Congestion Charge, Part 1

Image source: “Miami traffic jam, I-95 North rush hour,” Wikimedia Commons. Photo by B137, June 16, 2012

What’s your daily commute in and around Boston like these days? I, for one, have noticed the commute worsening over the past 20 odd years. After all, Boston is the sixth worst city in the U.S. for traffic congestion. So, what is the City of Boston doing about it? Some other cities are trying to address the issue by banning cars that burn carbon based fuel. Is this ban on cars stemming from progressives in California? As it happens, this movement is coming from Europe. Certain cities in Europe are wrestling with significant traffic congestion and associated pollution issues. They are approaching it in a variety of ways.

Several years ago the City of London imposed a congestion tax on cars being driven into the city. This tax is approximately $16 a day for the privilege of driving any gas or diesel powder car into the city. Were there riots in the street? No, most folks understood that things couldn’t continue unchanged unless something was done to curtail traffic congestion. This seems to have worked to the point that the new Mayor has upped the ante by implementing a further tax for cars that pollute. Not only do you have to pay your $16 congestion charge, but, starting in 2017, if you drive a car built before 2005 you have to pay an additional $14 pollution charge ($30 a day to drive your 12 plus year old car into the city). Electric and certain hybrid cars are exempt from these charges.

The City of Paris just enacted a law that bans all gasoline and diesel cars built before 1997 during working hours on week days. Drivers get a sticker for a permitted car and fined for non-permitted cars. This also applies to scooters and motorcycles built before 1999. By 2020, just 4 years from now, that restriction will shift to include cars built before 2010. Additionally, the country is looking at progressively banning all diesel-powered cars in the country, which is notable because 80% of cars in France are powered by diesel engines. This would be a significant turnaround in public policy given that diesel fuel was previously taxed at a lower rate to encourage usage.

Then there’s Norway. The country has targeted zero sales of gasoline and diesel cars by the year 2025, 9 years from now! Oslo, the capital, wants to ban all gas and diesel cars by 2019, 3 years from now. Is it no wonder that electric cars sales represent almost 24% of the current market? And, this is happening in a country that, we’re told, is too cold for electric cars to work efficiently.

So, what about American cities? So far there is nothing in this country that remotely compares to the changes occurring in European nations. Quite the opposite! Since the recent fall in gas prices, there has been an increase in the purchase of pick-up trucks and SUV’s and a decrease in the sale of hybrid cars. Even with very generous tax breaks and grants, electric cars sales in this country are still below 1% of the total sold each year. Granted, the U.S. is a big country and our public transportation systems are not the best, but maybe we need to think about congestion and / or pollution charges to push us in the right direction, particularly in urban areas where more than 50% of the population lives.

Would you support a congestion charge for cars in Boston or your city? Would a congestion charge get you out of your car and on to public transportation? If you already ride public transportation, would fewer cars on the road make it quicker for the bus or your bike to get around? On the one hand, would only the rich be able to afford to drive in the city? And, is it worth the sacrifice if the congestion charge improves the public transportation system?

Should we think about this from the perspective of reducing pollution? What about banning of cars built before 1997 or 2005? Given that the average age of cars in this country is more than 11 years old, any time frame shorter than that could have a big impact on getting older cars off the road. If you don’t want to ban cars outright, how about a pollution tax based on emissions, every car being tested yearly and taxed accordingly – a ‘pay to pollute’ fee, so to speak and keep your clunker running longer.

Image source: “Hubway Bike Sharing Boston,” Wikipedia. Image by Tony Webster, December 6, 2014.

If we don’t implement a pollution tax, what about free parking for electric cars? Would that be enough to incentivize folks out of their gas guzzlers? Probably not, I think some sort of ‘carbon charge’ would be a better approach – you’d see a direct connection between the pollution you produce and your bank account. Then we could use the money raised by these charges to fix the T, improve the bus services and increase the Hubway system. Or, I guess we could just leave it the way it is and choke our way through the daily gridlock.