Transportation Emissions, Modern Solutions, and the Inevitability of Localized Economies

by Jonathan Deschamps

In 2005, then Seattle mayor Greg Nickels created a big buzz around his town when he lead 130+ other US mayors in committing their cities to the Kyoto Protocol despite the United States refusal to sign this international treaty to fight global warming and benefit all future generations across the globe. Seattle's primary efforts towards meeting the Kyoto Protocol were in promoting the creation of more efficient buildings and in refusing not to purchase power from coal or other fossil fuel sources but instead increasing their dependency on dams which have their own negative impacts. Despite these minor improvements transportation emissions are still growing.

Little effort has been made in order to decrease Seattle's dependency on individual cars. In 2006,  Metro Transit announced that it would increase its fares by 75 cents over the next 10 years. Now only five years later and the bus fare has increased from $1.50 to $2.50 during peak hours, a full dollar increase. Just this month Seattle's other major transit agency, Sound Transit, launched its second major fare increase in two years. This increased frequency towards fare inflation in public transportation inevitably plays a role in reducing their ability to ween Seattle from its car culture. As fares increase the desire to ride public transit decreases for regular commuters of public transportation. New potential public transit users are also discouraged from making the switch because driving remains more economical despite the costs of emissions which all citizens will eventually pay for.

On top of increasing accessibility to public transit another major approach to reducing vehicle emissions is to redesign the city itself in order to decrease the desire to drive in the first place. So far, Seattle, like every other major US city is doing everything it can in order to maintain the flow of traffic. In its attempts to synchronize green lights and redesign viaducts the city is further encouraging individual drivers and in effect are making it increasingly difficult to solve problems since they become progressively worse faster than they become better due to the modern trend towards urbanization. As traffic increases roads also become increasingly dangerous for alternative forms of transportation such as walking and bicycling. Effectively adding injury to insult. However, many Europeans are taking an alternative approach towards solving emissions problems and are instead making city streets less appealing for car transit.

In Zurich, Switzerland closely spaced red lights have been installed on roads entering the city, intentionally causing delays and frustration among drivers. Pedestrian underpasses have been removed from once free flowing city streets allowing pedestrians to cross the street where ever they please and effectively reducing the flow of traffic. Public tram operators in the city can turn traffic lights green in their favor. On many city blocks, cars have been banned all together. At the same time Zurich has made grand efforts in increasing accessibility to public transit. In the past two years many German cities have created "environmental zones" where only cars which meet strict emissions standards may enter. In Paris and Barcelona, car lanes have been removed in order to favor public bike sharing programs. High prices on oil and stricter standards on fuel efficiency have also helped European cities lower transit emissions. If US cities are truly committed to the Kyoto Protocol as they claim, then all they need to do is look around the world in order to see what actually reduces emissions.


All signs seem to point towards a fundamental change to the American lifestyle itself, something elected officials and consumer habits have long protected. Emissions can't be reduced to optimal levels without decreasing dependency upon driving and long distance commerce. If American cities use Europe as a model for change then we need to improve accessibility to alternative forms of transportation while succinctly decreasing our desire to drive in the first place.  In effect lifestyles and local infrastructures would be forced to respond accordingly. However, digging a little deeper and taking a more holistic perspective on global warming would suggest more than just a top-down approach to problem solving.

Imagine reducing the need for transportation all together and thus preventing emissions before they occur. Reducing the desire for driving and increasing the appeal of public transit is really just a top-down approach towards the inevitable creation of localized economies. Right now people need to get from one point to another because their locality does not provide all their needs and individuals just don't think or live in terms of walking space but instead in terms of driving or flying space. What if neighborhoods were redesigned in order to provide for its local inhabitants. No longer would so many people need to drive across town to go to the market, to receive health care, or to go to work. This is a more realistic view towards a sustainable city than that of Seattle's former mayor Greg Nickels. If American cities and suburbs became more localized, inhabitants would likely interact more with one another, drive less, and ultimately form a greater sense of community and trust. A flourishing local economy equals a flourishing local culture. Less driving means more exercise and a decreased dependency on foreign oil. The ultimate lesson in this holistic thought experiment is that solutions actually do exist despite the complications which are created by dividing ideologies and an overall lack of focus and understanding.

These are not original thoughts but instead are based on a wide and rich knowledge base known as ecology which looks at the interactions between various complex systems which have historically been treated as separate entities by government, business, and individual citizens. The greatest impedance on Seattle's or anyone's path towards meeting the Kyoto Protocol or a higher quality of life in the future is in a stubbornness to adapt and change the way we think and live. We haven't always been a car culture and there's no reason to think that we always will be. After all, oil is our primary source of energy and according to experts, alternative energy will only be able to replace a small fraction of our increasing dependency. Therefore, we will inevitably be forced into localized economies as the price of oil increases and we soon realize just how vulnerable and unsustainable our modern lifestyle is. In the meantime, community involvement, educational outreach, and citizen demand can help us meet these ends in a more gradual and peaceful way than a sudden jolt to the American psyche caused by peak oil, global warming, or social unrest which we are already seeing the effects of in our daily lives and through out the world.