An independent analysis of public data highlights the unacceptable public health costs of the current state of transport. The American Lung Association gives 30 of California's 49 counties for which data is available an “F” grade for high ozone days, and 41 of 46 counties an “F.” ” About particle pollution in 2023 air condition notification card. California cities occupy each of the top four worst rankings for both annual particle pollution and ozone pollution.
Additionally, a new tool released by RMI partially addresses California's ambitious goal of reducing vehicle traffic by 20% by 2050, rather than the 25% goal proposed by CARB by 2030. This study shows that achieving even the highest standards can lead to life-saving public health benefits and cost savings. , and the climate benefits occur on a tremendous scale. These benefits include more than $400 billion in avoided traffic deaths and injuries, and more than $1 trillion in avoided transportation costs (including fuel, maintenance, and vehicle depreciation) for residents, including (average $60,000 per household), including savings of more than $500. The economic benefits from avoiding traffic congestion are more than $1 billion, and the lives saved through cleaner air and more physical activity provide more than $2 trillion in public health benefits. And the benefit of all this before considering climate impacts is that almost 200 million tonnes of carbon emissions will be avoided between now and 2050. As if by planting a billion trees today, in the next 25 years he would operate 1,600 wind turbines or block 16 fossil gas-fired power plants from being built. Masu.
But despite this multitrillion-dollar opportunity, California leaders are ineffectively reducing the state's $20 billion in annual transportation infrastructure spending, a central pillar of climate action in the transportation sector. We are having a hard time moving forward on this core of divesting from fiscally irresponsible highway projects. Toward investments that enable more Californians to make cleaner, healthier mobility choices. A powerful industry group that benefits from the way things used to work in most of the 20 industries.th The 21st century is a century in which we have all fought to protect our interests at the expense of the air we breathe.cent– But it's time to prioritize clean air and community priorities over an outdated, polluting and inequitable status quo.
An unbalanced and well-intentioned program (for now)
The Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP) provides a useful case study. Among the program's statutory goals are to improve the efficiency of the state's goods movement network and reduce pollution and “other negative community impacts, particularly in disadvantaged communities.” TCEP began awarding competitive funding in 2018, allocating 40% to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and 60% to counties and other funding applicants, approving the latest investment in 2023, Over six years, it has provided more than $3.5 billion. And for the first time, the list of TCEP-funded projects includes zero-emission vehicle charging infrastructure. This is a major need for increased investment in California, which is leading the nation's transition to zero-emission vehicles with both advanced clean trucks and advanced technology. Clean Fleet Rules. Once these ground-breaking policies are in place, investing in the necessary charging infrastructure will be the next critical implementation step.
While cargo efficiency is an important goal given the state's several major ports, TCEP's role in causing negative environmental and health impacts requires scrutiny. Of the 103 TCEP projects funded to date, more than half (56%) of those projects, which have raised more than $2.4 billion in funding over the past six years, have already been It is predicted to add congestion to California's traffic-clogged roads. Trucks are a way out of that congestion. As a result, trucks remain stuck in the same traffic jams and cargo movement becomes less efficient.
Even worse, using RMI's SHIFT calculator, we estimate that these projects' cumulative 527 miles of new highway lanes will generate between 2 and 3 billion “vehicle miles” on California roadways. Masu. This amount of new traffic will have the same polluting impact as adding 16,000 new fossil fuel-powered vehicles to the road, and will further increase traffic congestion and slow everyone's commute to work. There is a possibility that
In contrast, of the 103 projects TCEP has funded to date, only 10 percent are likely to achieve sustainable pollution reductions, such as through investments in new zero-emission freight infrastructure, and TCEP This highlights the need for a more balanced approach to investing in This balance is aimed at prioritizing clean transportation options, improving the efficiency of goods movement systems, and reducing pollution across California, especially in communities facing the highest pollution loads today. This can be achieved by promoting both at the same time.
Targeted, common sense reforms light the way forward
Aligning these goals will require some targeted, common sense reforms to TCEP.
- First, TCEP funds should no longer be used for projects that add “general purpose” lanes to the highway system. These investments fail to achieve the program's main objective of transporting goods more efficiently and create congestion and pollution on roads and communities alike. Instead, having dedicated truck lanes or toll lanes that give trucks privileged access can help move trucks and the goods they carry out of traffic, which in turn can reduce the risk of asthma and other respiratory illnesses. It can reduce the air pollution that causes it.
- Second, to avoid harming disadvantaged communities, TCEP funds should no longer be used to fund new highway construction of any kind in the communities most affected by pollution. there is no.
- Finally, roughly the same proportion of TCEP spending that has historically increased traffic and pollution should instead be reprioritized to projects that remove pollution from the goods-moving system. This should be achieved by allocating 50 percent of TCEP funds to zero-emission vehicle infrastructure. Examples include converting clean trucks and diesel-powered freight train cars to electricity.
Assembly Bill 2535 (Bonta) proposes these much-needed common sense changes. It's up to state leaders to make these critical investments in clean air, efficient movement of goods, climate action, and environmental justice.
