TODAY’S STUDY: RIGHT LOCAL TRANSPORT FOR RIGHT GLOBAL CLIMATE (AND A HEALTHIER LIFE)

Getting Back on Track: Aligning State Transportation Policy with Climate Change Goals
Neha Bhatt, Colin Peppard, Stephanie Potts, December 2010 (Smart Growth America and
Natural Resources Defense Council)

Getting to work, getting the kids to school, getting to the grocery store, getting to the movies or the in-laws for a family dinner - seems like modern life is always about getting somewhere. Today, for most people, there aren't too many choices about HOW to get there. But, as the report outlined below demonstrates, there are ways that local policies could create choices. Better choices.

Some of the transportation choices smart policy could encourage would be much better for individual wallets and the world's health than the ones most commonly available today. That's something constructive to think about while sitting in bumper to bumper freeway traffic daydreaming about a better world running entirely on New Energy. (And thinking about better transport policy and a New Energy future is a lot safer than texting on that secreted thigh-top smart phone.)

Executive Summary

With a comprehensive climate bill stalled at the federal level, many are turning to the states to make progress toward reducing carbon emissions. Are the states ready? To succeed, many sectors will need to reduce their carbon emissions. This report examines what states are doing to curb emissions caused by transportation. As such, it is the first report to look at state transportation policy as it affects greenhouse gas emissions and compare performance across the states.

State transportation policy has the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while also effectively meeting the nation’s wide-ranging mobility needs. Few studies have specifically sought to evaluate how states’ transportation policies impact GHG emissions. This report seeks to build on the work of Moving Cooler, a 2009 report by Cambridge Systematics, which quantified the carbon reduction benefits of various transportation strategies. The analysis here evaluates how well state-level transportation decisions are aligned with efforts to reduce GHG emissions by examining a selection of key transportation policies currently in place in the 50 states. The findings suggest that there is tremendous potential for states to make progress on reducing transportation-related carbon emissions. The report’s recommendations suggest ways states can improve their climate performance while meeting their mobility needs.

click to enlarge

Greenhouse Gases From Transportation Are a Growing Problem

Presidents Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George H.W. Bush have each called for reductions in GHG emissions, yet nationwide emission rates have steadily increased, rising 27 percent between 1990 and 2007. Nearly half of the net increase has been due to increasing emissions from the transportation sector, which today accounts for 32 percent of the country’s total carbon emissions according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Without bringing down transportation emissions, it will be impossible to achieve the reductions scientists have deemed necessary to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Between 1977 and 2001, driving in the United States measured in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), grew by 151 percent. Average trip lengths, trips per capita and the proportion of drivers traveling alone also increased, all of which have contributed to rising emission rates.

Innovations leading to more efficient vehicles and new, cleaner fuels could mean large reductions in GHG emissions, but the projected 50 percent increase in VMT between 2005 and 2030 would undermine much of the savings these technologies would earn. Without changes to the transportation sector, it will be impossible to achieve the emissions reductions necessary to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

State Transportation Policies Do Not Manage Carbon Emissions, and Often Make Them Worse

States are in a unique position to bring down transportation-related GHG emissions, given their primary role in setting statewide transportation policy and directing large amounts of transportation funding. This report seeks to better understand the patterns and impacts of current state transportation policies and investment decisions in all 50 states.

The results of the analysis are sobering: most states use few of the available transportation policy tools to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector, and in most cases make decisions that will likely increase emissions. No state received a higher grade than “B-,” and most states scored lower than “D,” demonstrating a lack of alignment between transportation and climate policies. Most states do not make any effort at all to connect transportation policy with climate change and energy goals, and some put in place systems that effectively sabotage these goals. In sum, current transportation policy in most states will likely worsen GHG emission trends in the United States.

click to enlarge

The Transportation Sector Can Deliver Major Reductions in GHG Emissions

Because states shape transportation decisions to such a large degree, changes at the state level are critically important. Conflicts between GHG reduction goals and transportation policies at the state level will hinder progress toward reducing emissions, just as aligning these policies will encourage it. All 50 states can take individual action to better align their transportation policies with climate change goals. The following strategies can help dramatically change the trajectory of climate change while improving travel choices for Americans. States should:

- Balance state transportation investments by using state and federal resources to support robust public transportation service, prioritize highway repair and safety over new capacity, support non-motorized transportation, and ensure state fuel taxes can support all transportation modes.

- Manage traffic through congestion pricing tools and incentivize low-carbon transportation options through comprehensive commuter programs.

- Link transportation and land use in transportation plans, implement smart growth and growth management policies, and promote transit oriented development.

- Set a course to reduce emissions by setting per capita transportation GHG or VMT reduction targets.

Federal transportation policy also has a strong influence on state and local transportation decisions and current federal policies may be contributing to the lack of progress in the states. Therefore, along with reform at the state level, changes to federal transportation policy are essential. Congress and the White House must work to align transportation policy more directly with national climate and energy goals. The following policies would strengthen the country’s transportation network and reduce carbon emissions. The federal government should:

- Set specific GHG emissions reduction targets for the transportation sector.

- Establish GHG emission impacts from transportation plans and projects as a criterion for receiving federal aid.

- Update transportation financing and funding formulas to reward reductions in driving, VMT, and fuel consumption, instead of rewarding increases in these areas, as is the current practice.

- Prioritize cleaner transportation modes throughout all programs and policies.

- Dedicate revenue from GHG fees to fund clean transportation investment.

While significant power to implement change rests in the hands of individual states, the results of this report show that most will not seek to curb emissions from transportation sector without federal leadership and guidance. Together, federal and state leaders can make the nation’s climate and transportation goals mutually supportive, but it will require action at both levels.

click to enlarge

Introduction

In recent years, two important and related trends have emerged with respect to U.S. transportation infrastructure policy. First, transportation policy experts from across the political spectrum have generally come to agree that the nation’s transportation policies must become more performance-based and outcome-oriented. Second, it has become clear that there is an important link between transportation infrastructure decisions and the emission of the greenhouse gases (GHG) that cause climate change. Since reducing GHG emissions is an important national objective and nearly one third of the country’s GHG emissions come from the transportation sector, energy use and GHG emissions should be among the metrics used to evaluate overall transportation performance.

Implementing a performance-based transportation policy that supports GHG reduction goals will require regular assessment of emissions trends and the major factors that drive them. This information would help state decision makers and transportation officials to adopt policies and practices that meet both mobility and climate change goals. States should know which tools offer the best mobility and GHG reduction benefits and thus contribute to high system performance. This requires understanding how well current policies of state transportation departments perform with respect to GHG emissions.

While transportation performance and transportation GHG emissions have been the subject of much study and debate, relatively little has been done to connect these two issues through actual evaluation of state transportation policy with respect to climate change. This report seeks to bridge that gap by evaluating the 50 states based on the degree to which they have implemented policy and investment decisions that have been shown to reduce transportation-based GHG emissions.

This report assesses the extent to which each state’s transportation policy framework supports reduction of GHG emissions. Seventeen policy and investment criteria are evaluated to collectively provide an indicator of state performance with respect to the likely impact of state transportation decisions on GHG emissions. The results indicate which states are making transportation decisions that are likely to reduce GHG emissions, offering a method of assessing each state’s relative performance in achieving such an objective. For the purpose of this report, a state’s transportation policy is understood to be the collection of executive, legislative, and administrative decisions that together define what transportation projects are built, how they are designed, and how they are managed to provide mobility options to residents and other travelers.

It is important to note that this report does not suggest that GHG emissions trends are the only metric that should define transportation performance. On the contrary, efforts to reduce GHG emissions through transportation strategies must be balanced with other important goals such as mobility, access, connectivity, economic development, congestion, public health, and other environmental impacts. The policies evaluated in this report have been shown contribute to these other goals as well. (For a review of such benefits, see Appendix D. For a thorough discussion of the economic benefits of these strategies, see the Center for Clean Air Policy 2009 report Cost-Effective GHG Reductions through Smart Growth & Improved Transportation Choices or the forthcoming CCAP report Growing Wealthier: Smart Growth, Climate Change and American Prosperity).

Further, it is important to recognize that, in the course of evaluating many heterogeneous states in a consistent way, this report makes certain generalizations and assumptions that do not incorporate some of the unique geographic, demographic, and economic characteristics of certain areas. Different transportation strategies will achieve varying degrees of success in reducing emissions based on the characteristics of a state, such as population growth rate, the extent and nature of its existing built environment, rate of development, economic profile, and the size of its urban, suburban, and rural areas.

click to enlarge

Conclusion and Policy Recommendations

A. Conclusion

There is a great deal of potential to reduce GHG emissions through transportation measures. Realizing this potential will require transportation policy and climate/energy policy to be harmonized and implemented in a coordinated way. Because states shape transportation decisions to such a large degree, this is particularly important at the state level. Conflicts between climate goals and transportation policies at the state level will prevent progress, just as aligning these policies will encourage it.

Based on the indicators selected for evaluation, this report finds that while state transportation policy and investment decisions support climate change goals to varying degrees, most states do not currently have a comprehensive transportation framework in place that will meaningfully reduce GHG emissions. The majority of states have basic transportation policies in place that support some amount of GHG reductions but only a few states make parallel investment decisions that support such policies.

Unfortunately, the analysis in this report shows that most states have failed to pursue a wide variety of transportation policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide numerous other mobility, economic and quality of life benefits. Surprisingly, this includes many states that take a variety of significant steps in other sectors to reduce GHG emissions. None of the states’ transportation policies are likely to support robust GHG reductions to the extent demanded by current climate science. Nearly every state could be doing much more to increase mobility and access for residents in a way that supports fewer GHG emissions. Moreover, states that are forgoing these are missing obvious benefits that would improve the affordability and public health impact of transportation. The fact that many of these measures would yield substantial co-benefits makes this finding even more troubling.

Overall, the findings of this report suggest that there remains tremendous untapped potential to make greater progress on reducing transportation related GHG emissions by more closely aligning transportation policy with climate change goals. To correct for this, states need to become much more intentional about reducing transportation emissions. Consideration for GHG emissions should be a factor in all transportation policy and investment decisions.

Moreover, considering the extent to which federal transportation policy can influence state transportation policy and investment decisions, the federal government could play an important role in facilitating and encouraging this through broader transportation policy reforms. Federal transportation policy must remove disincentives to implement transportation strategies that reduce emissions, as well as provide tools and funding to be supportive of these efforts. Similarly, federal climate change and energy policy must complement federal and state transportation policy to help states get control of GHG emissions in the transportation sector.

click to enlarge

B. State Policy Recommendations

States have much progress to make in aligning transportation and climate policies, as demonstrated by this evaluation and analysis. Though some states have already begun to take some initial actions, the package of recommendations outlined below will put states on the trajectory to harmonize transportation decisions with climate change goals, reaping additional benefits while doing so.

1. Balance state transportation investments by using state and federal resources to support robust public transportation service, prioritize highway repair and safety over new capacity, support non-motorized transportation, and ensure state fuel taxes can support all transportation modes.

State transportation officials have spent decades building one of the greatest highway networks in history. Efforts must now shift to building other forms of transportation that are cleaner, more efficient, and in high demand. This requires policy changes that accommodates all transportation users, including transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians in rural, suburban, and urban communities. States should seek to bring greater balance to their transportation investment plans. This includes balancing highway maintenance with new capacity investment and highway investments with transit, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure investments to ensure high-quality, convenient, well-maintained transportation networks for local, regional, and interstate travel. Balanced investment is a critical step toward improving the long-term prognosis for taming the transportation sector’s role in climate change.

2. Manage traffic with congestion pricing tools and incentives for low-carbon transportation options through comprehensive commuter programs.

Drivers have little idea about the true costs of their travel choices, especially when driving alone. Strategies such as tolling, parking cash-out, and demand-based parking fees are effective ways to signal to drivers through prices the impacts of driving and driving alone. Based on this information, travelers can then make more informed decisions about when and how often to drive. States that promote alternatives to driving alone when commuting provide a service in addition to information about smarter, cleaner travel choices.

3. Link transportation and land use in transportation plans, implement smart growth and growth management policies, and promote transit oriented development.

Transportation land use decisions strongly influence one another. States can only maximize the benefits of transportation decisions with supportive land use policies. This relationship is essential not only for progress toward climate goals, but also for a generally successful and cost-effective transportation network.

4. Set a course to reduce emissions by setting per capita transportation GHG or VMT reduction targets.

For efforts to reduce transportation GHG emissions to be successful, states need to become more intentional bout achieving this goal. This involves reorienting transportation policy principles to allow greater support for cleaner transportation options, understanding how transportation decisions will affect emissions, and setting clear goals to reduce emissions through transportation infrastructure and management policy.

click to enlarge

C. Federal Policy Recommendations

Transportation policy is a shared state and federal responsibility, and reducing emissions from transportation must be as well. To effectively support state efforts to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions, the federal government, guided by Congress, must reform national transportation policy so that it is more closely aligned with national climate change and energy goals.

To accomplish this goal, Congress should consider the following policies to both allow and encourage consistency between state transportation and climate goals:

- Set a national transportation sector GHG reduction target to reduce emissions, and require states and regions to set similar targets.

There is broad agreement that a reformed federal transportation policy must be oriented around national transportation policy objectives. As one of these objectives, Congress should set a national transportation sector greenhouse gas reduction target, and require states and large metropolitan areas to set corresponding sub-targets. The national target should account for GHG benefits accruing from cleaner cars, lower-carbon transportation fuels, and investments in low-carbon transportation infrastructure and systems management.

- Require consideration of GHG emissions in the transportation planning process.

Federal law currently requires states and metropolitan planning organizations to undertake a planning process to be eligible for federal funds. They must develop short-and long-term plans showing which projects will be built and how they will be financed. This planning process should be revised to include a consideration of the impact on regional GHG emissions of the implementation of projects and plans. Plans should be required to show how transportation strategies and projects will be deployed to achieve transportation-related GHG emissions reductions goals.

The transportation planning process should also be better coordinated with non-transportation agencies that are influenced by transportation decisions, such as housing, economic development, and environmental agencies. Moreover, the guidance and resources should be given to regions to plan for future growth and development in a way that stabilizes and reduces emissions.

- Increase funding parity for clean transportation infrastructure.

Currently, public transportation funding receives only 18 percent of federal transportation dollars, and programs to encourage walking and bicycling receive less than 1 percent. In addition, even with recent changes to the requirements for non-federal matching funds for public transportation projects, the federal government
still provides a greater proportion of funding for a highway project, and such funding is granted with less review.

Congress should increase funding for types of transportation that have been shown to effectively reduce GHG emissions, in addition to offering numerous other co-benefits. To ensure parity between all forms of transportation infrastructure, all elements of funding formulas such as non-federal matching requirements should be imposed equally on all transportation infrastructure projects regardless of mode.

Along with increased funding for transportation infrastructure that can reduce GHG emissions, performance measures should be used to create incentives for recipients of federal transportation funds to reduce GHG emissions. Implementing a performance-based federal transportation policy receives widespread support among transportation experts. Tools such as bonus funding, reduced non-federal match requirements, or other financial incentives for grant recipients that show progress toward meeting GHG reduction goals would help to ensure that such progress is being made. Non-financial incentives, such as the expedited project review offered under California’s landmark S.B. 375 offer an alternative option.

click to enlarge

- Reorient federal transportation programs to support greater implementation of clean transportation projects.

Federal transportation funds are distributed through various programs authorized in federal transportation authorization. In fact, consolidation and streamlining of the 108 federal transportation programs currently authorized has become a main goal of transportation reform efforts.

It is widely acknowledged that our transportation policy is broken. Repairing and reforming out transportation policy offers an opportunity to raise the importance of energy and climate change in transportation decisions. Programs that support cleaner transportation should be emphasized and programs that do not should be reformed to support cleaner option.

These reform efforts can support reduction on GHG emissions in a number or ways. Programs should encourage multi-modal project development, accommodate multiple forms of travel, promote sound asset management, encourage infill development and mixing of uses, and other policies that can generate more efficient travel while maintaining consumer welfare.

Some policies could set standards for design, maintenance, or operation of transportation facilities. Examples of this include Complete Streets policies, which encourage transportation agencies to design roadways that accommodate all appropriate users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users, in addition to drivers. Prioritizing highway maintenance through asset management standards ensure that existing infrastructure is maintained to a certain standard of repair before new infrastructure is built. This encourages infill development and prevents sprawling development, in addition to making for safer and higher-performing infrastructure. Other policies could allow different transportation modes to compete equally for selection. For example, federal approval of new highway and transit facilities should carry the same requirements to justify their selection, and further project review and administration should exhibit similar parity.

These are just a few of many well-documented examples of how federal transportation programs could be reformed to better support GHG emission reductions. Others include road pricing, expanded use of transportation demand management, and deployment of intelligent transportation systems to better manage roadways and transit systems. Congress should conduct a thorough review of all such policies when developing future federal transportation policy.

- Dedicate revenue from carbon pollution fees to clean transportation.

Much of the increase in funding for clean transportation projects should come from traditional sources of transportation funding. However, revenues generated from the sale of GHG pollution permits under any national climate and energy policy are also an appropriate source of funding. A portion of such revenue should be directed towards planning and constructing transportation projects that reduce GHG emissions.

click to enlarge

D. Recommendations for Further Research

Additional research and analysis would help decision-makers and transportation officials at all levels of government to gain a clearer picture of the most effective ways to address transportation emissions throughout the country, and the most accurate methods for evaluating results. Foremost, analysis of actual transportation-based GHG emissions trends in each of the states would be a critical indicator of performance. Unfortunately, such data is incomplete for many states.29 Additionally, this data is collected in a variety of ways, and is oftentimes estimated through various proxies. These gaps and variations must be reconciled before a truly accurate picture of state performance on emissions can be gained. There are likely many other ways in which transportation performance with respect to GHG emissions could be improved, and we hope that others will build upon this work as a foundation for future research that gives us an ever-improving picture of state performance in aligning transportation policies with critical climate change goals.

Though policies to address the efficiency of goods movement were not included, such strategies will clearly be important in addressing transportation GHG emissions. Goods movement, especially by truck, is expected to increase steadily over the coming decades. A discrete and targeted set of policy responses will be required to manage the increase emissions that will result. As states and the federal government weigh options for developing a more robust set of coordinated freight strategies, research into the potential GHG emissions impacts, both positive and negative, will help policymakers to manage freight traffic while also promoting energy efficiency.

Many government transportation agencies consider system management to be a separate policy area from transportation infrastructure design and investment. System management strategies offer real benefits that can add effective capacity to both road and transit systems without requiring physical expansion. This can address peak travel in a way that can limit the need to overbuild facilities accommodate the relatively short period of peak travel that occurs during morning and evening commute hours. The extent and sophistication of system management strategies requires a thoughtful evaluation to assess how to best deploy them to address both mobility needs and the need to minimize emissions.