greenhouse gas emissions Archives - Transportation For America

Green Light for Climate Action: Unveiling the impact of the GHG Emissions Measure rule

By mandating emissions tracking and target setting, the GHG Emissions Measure addresses an urgent need for climate action. And while this popular rule is an important first step, its success hinges on immediate and effective action at the state and local levels, which would signify a shift towards a cleaner, and greener, transportation landscape.

The United States Capitol building. (John Xavier via Flickr)

On November 22, 2023, the Department of Transportation released the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Measure rule, requiring state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to measure and report their transportation-associated emissions, as well as set targets to lower these emissions. This rule is long overdue, with a period of public comment on the rule having closed over a year ago in October 2022. More than 60,000 comments were received by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with comments in favor outweighing those opposed by more than 3,000 to 1, demonstrating overwhelming support from government agencies, and transit and advocacy groups, for progress on emissions reduction.

What does this mean for state DOTs and MPOs?

With the passage of the rule, all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, are mandated to measure GHG emissions associated with on-road mobile sources on the National Highway System (NHS) within their geographic or planning area boundaries. Additionally, state DOTs will need to establish 2 and 4-year emissions reduction targets, and MPOs will need to establish 4-year targets. State DOTs are expected to submit their first targets on February 1, 2024, signifying the administration’s endorsement of an aggressive and rapid policy rollout in the right direction. Both state DOTs and MPOs will need to consistently provide updates to report their progress in meeting their targets.

The GHG rule expands on important work in setting declining GHG emissions targets that already exist and has been implemented in 24 states and the District of Columbia. Crucially, the new rule provides a national framework and recommended method that standardizes how emissions should be calculated. A uniform calculation methodology allows for consistency across the board in emissions data that is currently produced and will be produced, and the ability to uniformly compare progress through timely updates.

State DOTs and MPOs are awarded a high degree of flexibility in setting their own declining GHG targets and pathways for achieving them, allowing alignment with their respective policy priorities. This also means that there is no incentive to set competitive targets, and there are no penalties imposed for failures to meet these set targets either. While the rule brings sunlight to progress on emissions targets, the absence of an enforcement mechanism implies that it may not drive substantial action in shifting the status quo.

Moreover, it is important to note that the emissions mandated for tracking and reporting by this rule pertain only to travel on the National Highway System (NHS), not all roads. As of 2020, the NHS represented only 5.3% of total mainline miles of roadway in the US. By solely focusing on NHS-related travel, more than 46% of the total vehicle miles traveled in the US are overlooked.

From awareness to action

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is channeling historic amounts of federal funding into states for transportation projects aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Among its programs is the Carbon Reduction program which provides funding for state projects focusing on carbon emissions reduction. These dollars hold unprecedented potential for investment in transportation projects that create climate-resilient and reliable transit networks. However, there is also the possibility that this money may continue to be invested in highway widening projects, leading to the opposite outcome of actually increasing emissions. Constituents deserve to know that their taxpayer money is going where it needs to go.

The new law arms the public with an important advocacy and transparency tool to assess whether the administration is fulfilling its promise of delivering on sustainable and equitable transportation options. This accountability encourages states and local leaders to align their work with their constituents’ goals and prioritize projects accordingly.

Confronting the climate crisis demands urgency. Changing climate conditions across the country are increasingly threatening the connectivity, efficiency, and safety of our transportation systems, impacting communities’ abilities to access daily necessities and get where they need to go. With adverse weather events impacting reliable service and recently witnessed air quality crises, the administration could not afford to delay decisive action any longer.

The science on this has also never been clearer. The Sixth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) emphasizes the unequivocal need to implement transformative change in the transportation sector. The transportation sector is the largest source of GHG emissions in the United States, and aligning climate goals with transportation agency goals is pivotal to moving closer to achieving the nation’s ambitious net-zero goals. Ultimately, the GHG performance measure should pave the way for more aggressive and ambitious climate mitigation and adaptation policies.

The GHG rule is not a silver bullet

T4A’s director, Beth Osborne, wrote in our statement on the rule that “these decisions have benefits beyond reducing emissions, like providing people with more opportunities to travel outside of a car, which enhances safety and mobility.” It is important to remember that achieving climate targets and creating equitable communities hinges on breaking free from car dependency. Electrification and vehicle efficiency, on their own, will not lead us out of the climate crisis. Our report, Driving Down Emissions, underscores the importance of accounting for factors like induced demand and shifting away from car-oriented land use in efforts to reduce emissions.

The GHG rule is a valuable, first step on a long path towards ensuring climate accountability and transparency in our transportation system, but we must continue to capitalize on this momentum to ensure that our transportation agencies move in the right direction. While we applaud the release of the new rule, it is evident that we need immediate and effective implementation and investment in greener forms of transportation, if the law will have the much-needed impact it intends.

Advocates call for White House council to track and reduce emissions

A man rolls a stroller down a wide sidewalk along a tree-lined street with a painted bike lane and crosswalk

While NEPA exists to protect the environment and communities, it has long fallen short of addressing climate emissions and protecting disadvantaged communities. In response to a call for comments about new guidance on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, Transportation for America joined a nine-member working group to urge the White House to address transportation’s role in climate emissions and historic injustices. Read the full comments here.

On January 6, 2023, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) released Guidance on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change, directing federal agencies to improve the evaluation of climate impacts in environmental reviews as part of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process.

The CEQ, created in 1970 with the passage of NEPA, is a body that oversees federal agencies’ implementation of NEPA-required environmental assessments of federally funded projects. As the lead body for the NEPA process, the CEQ’s Guidance determines the scope of scrutiny that projects must undergo through the NEPA process. However, for decades, the NEPA process and the CEQ have ignored or understated the significant role that federally approved transportation projects play in contributing to climate change emissions and overburdening Black and Brown communities.

The current approach from CEQ allows agencies like the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to sign off on faulty traffic models that fail to account for the role increased highway capacity has in increasing car usage and the associated CO₂ and fine particle pollution that follows. Inaccurate models used today often project, paradoxically, that new highways will reduce harmful emissions. But decades of previous experience have consistently shown that these projects worsen the congestion problems they were built to solve, while harming the communities they go through.

New highways, roads, and lanes are proven to induce more driving, a process called “induced demand.” Read more on induced demand and its impact on emissions here.

In response to the White House’s call for public comments on the CEQ interim guidance and in partnership with Coalition for Smarter Growth, Elders Climate Action, Equiticity, Institute for Transportation Development Policy, National Association of City Transportation Officials, Sierra Club, RMI, and the Southern Environmental Law Center, Transportation for America called for the CEQ to improve its Guidance to accurately measure, report, and minimize the production of greenhouse gasses from the transportation sector, one of the nation’s most polluting sectors. To do so, the coalition urged CEQ to take the following actions:

Ensure that transportation agencies’ actions and plans reduce emissions in order to meet the country’s international commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Direct FHWA and states to include realistic assessments of how transportation infrastructure investments could contribute to or reduce greenhouse gas emissions

Devise criteria in the NEPA process that prioritizes actions to reverse damage to community health from transportation infrastructure projects.

By taking into account these comments and other points included in the working group’s response to the Guidance, the CEQ can align the NEPA process with national climate policy. More detail on why the Council on Environmental Quality should consider these goals and how they would achieve them is included in the full comments document.

Read the full comments

No time to lose: Federal rule ready to boost awareness of transportation emissions

10/14 Update: Comments are now closed. More than 60,000 comments on a new rule to measure greenhouse gases from transportation were submitted to USDOT during a comment period that closed on 10/13. Comments in favor outweighed those opposed by more than 3,000 to 1. If the Biden administration moves forward, this new rule could reestablish sunlight and accountability for transportation’s impact on climate change. Here’s what’s next for the proposed measure.

Note 10/24: The FHWA’s final count of comments and submissions is 62,319, but some submissions included more than one comment, which means the actual number of comments is likely higher. A coalition of advocates determined that over 100,000 comments were submitted in favor of the rule.

States were recently granted a historic amount of federal transportation funds, which provides a great deal of flexibility in how states can use their funds. Even though transportation is the largest contributor to U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, states currently have no requirement to track their projects’ impacts on transportation climate emissions. The proposed GHG emissions measure would reestablish this requirement, previously rolled back under the Trump administration, and help states and MPOs take climate concerns into account in their spending decisions.

Find out how this rule and state actions can reduce emissions here.

Black and brown communities are disproportionately impacted by climate change, and the Biden administration set a goal to advance environmental justice. Justice40 aims to deliver 40 percent of the benefits of federal climate and clean energy investments to communities of color. (For more information about Justice40, read our past blog post.) However, without any sort of tracking in place at the state level for GHG emissions, any Justice40 benefits for marginalized communities could be dwarfed by the consequences of unchecked emissions levels rising overall.

So far, the rule is experiencing a wave of support from advocates, organizations, concerned citizens, and even state DOTs.

However, once comments close, the Biden administration will have to decide what happens next.

Many states are willing and prepared to take on the urgency of the moment. We wrote last month that 24 states and the District of Columbia already have emissions tracking rules in place, some that are more aggressive than what the federal government is proposing. In addition, the FHWA can and should commit to providing tools and best practices to states and MPOs to help them meet their GHG reduction targets. The USDOT can also shed more light on state emissions by providing accessible, user-friendly data for state and regional policymakers, whose job is to ensure that state transportation decisions align with voters’ priorities.

Urgency is needed. The reestablishment of this commonsense measure was one of the first actions we called on the Biden administration to take when they took office. It has been a long time coming, and we are pleased to see an end in sight. Now the administration must be careful not to delay the rule further. The federal funds granted under the 2021 infrastructure law have already started flowing into states’ hands, and shovels are hitting the ground. States are currently making decisions about long-term transportation projects that could make emissions worse. To set them up for success, the administration should finalize the rule quickly and require states’ GHG targets be set within 6 months of the final rule. Failure to act will only move the administration further from its goals and our country further from reducing transportation impacts on climate change.

Comments are now closed. Read more about the rule on NACTO’s site here.

Read our comment.

Four ways states and the Biden administration can curb transportation pollution

Traffic Backup on I-95 North at the Intersection with the Downtown Expressway in Richmond

Last month, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) proposed a new rule that will require states to measure and set goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with highways. This is a critical tool to foster accountability and steer infrastructure investments toward better climate outcomes. It’s essential for the USDOT to finalize this rule and for states to lead the way in realizing its full potential.

This post was written in partnership with Evergreen Action.

The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measure (GGEM), would require state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions tied to highways on the National Highway System (i.e. Interstates and US Routes). This proposal is a key action that Evergreen, Transportation for America, and other advocates have called for. Because the transportation sector emits more greenhouse gas pollution than any other sector of the American economy, data collected from this measure will be a vital tool to support investments in alternative transportation modes, better protect disadvantaged communities, and advance President Biden’s climate goals.

Following the enactment of the critical climate and infrastructure investments contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act (IIJA), Congress and the Biden administration must each play a role in ensuring that these resources are implemented effectively and equitably. At the same time, increased ambition at the state level and bold executive action are essential in order to attain further emissions reductions. New federal rules that enable states to push the envelope are needed to tackle the largest sources of climate pollution, and that includes our transportation sector.

So what is this rule all about?

In 2012 Congress passed the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), a two-year transportation authorization bill following nearly 3 years of stop-gap extensions. MAP-21 represented a tentative step towards accountability for the billions of dollars the federal government allocates to states every year for transportation, by codifying seven different performance categories for federal highway programs. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) created performance measures and subsequently required state DOTs to set performance targets aligned with these goals.

In 2017, the Obama administration proposed requiring states to measure greenhouse gas pollution from their surface transportation systems (i.e. roads, highways, transit, etc) for the first time, consistent with the goal of environmental sustainability established by MAP-21. Many construction industry stakeholders opposed it, likely viewing it as a threat to business as usual. Unsurprisingly, the Trump administration sided with industry and repealed the measure before it was fully implemented.

But a new and improved version of this measure is back, under the Biden administration. In early July, the FHWA proposed a new draft rule for a GGEM that would establish a method for state DOTs to calculate greenhouse gas emissions. Rather than a one-size-fits-all target set by the USDOT, states would be permitted to set their own unique declining targets that collectively lead the US towards net-zero emissions by 2050. Critically, the draft GGEM rule would require these targets to continuously decrease, to cut emissions over time in each state. The proposal is a big step forward from the status quo, but still limited in scope. For example, states face no penalties for failing to meet their established targets.

Here are the four actions the Biden administration and state DOTs must take for this proposal to be successful:

1. The Biden administration must finalize a strong performance measure rule ASAP

While the IIJA is not a transformative climate bill, states have a wide berth in deciding how to allocate formula funding under IIJA. The law also establishes new categories of climate mitigation funding, like the Carbon Reduction Program, and expands the kinds of investments eligible under legacy programs like the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. In short, governors and state governments will determine, through the decisions they make about what to build, whether or not the IIJA leads to reductions in climate pollution. However, without the proposed rule, the public has no way to hold states accountable for reducing emissions with the windfall of infrastructure money from the IIJA.

Right now, the FHWA has opened a public comment period for the proposed rule through October 13, 2022. Just like in 2017, this rule is already meeting fierce resistance, from both industry and Senate Republicans.

Some stakeholders are falsely claiming that this proposed rulemaking is outside the scope of the performance measures set forth by Congress in MAP-21. Many congressional leaders who were involved in passing that legislation have set the record straight, emphasizing that this proposal will “fulfill the original congressional intent…” There is plenty of flexibility for states built into the existing rule and the Biden administration must finalize a strong performance measure.

2. The Biden administration should factor in state performance when evaluating other competitive grant programs, and FHWA should improve its performance dashboard

Although most federal transportation funding is formula-based, the USDOT can influence policy significantly through discretionary funds like the Secretary’s RAISE grants or the Reconnecting Communities Program. To ensure the greenhouse gas performance measure doesn’t just “sit on the shelf,” the department should assess the relative ambitions of state greenhouse gas reduction targets and progress states achieve as it awards competitive funds. The Biden administration should also incorporate implementation of the measure into criteria for new programs created by the Inflation Reduction Act, including the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program and the EPA’s new Climate Pollution Reduction grants.

Moreover, because of the non-binding nature of the performance measure proposed, it’s essential that the emissions data and targets of each state are properly advertised and disseminated. This will allow the data to facilitate increased accountability. Right now, the FHWA’s dashboard for state performance data is buried on its website and the information is not frequently discussed or publicized. Going forward, the FHWA and the Office of the Secretary should reinvigorate the dashboard and regularly update stakeholders and the broader public regarding the progress states are making in setting and reaching their declining targets.

3. States should incorporate performance measures in state policy and go beyond USDOT’s proposal

*Washington State’s Move Ahead Washington program invests in public transportation and other sustainable travel options. Flickr photo by SounderBruce*

Because the targets required by the draft GGEM would be non-binding, it will ultimately be up to states to make their greenhouse gas targets meaningful in a local context. Going forward, states must better prioritize climate in transportation policy and funding decisions. Many states are already measuring greenhouse gas pollution in the transportation sector in some capacity and tailoring their long-range plans, short-term capital plans, and overall investment strategies accordingly. The following model policies should be considered as states move forward with accessing IIJA/IRA funding and implementing the performance measure.

Colorado: The Colorado Transportation Commission recently approved a new rule that will set mandatory greenhouse gas reduction goals for each MPO. These goals must be incorporated into investments identified in each region’s short and long-term transportation plans. The regional goals can be achieved by reprioritizing planned projects or investing in new mitigation strategies. In most cases, this will mean shifting investments away from the construction and expansion of highways and towards public transit and improvements to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Minnesota: Even as demand for electric vehicles has grown and the Biden administration acts to raise fuel efficiency standards for cars, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the United States continue to increase. States have a tremendous opportunity to act where the federal government has not and institute policies that tackle auto dependency. Minnesota recently adopted a statewide goal to reduce VMT statewide by 20 percent by 2050. More states need to look beyond electric vehicles and work towards shifting travel towards the most sustainable and equitable modes of transportation.

Washington: Washington State DOT is not waiting for the federal government and has already implemented a performance measure for greenhouse gas pollution associated with the National Highway System infrastructure inside the state. Emissions and targets are reported to the federal government biennially. Earlier this year, Washington also enacted Move Ahead Washington, a significant transportation funding package that invests heavily in public transportation and other sustainable modes aimed at reducing car travel.

4. States should implement an equity-first approach to meeting targets

States will have significant discretion when deciding how and where to spend transportation-related IIJA funds, and they should ensure they deploy federal funds with a focus on communities that are already impacted by transportation planning and pollution. Black, Brown, Indigenous, and low-income communities suffer the most from vehicle pollution and are historically least likely to receive government investments. By prioritizing these underserved and overburdened communities, states can ensure they are supporting their most vulnerable populations while reducing pollution.

Additionally, state policymakers need to pay careful attention to wealth disparities between white users of the transportation system and people of color, which impact both mode choice and job access. States should consider new incentives for used electric vehicles to supplement the credit for used vehicles contained in the Inflation Reduction Act, and also need to take significant steps to build out networks of Complete Streets and make public transportation more reliable and affordable. Finally, state departments of transportation should prioritize investments that begin repairing past racist policy decisions that were meant to intentionally divide neighborhoods.

Key takeaway

The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas pollution in the United States. Because most transportation investment decisions are made at the state level, the USDOT’s new Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measure is a critical tool to foster accountability and steer infrastructure investments away from expanding highways and towards vehicle electrification, public transportation, and improvements for other sustainable modes of travel like biking and walking. It’s essential for the USDOT to finalize this rule and for states to lead the way in realizing its full potential.

Transportation for America applauds new emissions rule, “a vital first step”

In response to the USDOT’s newly proposed rule for states and municipalities to track and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, Transportation for America Director Beth Osborne offered this statement:

The Biden administration took an important step today in holding states to account for their transportation emissions. This proposed rule will provide sunlight and accountability on how our tax dollars are being spent and the results of our investments, including the $643 billion approved for transportation in last year’s infrastructure law.
To create a more efficient, less polluting transportation system, we have to start by measuring the transportation sector’s greenhouse gas emissions, and then set targets for reducing them. States have enormous flexibility in how they spend federal taxpayer dollars, but there is little accountability to push them to meet federal goals. Today’s action by the administration will be critical to shedding light on state emissions and arming advocates, decision-makers, and taxpayers with the information they need.
This is also an achievable task for states. 24 states (plus the District of Columbia) already measure emissions from transportation in some form.
This is a vital first step, but there is still more the administration can and should do. We urge the USDOT to be bold and consider state progress on these new emissions goals when awarding discretionary grant funding, particularly for projects related to emissions reduction like the Carbon Reduction Program.
State DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) will now have the opportunity to set decreasing emissions targets, and they should not drag their feet in doing so. We stand ready to help them succeed.

A way to improve the infrastructure deal

The transportation programs for the budget reconciliation package would help fill the gaps left by the bipartisan infrastructure deal.

Close-up of Capitol building — *Photo by S Chia on Flickr*

Update 9/21: This post was updated to include progress made in the House since its original post date.

Congress’ final infrastructure deal (the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act) didn’t live up to the original bipartisan package announced with pride by the White House and Senate on June 24, cutting transit funding by $10 billion while almost all other areas matched the original proposal. The House’s budget reconciliation package takes steps to restore this funding, while also going further to provide equitable access to goods and services, improve climate outcomes, and reduce the negative impacts of the transportation system on disadvantaged communities.

The House’s reconciliation package includes a new $10 billion transit program, helping to rectify the $10 billion taken from transit in the final bipartisan infrastructure bill. This funding includes flexibility for operations support, which will be key for transit agencies hit hard by the pandemic. It’s also specifically designed to connect residents of disadvantaged or persistent poverty communities to jobs and essential services.

Another win for equity: the budget also provides $4 billion for communities negatively impacted by transportation. These funds can be used to improve walkability, reduce the public health impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and improve road safety.

There’s an additional $4 billion for incentive grants for states that reduce GHG emissions significantly or adopt targets to reach zero emissions by 2050. Funding is also included for USDOT to institute a GHG emissions performance measure to help prioritize projects that reduce travel time and emissions. Former President Trump repealed this measure and reinstating it is one of our key tasks for the Biden administration.

To help address needs at a local level, the House added $6 billion to advance local surface transportation projects.

The House also added $10 billion for the planning and development of public high-speed rail projects and $150 million for credit risk premium assistance, making it easier for smaller railroads to access and benefit from these funds. This funding will help improve passenger rail service, making it a more convenient and reliable form of transportation.

We enthusiastically support these programs and encourage you to tell your senator to include them in the final budget reconciliation package.

Three ways reconciliation can restore funds taken from transit and equity

Nancy Pelosi speaking into a microphone with Chuck Schumer on her right, AFGE behind her

With the bipartisan infrastructure deal approved by the Senate, opportunities to shift long-term transportation policy will shift to the House and to program implementation. The opportunity in the House is through targeted investments via the budget reconciliation bill that will accompany the House infrastructure bill vote.

(UPDATE 8/18: Clarified details on the passage of the Affordable Care Act)

After a strong five-year reauthorization proposal was approved by the House, the Senate transformed their reauthorization offering into a larger bipartisan infrastructure deal, funding everything from broadband to water infrastructure, which passed the Senate last week. This deal, which was crafted and passed in the Senate with the White House’s backing, doubled down on maintaining the status quo in regards to transportation policy, focusing on highway construction and expansion without incorporating maintenance of roads and bridges as the priority, improving transportation safety, and better connecting communities.

Rep. Peter DeFazio criticized the deal, specifically citing the bill’s treatment of public transportation.

From Washington Post Live

Speaker Nancy Pelosi reportedly refused to approve the Senate’s deal, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act without the Senate first approving a sweeping budget reconciliation bill that focuses on strategic national investments across a broad spectrum of infrastructure concerns, including but not limited to agriculture, environment (air and water), education, first responders, and public health. The Senate granted her wish, passing a budget resolution, kicking off the reconciliation process, and this bill provides an opportunity to invest more in transit funding, including transit operations.

What is budget reconciliation?

As noted in the graphic below, the Senate budget resolution provides key directions to specific committees on both the House and Senate side on how to program the specific budget called for in the resolution. (Budget reconciliation is often used to pass more controversial or partisan legislation. For example, the final Affordable Care Act package resulted from the House passing the Senate’s healthcare bill and then amending it through the reconciliation process. However, reconciliation only happens once each year as part of the annual budget-making process.) The House will return next week, with respective committees deliberating how they will program and craft legislative text to the directives of the Senate’s budget resolution, before cobbling together the final reconciliation bill for passage in both chambers of Congress.

Diagram listing the steps of budget reconciliation — Image from Peter G. Peterson Foundation

As the respective committees in the House and Senate contemplate legislative text for the final reconciliation bill, there are key restrictions for what can be included. Unfortunately, introducing brand new policies or making major policy changes not connected directly to new funding are difficult if not impossible.

As the graphic illustrates, any legislative text in the final reconciliation must pertain to policy that has budgetary impacts and stays within the programming directions and funding limits of the budget resolution.

Table showing changes that are permitted and not permitted in budget reconciliation — Image from Twitter/ House Budget GOP

As it pertains to transportation, the resolution allocates $60 billion to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to program as they deem prudent, while also adding unspoken pressure not to revisit items called for in the IIJA. The resolution also calls for an additional $30 billion for respective Senate committees focused on surface transportation to program accordingly.

Within those constraints in place for this reconciliation process, T4America has outlined three key investments that need to be made to better connect communities and improve equity and climate outcomes.

1. Increasing public transportation funding levels by $10 billion

The original bipartisan infrastructure framework, agreed to and announced by the President and the Senator’s part of the negotiations in June, called for $49 billion for transit. As the final IIJA was set, transit was the only part of the plan that took a cut (of $10 billion) from that original proposal, down to $39 billion. Less money for transit means greater challenges for transit agencies, for keeping transit running, and making the necessary capital investments, including transit electrification. There is much more that can be done to improve transit, but advocating simply for restoring the agreed funding amount is an easy fix within the limits of the budget resolution.

2. Increasing funding for the reconnecting communities program by $12 billion

President Biden’s American Jobs Plan (AJP) contained approximately $24 billion for reconnecting communities (tearing down highways that separate marginalized communities, reintegrating community mobility and streetscapes). The Senate’s deal slashed that program down to just $1 billion. (The House’s INVEST Act allocated $20 billion.) By restoring at least some of this program’s funding, meaningful progress can be made to reconnect and reinvest in diverse communities across the United States.

3. Increasing funding for zero-emission vehicles and charging infrastructure by $7.5 billion

Currently, transportation is responsible for a significant portion of climate change-inducing emissions, but emerging technologies are making it possible for reliable zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). Meeting the moment with significant investments in ZEVs (especially medium and heavy duty vehicles such as transit, school bus, and municipal fleet vehicles) and their associated charging infrastructure will help drastically curb emissions. This funding would also involve investments in domestic manufacturing to help ramp up capacity and lower costs to deliver on ZEVs and their charging infrastructure.

While Congress is in recess and members are in their home districts, it is a great time for constituents to engage their members on these issues. Share these three simple, key investment priorities for reconciliation with your members of Congress, while explaining what these investments can mean in your local community in regards to jobs, equity, and climate change.

The Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act re-introduced in the Senate today

Today, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Tom Carper (D-DE), and Representative Jared Huffman (CA-02) re-introduced a bill that would measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. This would be transformative.

We originally wrote this blog when the bill was first introduced in July 2019—we hope that 2021 is the year it becomes law.

Crossing the street in Boston. Photo by Yu-Jen Shih on Flickr’s Creative Commons.

Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), contributing 28 percent of the United States’ total GHG emissions. While many other sectors have improved, transportation is headed in the wrong direction. Driving represents 83 percent of all transportation emissions and these emissions are rising—despite cleaner fuels, more efficient and electric vehicles—because people are driving more and making longer trips.

Unfortunately, our federal transportation program forces people to drive more by measuring success through vehicle speed—not the time it actually takes people to reach their destination. Building wider highways and sprawling cities to accommodate high-speed driving creates a feedback loop of more driving, virtually guaranteeing ever-increasing transportation emissions (and congestion).

To reduce emissions we must make it possible for people to take fewer and shorter car trips, as well as make it easy and convenient for people to bike, walk and use transit. But we can’t do this if we only measure and value high speed car trips. The bill introduced today would change what we measure and value in transportation to include reducing GHG and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

The Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act, introduced by Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Tom Carper (D-DE) and Representative Jared Huffman (CA-02), will create new performance measures and goals requiring that states measure, and reduce, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG in their transportation systems. Read more about the bill on Senator Markey’s website.

“Business-as-usual is building bad highways and breaking our planet — we can build smarter, safer, and healthier systems if we factor climate impacts and emissions into our decision-making process,” said Senator Markey, a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee and co-author of the Green New Deal resolution. “We can advance the goals of clean energy, climate progress, and healthy communities, as well as fortify ourselves against the adverse impacts of climate change. An essential component of that effort is to re-envision how we plan for, construct, and maintain our national highway system, using climate measures that matter and ensure that we hold systems accountable.”

To reduce VMT and GHG, states would likely have to employ a variety of strategies, including better transportation options and smarter land use. These strategies come with a host of benefits besides reducing GHG: reduced congestion, lower household transportation costs, safer streets, more attractive communities and better health outcomes. By measuring how successful transportation projects are by how many destinations—like jobs, schools, and grocery stores— people can access, the federal government can incentivize states and local governments to invest in transit, biking, and walking, as well as build places closer together.

“Our transportation system gives many Americans no choice but to drive everywhere, which is no surprise because our transportation program is designed to consider only vehicle speed, not whether people (driving, taking transit, walking, rolling or biking) reach their destination. We need to measure what matters,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “Doing so will help give Americans more freedom to choose how to get around, save them money, and also reduce the harmful emissions wreaking havoc on our climate. We are hopeful that the re-introduced GREEN Streets Act will resume an important conversation about aligning federal funding with the outcomes we deserve from our transportation system, and we are pleased to support it.”

Transportation for America strongly supports the GREEN Streets Act and urges Congress to pass this transformative legislation.

Over 75 organizations and elected officials want the greenhouse gas performance measure reinstated

Reducing transportation emissions is necessary to slow down climate change. Which is why in less than a week, over 75 organizations and elected officials signed a letter by Transportation for America urging the Biden administration to reinstate the greenhouse gas (GHG) performance measure for transportation. This letter supported a similar effort in Congress led by Senator Cardin and Rep. Blumenauer.

Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States, and the bulk of them come from driving. Reducing these emissions is critical—but in 2018, the Trump administration repealed a performance measure that would have required states to measure greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions when planning new highway projects.

That’s why in less than a week, over 75 organizations and elected officials urged the Biden administration in a letter to reinstate the GHG performance measure. This letter was sent to Secretary Buttigieg along with a letter by Senator Ben Cardin and Congressman Earl Blumenauer, signed by 47 Senators and Members of Congress, who asked the secretary to “urgently” restore this performance measure.

Restoring the GHG performance measure can be done immediately through executive action initiating a notice of proposed rulemaking. According to Transport Topics in 2018, “The proposed measurement rule would have required state DOTs and MPOs to undertake administrative activities to establish targets, calculate their progress toward their selected targets, report to [the Federal Highway Administration] and determine a plan of action to make progress toward their selected targets if they failed to make significant progress during a performance period.”

Please read the full letter—with the list of 80 signatories—here. For more on the connection between transportation and greenhouse gas emissions, check out our latest report: Driving Down Emissions.

House’s new climate action plan takes a page from T4America’s playbook

Last week, the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis released a new legislative blueprint for tackling climate change that incorporates a number of T4America’s recommendations. The blueprint goes beyond merely electrifying vehicles to take a much wider view—prioritizing repair, safety, and access, and promoting transit, biking, and walking.

Riding a Citi Bike in New York City. Photo by Thomas Hawk on Flickr’s Creative Commons

For too long, electric cars have been the sole focal point of legislative efforts to reduce transportation emissions. Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), contributing 29 percent of the United States’ total greenhouse gas emissions—and the majority of these emissions come from driving. Electric vehicles (EV) would seem like a guaranteed way to bring those emissions down, but they are not enough. Increasing rates of driving are negating even impressive gains in fuel efficiency and EV adoption. Between 1990-2016, a 50 percent increase in driving negated a 35 percent increase in overall fleet fuel efficiency brought on by the implementation of CAFE standards. This caused emissions to rise by 21 percent over the same time period.

To truly bring down transportation emissions, we need to think #BeyondEVs. We need to stop building expensive, unnecessary new roads that just increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT). We need to stop making car ownership a prerequisite for participating in the economy. We need to actually measure emissions from the transportation sector, and penalize states for pursuing projects that fail to bring those emissions down. We need to focus on the low-carbon modes that can improve people’s lives: transit, walking, and biking.

This is what we recommended to the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis in November 2019 when they asked us for strategies to reduce emissions. The Committee released their new legislative blueprint for tackling climate change last week, and we are incredibly pleased to see our recommendations shaping the transportation section.

Here are the T4America recommendations for moving #BeyondEVs that found a home in the new blueprint.

Measure what matters: Greenhouse gas emissions and access

The House blueprint recommends creating a new performance measure for greenhouse gas emissions, requiring states and metro areas to measure emissions and then create plans for lowering them—just like in the INVEST Act. “It gets a lot harder to justify building a new highway (that you probably can’t afford to maintain anyway) when you have to reduce emissions with your federal dollars, considering that every 1 percent increase in lane miles results in a 1 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled,” as Smart Growth America wrote in this more expansive blog on the House blueprint.

The blueprint also takes steps to increase access to jobs and services by all modes, a climate-forward proposition that starts to make moving people—not just vehicles— the focus of transportation funding. “The House Select Committee adopted our core priority to start measuring access to destinations, directing states and MPOs to start evaluating how well the transportation system is facilitating access to housing, jobs, and critical services by any and all modes—similar to provisions that were included in the INVEST Act,” as Smart Growth America wrote in this more expansive blog on the House blueprint. The blueprint also directs agencies to analyze how low-income communities and communities of color experience difference degrees of access to jobs and services.

Make roads safer to walk, bike, and ride transit

Walking, biking, and riding transit are the lowest-emitting modes of transportation, but dangerous streets and disconnected communities make them difficult for many Americans to reap their benefits. The Committee makes numerous recommendations throughout the plan to prioritize funding for low-carbon transportation, especially walking and biking—and not just by increasing funding for the Transportation Alternatives Program, which receives only a meager $750 million for biking and walking projects across the country.

Measuring access instead of vehicle speed, as noted above, would begin to improve safety for all road users by measuring access by all modes—that includes walking, biking, and riding transit. But the plan also recommends requiring states to use “complete streets” and context-sensitive principles, using language that actually comes directly from T4America’s long letter of recommendations for the Committee.

Stop building needless new roads by prioritizing maintenance

Prioritizing repair is not the kind of strategy that is on the radar of most climate advocates, but it would in fact make a huge difference by stemming the trend of inducing more driving, making it an incredibly effective climate policy that could be easily implemented. How so? The nation’s roads are deteriorating, contributing to a looming financial problem, yet states consistently underinvest in maintenance and build new roads instead that bring increases in emissions. As we found in our report Repair Priorities (cited by the House Select Committee in their blueprint), between 2009 and 2017, the percentage of the roads nationwide in poor condition increased from 14 to 20 percent. At the same time many states continued to spend a significant portion of funding to build new roads.

As we discussed above, building new roads increases driving, with every 1 percent increase in lane miles resulting in a 1 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled. Prioritizing maintenance means that states can’t use federal funds to build new roads while neglecting their basic maintenance needs—a requirement that was included in the recently-passed INVEST Act.

It’s time to go #BeyondEVs—and the House majority agrees

With driving contributing the majority of U.S. transportation emissions, it’s time to shift our focus from reducing pollution from all the cars to asking: “why do we need all those cars in the first place, and can we drive them less overall?” Because we know that electrifying cars isn’t enough. We will not be able to electrify vehicles faster than vehicle miles traveled are increasing—the consequence of our national transportation strategy prioritizing vehicle access above all else.

To substantially reduce our GHG emissions, we need to couple electrification with strategies that cut to the heart of our problem: too much driving. We’re pleased to see so many of our recommendations included in the Committee’s blueprint, and are excited to continue to push the needle towards reducing emissions with our new partners in the House.

House transportation bill goes big on climate

House transportation leaders introduced legislation to update our national transportation program to address climate, equity, safety and public health. Climate advocates and climate leaders on the Hill should recognize the strides taken with this proposal from Congress and fight to protect those changes in the bill.

This is a joint post by Transportation for America and Third Way, co-written by Rayla Bellis, T4America program manager, and Alexander Laska, Third Way Transportation Policy Advisor for the Climate and Energy Program. It is also posted on Third Way’s site.

The House transportation committee’s markup of the INVEST Act starts at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, June 17th. View our amendment tracker here, get real-time updates by following @t4america on Twitter, visit our hub for all T4America content about the INVEST Act, and take action by sending a message to your representative if they sit on this House committee.

While it isn’t perfect, the INVEST Act introduced in the House takes some very important steps, including:

Measuring and tracking important outcomes like GHG emissions and access to jobs and services.
Making significant progress towards electrifying our vehicle and transit fleets; and
Supporting investments in low emissions transportation modes, including:
- Supporting transit with more money and better policy; and
- Supporting biking and walking with a comprehensive approach to improving safety.

For too long, federal transportation policy has prioritized car travel and the infrastructure to support it while neglecting cleaner and more affordable transportation options like transit, walking, and biking. We are now seeing the consequences of decades of spending in line with those priorities: car-ownership is a prerequisite for participating in the economy in most communities, and many people are driving further every year to reach work and daily necessities. It is unsafe, inconvenient, or flat-out impossible to reach those destinations by any other means in much of the country. As a result, transportation is now the nation’s single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), accounting for 29 percent of emissions, 83 percent of which comes from driving. While cars and trucks will and should remain an important part of our transportation system, any effective strategy to reduce emissions from transportation must make it easier for Americans to take fewer and shorter car trips to access work and meet basic needs.

Last week the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee released their transportation reauthorization proposal. Third Way and Transportation for America unveiled a scorecard earlier this week to show how the new House reauthorization proposal and previous Senate proposal stack up against the recommendations in our new Transportation and Climate Federal Policy Agenda. The House bill makes significant strides in several areas in line with our federal policy agenda:

Measures and tracks important outcomes

We measure all the wrong things in our transportation system and therefore get the wrong outcomes. Instead of measuring whether people can get where they need to go (e.g., jobs, healthcare, and grocery stores), we measure how fast cars are moving. Rather than being required to reduce transportation emissions, states are distributed more money if their residents drive more and burn more gasoline.

The House bill takes important steps in reversing these perverse incentives. It requires states to measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from their transportation system (a similar requirement from USDOT was rolled back early in the Trump administration). States that reduce emissions can be rewarded with increased flexibility, while states that fail to reduce emissions will face penalties. This is a major shift, and it will lead to significantly different outcomes if states are truly held accountable to these requirements.

In addition, the bill requires a new performance measure to help states and MPOs evaluate how well their transportation systems provide access to jobs and services. This access measure is monumental. For the first time at the national level, recipients of federal transportation funding will be required to measure whether their transportation system is performing its most essential function: connecting people to the things they need, whether they drive, take transit, walk or bike. This will have profound impacts in communities, including directing more funds to projects that shorten or eliminate the need for driving trips. It also happens that providing a high level of access, especially for nondrivers, correlates with lower GHG emissions.

Makes significant progress towards electrification

Decarbonizing our transportation system will require us to transition quickly to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs)–and that means making sure we have the infrastructure ready to support those vehicles. The INVEST In America Act establishes a new $1.4 billion program to deploy electric vehicle charging and hydrogen fueling infrastructure in public places where everyone will have access. The grant program will focus on projects that demonstrate the most effective emissions reductions. We believe the program should additionally focus on ensuring this infrastructure is accessible to low-income communities; this, combined with policies to make ZEVs more affordable, will help ensure all Americans can benefit from the air quality improvements and other benefits of clean vehicles.

The bill also reorients federal funding for transit buses towards electric vehicles by boosting funds for the Low- and No-Emission Vehicle Program five-fold, incentivizing the purchase of electric fleets, and requiring a plan for transitioning to a 100 percent electric bus fleet. This improved program, and other transit reforms, will help transit agencies procure electric and other clean buses, as well as the refueling infrastructure to support them. Transit is already a lower-carbon alternative to driving, and shifting our fleet towards clean buses will make it even more so. Ultimately, all federal funding for bus procurement should go towards low- and no-emission buses, but the significant increase for this program is a good start.

Supports transit with more money and better policy

Too many Americans must drive because they either are not served by transit or only have access to infrequent, unreliable, and inconvenient service. Transit has been underfunded for decades at the federal level despite the significant benefits it provides to communities: reduced emissions, improved economic opportunity, a way out of congestion, cleaner air, mobility choice, better health outcomes, and improved quality of life. Our failure to invest sufficiently in transit has disproportionately impacted low-income people and people of color, who are more likely to rely on transit to access jobs and services.

The House bill gives transit a big increase in overall funding: 47 percent. Equally importantly, however, it changes some policies that have long obstructed transit as a truly viable option in communities. For years, federal transit funding has incentivized lowering operating costs (usually accomplished by offering less or infrequent service) at the expense of building transit that best serves people’s needs. The new bill includes policies that shift those incentives, focusing instead on frequency of service. This will make transit a real option for more people in more communities.

Supports biking and walking with a comprehensive approach to improving safety

Dangerous road conditions pose one of the biggest barriers to taking short trips by walking or biking in many communities, leading to unnecessary driving trips that increase traffic and emissions. Between 2008 and 2017, drivers struck and killed 49,340 people walking on streets nationwide, and pedestrian fatalities have risen by 35 percent over the past decade. People of color, older adults and people walking in low-income communities are disproportionately represented in these fatal crashes.

The House proposal takes a comprehensive approach to make walking and biking safer through a combination of increased funding, policy reform, and better provisions to hold states accountable. For example:

The bill requires Complete Street design principles and makes $250 million available for active transportation projects including Complete Streets.
It proposes changes to how speed limits are set to prioritize safety results over a faster auto trip.
It requires states with the highest levels of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities to set aside funds to address those needs.
The bill would also prohibit states from the current practice of setting annual targets for roadway fatalities that are negative—in other words, targets that assume the current trend line of increased fatalities is unstoppable, essentially accepting more fatalities every year as an unavoidable cost.

The House bill isn’t perfect, but is a significant improvement over the Senate’s proposal

While the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s proposal takes many steps in the right direction, it still misses the mark in some areas based on our agenda. It still includes significant funding for highways without the proper restrictions in place to avoid unnecessary buildout of new lane-miles we can’t afford to maintain, and congestion relief is still a primary goal embedded throughout the proposed program. This ultimately prioritizes the same types of transportation investments we have seen for decades.

Yet, the House bill takes significant steps that the Senate EPW bill introduced last year did not. In contrast to the broad, holistic approach the House bill takes to addressing emissions, the Senate bill introduced some new (but relatively weak) stand-alone programs to address emissions, congestion, and other important topics. Importantly, the Senate bill did not make any needed changes to the core federal formula programs, continuing to direct the vast majority of funding into programs that incentivize building high-speed roads and making travel by any means other than driving — and emitting — impossible for most Americans.

Bottom line: the House’s proposal could be a game-changer for climate, equity, and safety goals

The House’s proposal introduces more substantial reforms to our national transportation program than we have seen in years, and many of the changes will directly support reduced emissions, environmental justice, and other important goals. This is a big deal, but the magnitude of the changes may not be readily apparent. Many of the most transformative proposals do not sound like climate initiatives because they do not specifically reference emissions or address electrification. Instead they change funding formulas, policies, and performance measures that, over decades, have produced a transportation system that requires more and longer car trips and greater emissions.

Climate advocates and climate leaders on the Hill should recognize the strides taken with this proposal from Congress and fight to protect those changes in the bill. Advocates for preserving the status quo are preparing to fight these important changes. We need climate advocates to do the same to defend them.

House bill sets new standard for GREEN Streets

Last week, Rep. Jared Huffman (CA-02) introduced a bill that would measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled on our roadways. This would be transformative.

Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), contributing 29 percent of the United States’ total GHG emissions. The majority of these emissions come from driving. But right now, we don’t measure emissions on our roadways. Without measuring these emissions, we will never be able to reduce them.

Rep. Huffman’s new House bill—H.R. 5354, The Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act—would change this. The bill, co-sponsored by Reps. Pocan (D-WI), Connelly (D-VA), Lowenthal (D-CA), Rep. Haaland (D-NM), and Blumenauer (D-OR), will create new performance measures and goals requiring that states measure and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG in their transportation systems.

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), along with Senators Carper (D-DE), Sanders (I-VT), and Durbin (D-IL), introduced companion legislation in the Senate earlier this year.

“Tackling climate change is going to mean moving away from the current model of more highways and longer commutes to a model of safer, healthier, and more resilient communities,” said Rep. Huffman, a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. “The GREEN Streets Act will be an essential component of this effort by transforming how we measure success in the federal transportation program and how we hold federal and state decision-makers accountable for reducing carbon pollution.”

California has already taken steps to do something similar to what the GREEN Streets Act would require. California’s law SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to identify new metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts. For development projects, VMT is now the new metric for transportation analysis, replacing level-of-service.

We need new metrics to measure the success of our transportation system in a way that provides a more holistic, inclusive view of the system. The GREEN Streets Act is a huge step in the right direction, requiring states to begin measuring and reporting how far people are driving, the resulting emissions, and then working to reduce both. We need a new vision for our transportation system, and this legislation will help us get there.

TransportationCamp DC 2020 tickets are on sale! Join us at this “unconference” for transportation nerds on Saturday, January 11th at the Catholic University of America.

The Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act introduced in the Senate today

Today Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Tom Carper (D-DE) introduced a bill that would measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. This would be transformative.

Crossing the street in Boston. Photo by Yu-Jen Shih on Flickr’s Creative Commons.

The Generating Resilient, Environmentally Exceptional National (GREEN) Streets Act, introduced by Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Tom Carper (D-DE), will create new performance measures and goals requiring that states measure, and reduce, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and GHG in their transportation systems.

“To combat climate change, we must reduce emissions and build safer, healthier and more resilient communities,” said Senator Markey, a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee and co-author of the Green New Deal resolution. “That means advancing the goals of clean energy, climate progress, and healthy communities, as well as fortifying ourselves against the adverse impacts of climate change. An essential component of that effort is to re-envision how we plan for, construct, and maintain our federal highway transportation system, using climate measures that matter and hold systems accountable.”

“For decades our federal transportation program has been full of incentives that encourage more driving, longer trips, and more congestion. It’s high time for us to reduce all three of those things as a unifying purpose for the program,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “Doing so will help give Americans more freedom to choose how to get around, save them money, and also reduce the harmful emissions wreaking havoc on our climate. We are hopeful that the GREEN Streets Act will help kickstart an important conversation about finding a new, more productive purpose for the federal transportation program and we are pleased to support it.”

Transportation for America strongly supports the GREEN Streets Act and urges Congress to pass this transformative legislation.

What to watch for in Tuesday’s transportation and climate change hearing

The intersection between climate change and transportation will be on full display during a committee hearing in the U.S. House of Representatives. But will members of Congress take the opportunity to examine the critical role that federal transportation policy has played in creating the climate crisis? Here are six things we’ll be looking for during the hearing.

On Tuesday, February 26, at 10 a.m., the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee will hold a hearing entitled, “Examining How Federal Infrastructure Policy Could Help Mitigate and Adapt to Climate Change.” This hearing will give members of Congress a unique opportunity to discuss the merits and flaws in our transportation system.

When this topic has come up in the past, Congress has often focused exclusively on the role of auto manufacturers in improving fuel economy and the oil industry in reducing the carbon content of gasoline. But will the T&I Committee take advantage of this opportunity to ask probing questions about its own role in reducing GHG emissions by the way it funds the transportation system?

To help the committee inform its discussion, we recently produced two fact sheets outlining the links between transportation and climate change and some solutions.

Here are six things we would like to hear from today’s hearing:

1. A real conversation about the links between transportation and climate change

Transportation is now the single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), contributing 28 percent of the United States’ total GHG emissions, surpassing electrical generation. While many other sectors have improved, transportation is headed in the wrong direction. Driving represents 83 percent of all transportation emissions and these emissions are rising—despite more efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels—because people are driving more and making longer trips.

2. Focus on policy, not technology

EV’s will not solve the climate crisis alone: The State of Minnesota recently found that, “the average Minnesotan would have to drive an estimated 1,500 fewer miles per year” to achieve its climate goals. The State of California found that, even after a ten-fold increase in the number of zero emission vehicles, it would have to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita by 25 percent to achieve its climate goals. Hawaii came to a similar conclusion. Electric vehicles alone will not be sufficient to reduce transportation sector emissions, even if we replaced every gas car on the road with an electric one tomorrow.

3. A discussion about whether federal policy should continue to disproportionately subsidize driving over all other modes

80 percent of federal transportation formula funding is for roads. Though they are permitted to, states rarely use these funds for other purposes and there is no requirement to prioritize maintenance first. Funding for new roads is guaranteed through the highway trust fund. Funding for new transit is discretionary and has been repeatedly targeted for cuts or outright elimination. The federal government will only cover up to about 50 percent of the cost of new transit projects, while covering around 80 percent of the cost of new roads.

With new roads subsidized by the federal government, localities struggle to stay ahead of development that spreads further from the center of metro areas, forcing people to travel further to access jobs and services. Often, state and local authorities use funding intended to make walking or bicycling safer to build roadways instead. The resulting growth in driving and congestion leads to a demand for more roads, which induces even more driving. The U.S. has added lane miles faster than our population has grown. This strategy has failed to “solve” traffic congestion and has significantly increased greenhouse gas emissions, offsetting the modest gains made in vehicle efficiency and cleaner fuel.

4. An acknowledgment of the perverse incentives in the current system

States are rewarded with more federal funds if they burn more fuel, increase vehicle miles traveled, and build new lane-miles. That’s one example. There are scores of others.

5. Call out the role of speed in degrading safety, increasing pollution and congestion

Because free flowing traffic is considered the gold standard, roads are built to ensure traffic flows quickly. This means that a long-distance commute where a car moves very quickly (even over a very long total trip time) would be considered more successful than a far shorter commute at a slower speed in traffic. Designing roads with speed as the highest goal is what leads us to more and wider roads, and more and longer trips. Instead, roads should be considered as part of a network which is judged on whether people can reach jobs and services by any mode of travel, not the simplistic measure of whether some of them travel at high speed when driving.

6. A discussion about measuring progress (or failure), and holding states accountable

In 2012, Congress gave states more discretion over spending in exchange for a weak, opaque system of accountability in which states are required to set targets for transportation safety, state of repair and traffic movement. These targets can be negative (e.g., a safety target of increasing roadway deaths) with no rewards for hitting targets nor penalties for missing them. After seven years most of those targets are still not public. There are also no requirements for states or communities to measure and report the GHG emissions and VMT per capita effects of their transportation investments.

Congress got snowed by the states.

Looking for solutions?

A conversation along these lines above would be new and an important step forward, but we also need to start talking about some thoughtful solutions. With driving responsible for 83 percent of all transportation emissions—which are growing despite more efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels because people are driving more and making longer trips—it is critical for Congress to make major changes to the federal transportation policy that’s making it all possible.

What will the committee members propose? We have some ideas:

All modes should receive the same federal share: Currently, the federal government will fund up to 80 percent of a road project (even 90 percent in limited cases), while it will only fund up to 50 percent of a transit project.
Reform federal funding distribution: Currently, each state receives dedicated road funding through the highway trust fund formulas, which increases as states increase their VMT. New public transit, bike, and pedestrian infrastructure funds are either discretionary (transit Capital Investment Grant program), or an underused option within roadway funding (eg. Transportation Alternatives Program and Surface Transportation Block Grant). Congress could organize the formula funding around efficiency goals and create more parity between the modes.
Prioritize maintenance with formula road funding: Historically, states have used this formula funding for new road construction, encouraging far-flung auto-oriented development that increases the length and number of car trips. The program should focus on getting greater efficiency from the roads we have already built.
Measure the right things: Communities need accurate tools to make informed choices. So what should we measure and replace?
- Measure GHG, and VMT per capita: States and communities should measure and report the GHG emissions and VMT per capita effects of their transportation investments.
- Measure how well the transportation system connects people to destinations: Roadways are designed to move cars quickly with the assumption that there will always be more traffic, a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to more and wider roads. Instead of measuring speed and traffic flow on roads, we should measure how the system, and any new investment, connects people to jobs and services by all modes of travel.
Set climate goals and penalties for failure to achieve goals: Just measuring our impact won’t quite cut it. The federal government should set GHG and VMT per capita reduction goals and require all states to implement policies to achieve these goals. States failing to achieve their goals should be penalized. States that exceed goals should be rewarded.
Align new construction with GHG goals: In the transit program, new capacity projects have to compete for funding and successful projects must demonstrate that they advance national and local goals, including environmental benefits and economic development. There is no such standard for new highway projects. Congress should require funding for new highway capacity to compete for funding, and preference should be given for projects that reduce GHG emissions and VMT per capita.

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of November 10th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

Almost 50 members of Congress, led by Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao asking her to keep the greenhouse gas emissions rule and not move ahead with plans to repeal it. (Senator Cardin’s Office)
The U.S. Senate is expected to vote to approve Derek Kan’s nomination today to be Undersecretary of Transportation for Policy. (Railway Age)
Representatives Randy Hultgren (R-IL) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) explain in an op-ed the importance of a tax reform bill keeping private activity bonds. (Northwest Herald)
“Self-Driving Taxi Service From Waymo Set To Begin Shortly” in Chandler, Arizona. (CleanTechnica)
Forbes Op-Ed: “Waymo Tests Its Self-Driving Cars In My Town. Here Are The Odd Things I’ve Seen.” (Forbes)
The American Transportation Research Institute, part of the American Trucking Association put out a report that concludes a “federal fuel tax increase is the ‘only meaningful mechanism’ to pay for President Donald Trump’s proposed infrastructure improvements.” (Talk Business and Politics, ATRI Report)
Reed Cornish, a White House Advisor, shed a little more light in an interview with Recode on the Trump’s administration’s infrastructure principles and reveals he encouraged Elon Musk to start building a tunnel between New York City and Washington D.C. (Recode)