Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
flood1.jpg

Elizabeth Kolbert, author of the outstanding Field Notes From a Catastrophe, covers climate change for the New Yorker. In this week's issue, she takes up congestion pricing and Mayor Michael Bloomberg's 2030 plan:

The case against congestion pricing is often posed in egalitarian terms. "The middle class and the poor will not be able to pay these fees and the rich will," State Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, of Westchester County, declared after listening to the Mayor's speech. In fact, the poor don't, as a rule, drive in and out of Manhattan: compare the cost of buying, insuring, and parking a car with the seventy-six dollars a month the M.T.A. charges for an unlimited-ride MetroCard. For those who do use cars to commute, eight dollars a day would, it's true, quickly add up. And that is precisely the point. Congestion pricing works only to the extent that it makes other choices-changing the hours of one's daily drive or, better yet, using mass transit-more attractive. One of the Mayor's proposals is to put the money raised by congestion pricing-an estimated four hundred million dollars a year-toward improving subway and bus service.

As a matter of city planning, congestion pricing is a compelling idea; in the context of climate change, it is much more than that. Any meaningful effort to address the problem will have to include incentives for low-emitting activities (walking, biking, riding the subway) and costs for high-emitting ones (flying, driving, sitting at home and cranking up the A.C.). These costs will inconvenience some people-perhaps most people-and the burden will not always be distributed with perfect fairness. But, as the Mayor pointed out, New York, a flood-prone coastal city, is vulnerable to one of global warming's most destructive-and most certain-consequences: rising sea levels. If New Yorkers won't change their behavior, then it's hard to see why anyone in the rest of the country or, for that matter, the world should, either. The congestion problem will, in that case, find a different resolution. Who, after all, wants to drive into a city that's under water?

Photo: tillwe/Flickr

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Is Sec. Duffy Holding NY Transit Hostage To Negotiate Away The Rest of America’s Transportation Future?

The federal Transportation secretary is using two large transit projects as a bargaining chip to bully Congress into passing a budget that could be disastrous for communities across the country.

October 3, 2025

Friday’s Headlines Shut It Down

The government shutdown looks like it will be just another excuse for the Trump administration to cancel transportation projects unless blue states bend the knee.

October 3, 2025

Can Pedestrian Pop-Ups Go Permanent in the U.S.?

Can temporary pedestrian pop-ups spur permanent change?

October 3, 2025

Talking Headways Podcast: Healthy Architecture, Healthy People

It is very unusual for an architecture project to pay any attention at all outside of the property line. And that has to change.

October 2, 2025

Report: A Third of Americans Can’t Rely On Cars — And 16 Million Have No Access At All

So why do we plan our cities like everyone can and does get behind the wheel every day?

October 2, 2025
See all posts