A refreshing change of pace: sensible policy

Imagine: charging polluters to encourage the others!

Posted by JMG (Guest Contributor) at 8:15 PM on 29 Apr 2007

Sam Smith, publisher of the estimable e-letter The Progressive Review, is perhaps the ultimate pragmatic environmentalist, with a sharp eye for what works and a sharper ability to deflate the pompous and overly-self-loving.

He is often the sole commenter picking up on policy proposals and practices that a less parochial media less obsessed with infotainment would be interested in -- such as the success of congestion charges in London's central district, implemented by Mayor "Red Ken" Livingstone (elected by IRV):

The facts about London's congestion charging scheme are clear. It cut the amount of traffic entering central London by 20%. Each day in 2006, there are were almost 70,000 fewer vehicles entering the charging zone compared to the number that had been entering each day before charging began.

The figures following the extension of the zone westwards show that it is also operating at the expected level. Traffic in the area of the western extension of the zone is down 13%, right in the middle of the 10-15% reduction that had been predicted. And since the extension, traffic in the old congestion charging area has not risen at all - an even better result than anticipated.

The results are particularly striking as London is going through a huge growth in utilities' roadworks, as the antiquated water supply system, which leaked away a third of the city's supply, is being replaced. Without the reduction in traffic due to congestion charging, major parts of the centre of the city would have been close to gridlock.

In addition, road safety has improved, CO2 emissions have been cut, and congestion charging contributed to the growth of cycling with more people than ever before traveling by bike - a 72% increase in the number of cyclists on the capital's major roads since 2000.

Naturally, all these benefits were not only brought by congestion charging itself but by the public transport measures that accompanied it. Bus ridership in London has risen by 2 million a day, and the city has embarked on the largest programme of public investment in transport for 50 years. Doubtless, New York will be looking at implications for public transport in the city.

Finally, New York's decision has another implication. It is a final nail in the coffin of the claim by rightwing pressure groups and anti-environmentalists that policies being pursued in London are against the interests of its economy - for the one thing that cannot be claimed against New York is that it is an anti-business city!

In reality, of course, the evidence was already in. Retail sales in central London are far outperforming those in the rest of the country. The West End theatre trade is strong. Tourism is growing strongly. Congestion charging has achieved exactly what it was designed to do - not cut the number of journeys, but shift them from private cars to public transport. It has cut congestion, and cut environmental damage, with the economy continuing to boom.

...

The next proposed step for the congestion charge is to increase its benefits by enhancing its ability to tackle climate change. This would see the introduction of a L25 charge for cars responsible for the highest CO2 emissions, with reduced charges for cars with lower-than-average emissions, and the greenest cars would pay nothing.

For story: A refreshing change of pace: sensible policy
4 Comments | Post a Comment

"Red" Ken and London

I was in London earlier this month -- for the first time in 13 years -- and can confirm that it has been transformed. As the article you quote describes, private vehicle use seems to have been reduced (compared with what it was like when I lived there in the late 1980s), and the frequency of bus service is phenomenal. My family and I stayed in a hotel located on what was a minor through-street near the British Museum, yet the buses trundled by at a rate of about one every 30 seconds. London's tube (underground, metro) system is still rather antiquated, but I understand that the authorities are working to improve it. Meanwhile, many more people ride around by bicycle than I recall from the '80s, and central London is now served by hundreds of pedicabs -- in addition to the traditional, motorized ones.

What makes these developments personally interesting to me is the evergreen presence of "Red" Ken Livingstone, who was leader of the Greater London Council (GLC) when I lived in London (until the GLC was formally abolished by Margaret Thatcher, at midnight on 31 March 1986). Livingston has always been a political maverick, combining a penchant for creating controversy in international affairs with a passion for improving London's transit. His most enduring legacy will no doubt be in respect to the latter.

These are only my personal opinions.

by Ron Steenblik at 12:16 AM on 30 Apr 2007

Zero emission

No charge for electric cars? Say hello to congestion once again.

Given inexpensive, green driving with electric cars (backed up with a biofuel generator), the public will resume driving as many miles as they can afford, everywhere they can.

Those who hate cars will eventually have to tax and fee them out of existence. So that is what they want to do right now, instead of moving to electric cars (I'm not calling them plugin hybrids anymore, it's self defeating). Their agenda will hand elections to the gas guzzlers as our green pols are swiftboated as car haters by asociation.

Beware the puritanical car haters, they will delay clean, green cars as long as they can. They know electric cars will defeat their obsession with eliminating cars altogether.

How much of the cash collected from the London plan is going to bike trails, bike racks on trains and buses, and electric assited bikes? I'm betting zero. You can tout biking but politicians aren't funding it.

Fund biking in conjunction with buses and trains and electric cars or admit you are a car hating, never biking puritan. Sorry we don't like puritans. Right or left wing. Puritan Naderites take notice, you were the crew that got US this chimp we are suffering now.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

by amazingdrx at 6:07 AM on 30 Apr 2007

Congestion pricing needs options

As a native New Yorker currently living in Vancouver, BC, I am really looking forward to congestion pricing in NYC. It will be a great thing for the city.

However, a similar proposal comes up for Vancouver every once in a while. Here, I think it will fail, or at least it won't be an immediate success.

The reason is that as Livingstone mentions, reducing car traffic relies on having other options. In Vancouver, we have great transit within the city, but the suburbs have abysmal public transit. Without significant increase in transit all congestion pricing would do is piss off people who live in the boonies. They still have to drive and now they have to pay more.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca

by Werdna at 10:02 AM on 30 Apr 2007

Hadn't seen statistics before ...

Almost surprised that traffic was not down further. Very interesting the (important) link between instrature work. Basically, most major cities around the world are sitting on top of major infrastructure repair / renovation / replacement requirements. If cars can be taken off the road, perhaps this will speed the path to more efficient water/sewage system implementation.

And, the idea of a graduated fee is great -- quite low for EVs, a little more for PHEVs, up through into America's favorite SUV GHG-belchers. And, related to congestion, if EV/PHEVs penetrate enough, move all the fees up a little.

Seems to me that Washington, DC, should seek to impose a congestion fee ...

there is good public transport into the city (Metro rail & bus)
traffic congestion is a mess
pollution from automobile transport is a serious regional problem
High-percentage of vehicles entering city through relatively few nodes (bridges from VA, etc ..>)

And, well, this is a way for the city to sock it to the suburbanites who work in DC but don't pay any taxes.

Doubtful Congress will let it through but this would be a great step forward for DC, the region, and the nation.

Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart. NOW!!! to Energize America .

by A Siegel at 12:05 PM on 30 Apr 2007

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.