00 20
11813
16.47
4962
6.92 HC 23
21.90
9.20 6
4.94
2.07
NOx 48
45.71
19.20 86
70.80
29.74 PM 4
3.81
1.60 1
0.82
0.35
CO2
4484
4636
*Source : Khan et al., (2006)

26. RESULT
Figure 12: Comparison of CO2 Emission Reduction for Engine Type

27. Estimation of Social Cost of GHG
FUTURE WORK
Estimation of Social Cost of GHG
Economic Analysis

28. “…providing relief from
congestion, pollution and accidents free corridor
to the users”