From World War II until just a few years ago, the number of miles driven annually on America’s roads steadily increased. Then, at the turn of the century, something changed: Americans began driving less. By 2011, the average American was driving 6 percent fewer miles per year than in 2004.

The trend away from driving has been led by young people. From 2001 and 2009, the average annual number of vehicle-miles traveled by young people (16 to 34-year-olds) decreased from 10,300 miles to 7,900 miles per capita – a drop of 23 percent. … Young people are driving less for a host of reasons – higher gas prices, new licensing laws, improvements in technology that support alternative transportation, and changes in Generation Y’s values and preferences – all factors that are likely to have an impact for years to come.

The report closes with a discussion of some of the implications for transportation policy — and funding — if the trends toward less driving-intensive lifestyles stays with this young cohort and those that follow.

Such a shift in future transportation trends would shake the foundations of transportation policy-making. For example, to meet the demand for alternative transportation, federal, state and local governments would need to prioritize investment in public transportation, bike lanes, sidewalks and other transportation alternatives. To meet the demand for walkable neighborhoods in close proximity to transit, government officials would need to ensure that land-use and transportation policies were aligned to support the development of these communities. To compensate for the declines in gas-tax revenues, decision-makers would need to find alternative sources of funding for road and bridge maintenance or boost the gasoline tax to levels that may further discourage driving.

Transportation for America communications director David Goldberg was quoted prominently in the article, a sign of the campaign’s growing influence in transportation policy. In the report, Goldberg points out that these trends cannot be explained by the recession alone.

Environmental consciousness and the appeal of living in urban centers also play a role, says David Goldberg, spokesman for Transportation for America, a national coalition that advocates reduced dependence on cars. “There have been trends of leveling rates of driving and increased use of public transportation which predate the economic downturn,” he says.

Younger Americans are also changing their perceptions – and the behavior – surrounding automobile use.

Some of the decline in car ownership may be driven by younger people putting off getting their driver’s licenses or buying their first cars, Goldberg says. “We’ve seen a cultural shift.”

Due to the impact of high gas prices, the economic slowdown, and a growing preference for public transportation and other options for getting around, congestion was down in 2008 over 2007, marking the first two-year decrease in congestion since the Texas Transportation Institute began keeping track in 1982. Today, TTI released their bi-annual Urban Mobility Report today on the state of congestion and traffic in the U.S.

Some key findings:

Travelers spent one hour less stuck in traffic in 2007 than they did the year before and wasted one gallon less gasoline than the year before. The differences are small, but they represent a rare break in near-constant growth in traffic over 25 years.

• The overall cost (based on wasted fuel and lost productivity) reached $87.2 billion in 2007 — more than $750 for every U.S. traveler.
• The total amount of wasted fuel topped 2.8 billion gallons — three weeks’ worth of gas for every traveler.
• The amount of wasted time totaled 4.2 billion hours — nearly one full work week (or vacation week) for every traveler.

One cause of the decrease in congestion is the same cause responsible for the lower numbers of highway fatalities — Americans have been driving less and less. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) growth rates have been in decline since 2005 and in 2007, total VMT and per capita VMT actually decreased for the first time since World War II. High gas prices and the recent economic downturn have contributed to these declines, but VMT was actually in decline well before the shock of increased gas prices and the recession, and has continued to fall even as gas prices plummeted over the last year.

And while total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) went down just slightly, congestion is down much more significantly.

According to Feburary numbers from INRIX, a reputable traffic statistics service, just a 3.7% drop in vehicle miles traveled in 2008 resulted in a 30% drop in congestion in our 100 most congested metro areas. That means each commuter spent 13 less hours stuck in traffic in 2008 over the previous year. And in slight contrast to the TTI report, the report found that overall, “99 of the top 100 most populated cities in the U.S. experienced decreases in traffic congestion levels in 2008 as compared to the prior year.” Small reductions in how much we drive each year have a much larger impact on congestion.

There’s no doubt that the sagging economy had a hand in reducing how much we drive. But regardless of the current economy, most Americans seem to be looking for ways to drive less — not more. So what if we invested more in the positive ways to reduce the amount we have to drive by making other options for getting around accessible, convenient, and available to more people?

With public transportation ridership still going up — even as driving is going down — it’s clear that people who have choices for getting around use them. People are looking for other convenient ways to travel that can get them out of traffic and save them time and money.

And as the INRIX numbers show, if we can make it easier to get around and increase the options for doing so, everyone behind the wheel benefits as congestion decreases. (And despite the decrease overall, the current $87 billion in congestion costs isn’t good news, by any stretch of the imagination.)

It’s unquestionable that the recession has had an impact, giving us some momentary slack in congestion. But what will we do with the breather? When the economy begins to pick back up again and people start driving more, will we head straight back into gridlock? With driving down and public transportation up, will we make more investments in the kinds of transportation options people are clamoring for, the kinds of options that can reduce congestion and make travel more painless for everyone?

Or will congestion simply mount as the economy rebounds?

In November 2008, President Obama described America’s dependence on oil as resembling a “shock and trance” cycle. Our growing demand for foreign oil, he said, creates skyrocketing energy prices, leading to dramatic calls for energy independence and sudden cutbacks in our consumption that quickly dissipate once the price of oil drops — beginning the cycle all over again.

Transportation for America believes that the push to make our country less dependent on oil begins with a smarter, cleaner transportation system, and for this reason we’ve made one our top national transportation objectives to promote energy efficiency and achieve energy security.

While we’ll talk later this week about the programs in our Blueprint that help us reduce our dependence on oil, we wanted to explain today why we have this national objective, why our transportation system has such deep effects on our country’s energy consumption, and what performance targets are linked to this goal. As you’ll recall from the previous posts in this series, our 10 performance targets are measurable goals that will help us ensure that we achieve our objectives. While nearly all of these performance targets are important to create a more energy-secure economy, we are including two here that are particularly critical as we look towards this goal:

The transportation sector is, simply put, a massive engine behind our addiction to oil.

Each second, our transportation sector burns through 6,300 gallons of oil and produces more CO2 emissions that any nation’s entire economy except China’s. A full two-thirds of the oil consumed in the United States is used for our transportation system, and 40 percent is used to fill up gasoline tanks in our personal vehicles. Our economy is responsible for nearly 25 percent of oil consumption globally, despite the fact that we have less than three percent of the world’s oil reserves.

Click to enlarge. Reducing how much we have to drive is a popular idea.

The president made big news last week when he declared new federal fuel standards, mandating that new cars must have an average fuel economy of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016. But as many experts have told us, creating a more fuel-efficient, energy secure country does not revolve only around cars that use less gasoline. Extensive research has shown that unless we actually reduce driving by shifting to more fuel-efficient modes of transportation and meeting the pent-up consumer demand for more accessible, walkable communities, we’ll completely wipe out any gains we see from driving more fuel efficient cars and continue on the exact same energy-dependent path.

While few of us spend a lot of time thinking about how our goods movement is tied to energy efficiency, this sector of our transportation system is a critical component in our push for energy security. Trucks currently use 27 gallons of fuel for each ton of freight moved from coast to coast; at the same time, bringing the same ton of freight buy rail only uses seven gallons of fuel. And as you may have seen in their commercials for freightrailworks.org, 1 gallon of gasoline can move a ton of freight 436 miles by rail. Transferring a mere 10 percent of freight currently moved by truck to our railways would save more than one billion gallons of fuel per year.

Click to enlarge. Where we live and its impact on the cost of transportation.

As we’ve noted many times on this blog, reducing total miles traveled in automobiles is an essential part of this equation. Thanks to the automobile dependence required in many areas and the high cost of gasoline, families living in areas where the only option is to drive spend a full quarter of their income on transportation, nearly three times the percentage for people with good access to public transportation. (See graphic at right)

Americans are already changing their driving habits, supporting investment in rail, and expressing their desire to live in walkable, accessible neighborhoods. But in order to tap into these shifting preferences in our transportation policy, Transportation for America believes the federal government needs to make bold changes and targeted investments in the modern infrastructure that will make us more energy independent.

To get the details, come back later this week and see some of the specific policies and proposals included in our Blueprint that will help our transportation system achieve this goal.

• New York Times columnist Bob Herbert throws his support behind an infrastructure bank to help stimulate the economy.

• Decline in advertising sales causes more financial pain for New York City’s transit agency. (New York Times)

“Livable and Sustainable Communities.”

Those four words might not be at the top of the list of what one would expect to hear from the person in charge of how the federal government spends our tax dollars on all forms of transportation — ports, railroads, highways, interstates, sidewalks, bike lanes and more — but that’s exactly what U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood named as a primary goal for DOT while testifying before a Senate Committee yesterday (ahead of T4 America.)

In his remarks, he made it clear that DOT and the Obama administration see the deep connections between where and how we spend transportation dollars and the quality of life for everyday Americans.

One of the clear issues with our national transportation program since 1991 is that it’s been like a huge ship without a rudder — spending billions each year without any clear goals or vision for exactly what those billions should accomplish for us. Economic development? More travel options for everyone? Making transportation affordable and safe for all Americans?

After talking at length about the many challenges facing America, Secretary LaHood made it clear that DOT will be governed by some very clear principles in the future, including better quality of life as a goal for transportation spending:

With these great challenges it is essential that our transportation policies be framed so that we can meet these demands and at the same time be consistent with the major goals I have established for guiding the actions of the Department of Transportation: economic recovery; safety; and livable and sustainable communities will be the key organizing themes as we in the Department reformulate existing policies and develop new policy directions for the future.

You can download his full remarks from the committee web site here, (.pdf) but continue reading for a few select quotes:

…Since 1970, there has been a 173 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT; the total miles traveled by all U.S. vehicles), while the population grew 47 percent. In other words, VMT increased at almost four times the rate of population growth. Notwithstanding some anticipated reduction in VMT growth in the near term, reflecting the current downturn in the economy, this growth trend is clearly unsustainable.

In the past, population and economic growth have always led to large increases in highway travel. This is because most communities have built transportation systems that only allow people and goods to move by road. This Administration believes that people should have options to get to work, school, the grocery or the doctor that do not rely solely on driving. We want to transform our transportation system into a truly multimodal system with strong alternatives to driving in order to maximize highway capacity, combat traffic congestion, reduce our reliance on oil and decrease greenhouse gas emissions…

How aging America affects transportation:

Addressing the mobility needs of our citizens, we must keep in mind that an aging population will increasingly challenge our transportation system. The percentage of the population over 65 will almost double during the next 50 years, from 12 percent to 21 percent. Those older people – the people just graduating from college today – will demand a high level of mobility. This population should be able to maintain a high level of mobility without having to rely only on the automobile. Public transportation, that provides convenient and affordable transportation service, must be available. Transit-oriented, mixed-use development can especially benefit our older citizens. We need to continue our efforts to coordinate government and non-profit transportation services to make it easier for older adults – as well as people with disabilities and people with low incomes – to live independently and get where they need to go…

On livability:

Livable and Sustainable Communities

One of my highest priorities is to help promote more livable communities through safe, reliable and accessible surface transportation choices. Actions on many fronts will be required to enhance transportation’s contribution to strong and connected communities. A livable community requires that transportation solutions be tailored to the needs of the individual community or region as one-size-fits-all solutions are no longer viable.

Our initial focus will be on expanding the transportation choices available to American families. All segments of the population must have access to transportation services to get to work, housing, medical, educational, shopping, and other essential activities. Linking transportation and land-use planning to promote improved access to transit and creating walkable, bikeable communities will increase overall mobility and benefit all Americans.

The average working American family spends nearly 60 percent of its household budget on housing and transportation costs, making these two areas the largest expenses for American families. Affordable housing near transportation is an important element of livable communities and we have already started working with HUD to help provide American families with more choices for affordable housing near jobs and improve their range of transportation options while lowering their transportation costs.

Livability is not just an urban idea. The Department is working to improve livability of rural Americans as well. Many rural communities face tough choices as they try to attract economic development. They want to grow and attract new jobs but do not want to lose the unique character of the area. Transportation investments in these communities can be designed in a way to support new development while maintaining the small town character that makes these communities home.

You’ve probably heard that Americans are looking to save money and fuel by leaving their cars behind in order to walk, bike and use public transportation in historic numbers. What you might not know about is one of the most important byproducts of this shift in travel demand and decline in miles driven — much safer roads, and far fewer highway deaths.

A new release from the Federal Highway Administration shows that in 2008, a total of 37,313 people died in vehicles crashes, a nine percent decrease from the previous year and the lowest overall level in nearly 50 years. That means that almost 4,000 fewer people died in car crashes last year than in 2007 — something that comes as a rare piece of good news in a tough economic environment.

Though certain states may be making concerted efforts to ramp up safety, no one can deny that the continued drop in driving, which is due to both the economic crisis and fluctuating gas prices, has a profound effect on the safety of our roads.

While these numbers are certainly something to celebrate, they should give us no reason to think that we don’t have much more work to do. One hundred Americans still died each day on our roads last year, and our existing set of local, state and federal policies are doing little to help improve that. That’s like a small commercial airliner full of passengers crashing each day. And it’s hard to imagine that we wouldn’t be shocked into action were that the case with airline travel.

That’s why Transportation for America is pushing Congress and the Obama administration to develop a comprehensive plan for designing safe, complete streets for all users, holding states accountable for reducing fatalities and injuries, and directing targeted efforts to vulnerable groups like seniors and people in rural areas.

Help us out by joining with others to send a message to Congress urging that they support the complete streets bills to make our roads safe, hospitable and accessible for everyone who needs to use them.