dc.description.abstract |
Many states are working to mitigate their contributions to global climate change by controlling
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These efforts often begin with a establishment of a statewide
GHG reduction goal, followed by targeted policies to reduce GHG emission from specific classes
of sources or economic sectors. For the transportation sector, many policy, legal, and cultural
barriers stand in the way of achieving goals to reduce GHG emissions. Our immense
transportation and transportation fuels infrastructure – including roads, highways, parking lots,
pipelines, refineries, abundant and affordable gasoline, and low density land development
patterns – supports continued reliance on cars and light-duty trucks. Transportation project
programming processes, through which transportation capital projects are chosen for receipt of
funding, often support the selection of projects that reinforce the existing carbon intensive
infrastructure. Funding is limited, and many funding sources are constrained in how they may
legally be spent. Other transportation goals and policy efforts compete with climate goals for
funding priority. Political forces can skew transportation agencies’ programming processes.
These barriers notwithstanding, the 20th century’s trend towards single occupancy vehicle trips
is not permanently fixed. Many academics, engineers, planners, and policymakers have worked
to map out the path to a carbon-minimal transportation future. With this roadmap in place,
the greatest obstacle facing states attempting to reduce greenhouse gases from their
transportation sector is inadequate implementation. With a desired outcome in mind – reduce
greenhouse gas emissions to at least 80percent below 1990 levels by 20501 – states must work
backward from this goal: measure current emissions, plan for reduced emissions, select
projects that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by minimizing vehicle miles traveled, and
fund and build those projects. Projects that lead to transportation sector GHG reductions are
projects are usually reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled, such as public transit, bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure, and congestion mitigation projects2. Although less likely to be
achieved through funding and planning mechanisms, other projects will reduce transportation
sector GHG reductions by increasing vehicle efficiency or decreasing the carbon content of
fuels, such as electric vehicle charging stations. In due course, reduced greenhouse gas
emissions resulting from planning efforts, combined with improved vehicle efficiency
technology and reduced carbon content of fuels from the automobile and energy industries,
will yield drastically decreased transportation sector GHG emissions. Many states today are
doing some of this work by measuring transportation emissions and setting goals to reduce
those emissions. This report shows that these actions are meaningless unless states are also
funding, planning, and programming transportation projects that will reduce GHG emissions.
1 As discussed below, all three case study states described here (California, Massachusetts, and
Washington) have a statewide GHG reduction goal similar to this figure.
2 See Greene & Plotkin. 2011. Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation.
Pew Center of Global Climate Change. http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/reducingtransportation-
ghg.pdf
3
The efforts of three states – California, Washington, and Massachusetts – to reduce GHG
emissions from the transportation sector are investigated here. Through investigation of these
three states, this report addresses the following questions:
• Are states with greenhouse gas reduction goals in both state statute and in long range
transportation plans implementing processes to ensure their transportation investments
achieve the goals?
• What legal and other policy barriers exist to spending on GHG-reducing projects in
transportation?
All three states have similar statewide GHG reduction goals set in statute. California is the
largest state and has the most far-reaching policies and programs to mitigate GHG emissions.
California’s approach delegates authority to regional metropolitan planning organizations
(MPOs) to achieve regional GHG reduction goals set by the state. Pursuant to its statutory
authority, Massachusetts’ state environment agency promulgated rules requiring the state
transportation agency to demonstrate how it will meet GHG reduction targets through
prioritization of GHG-reducing projects. Washington has statutory goals to reduce per capita
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in addition to a statewide GHG reduction goal. This report
describes the policy and processes used in these three states to reduce greenhouse gases from
the transportation sector through state and metropolitan transportation funding, planning, and
programming and then discusses legal barriers to implementing processes to achieve GHG
reduction goals. This paper does not measure actual GHG emissions reductions that the three
states have accomplished since enacting goals. Rather, this report critiques the efficacy of
states’ policy and processes to achieve transportation sector GHG reduction goals. Finally, this
report makes recommendations for building greater efficiency and transparency into funding
and programming processes in order to implement transportation programming frameworks
that better achieve transportation sector GHG reduction goals.
After assessing current policy, federal funding and planning frameworks, and legal barriers to
implementation, a set of recommendations for implementing transportation sector GHG
reductions emerges. States’ GHG reduction goals must be legally enforceable through strong
statutory language. Constraints on funding sources should be removed. States should
implement greenhouse gas performance measures that ensure transportation dollars are spent
on transportation projects that actually reduce greenhouse gases. A performance-driven
approach is consistent with the existing federal framework for funding, planning, and
programming transportation. By implementing a feedback loop where the GHG outcomes of
transportation projects influence how future projects are selected, states can ensure that
transportation funding actively works to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals. To do this,
states must go much further than establishing GHG reductions as a goal in long term
transportation plans. They should integrate GHG considerations in every state of the
transportation programming process: funding, planning, programming, and performance
measurement. |
en_US |