Surprise! New York’s congestion pricing plan to fix traffic… actually fixed traffic

In January, New York City added a toll to all vehicles entering the city, the first in the US to do so. It was controversial at first, but now that it’s been around for months, residents support it and are seeing the positive effects – less traffic, less noise, more revenue, and more walkable spaces.

“Congestion charges” are not a new idea, but they are a new idea to the US. NYC is the first American city to implement one, and perhaps the best-suited for it, given its dense downtown area and extensive public transport.

The concept has been applied in many other large cities around the world, such as London and Stockholm.

The basic idea is that, since these downtown areas are always choked with traffic (a problem that negatively affects society in many ways), but that alternatives exist to get people in and out of these downtown areas, what we need to do is make sure that people who are bringing cars into these areas are really really sure that they need a car.

And, in a capitalist society, the way that you do that is: you make it cost money. If someone is going to impose a cost on everyone else (in the form of traffic, noise, etc.), then they should have to pay for it. It just makes sense.

Unfortunately, a lot of these ideas with good economic backing (for another example, a carbon price…) also suffer from opposition while they are being discussed. Prior to NYC’s January adoption of the congestion charge, more New Yorkers wanted it to be delayed than to go through.

It was only after the dumbest resident of NYC wandered into the Oval Office and tried to strongarm the state into canceling the plan that NYC residents came around to supporting it.

Another thing driving that newfound support is that, well, it works.

A new study came out this week from the New York Regional Plan Association showing that not only has the congestion pricing plan reduced traffic in NYC significantly, it has also reduced traffic in neighboring New Jersey – which isn’t even covered by the plan.

Opponents had claimed that the zone would merely shift traffic to surrounding areas, but it turns out it has lowered traffic in surrounding areas, as road users have replaced car trips with transit trips, reducing congestion significantly.

In total, traffic delays in Manhattan were 25% lower than they would be without the congestion charge. And in regions outside Manhattan, traffic delays were reduced by 9%

This has resulted in massive time savings for the cars and buses that do still enter into the congestion zone.

Time lost to traffic jams dropped by 28.4% after the congestion charge was implemented, which means drivers saved 17 minutes for every hour they previously would have spent in traffic. And in surrounding areas outside of NYC, which aren’t even covered by the congestion charge, drivers saved 7 minutes for every hour they previously would have spent in traffic.

RPA previously estimated that these time savings would add up to an annual value of $1.3 billion.

For buses, this means that public transit has been more on time than ever before, as trip times for buses have reduced significantly, especially on the tunnels into the city (Holland Tunnel buses saw a 48% reduction in trip times, for example). And emergency vehicles move faster too, leading to lifesaving benefits.

The NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority stated just a month after the system was first implemented that 60,000 fewer vehicles enter the congestion zone each day, that the area saw an immediate 4% increase in pedestrian traffic, that there was a 70% drop in excessive honking reports, and that the system generated $48 million in just one month.

While air quality was not covered in either of these analyses, reduction in traffic also likely resulted in reduction in air pollution from idling vehicles, which should bring significant benefits in the most densely-populated part of the country, with lots of lungs breathing that traffic pollution every day.

Electrek’s Take

I’ve developed a bit of a pattern with articles like these, where I like to start the headline with the word “Surprise!” for things that are, well, entirely unsurprising.

For example, when London’s tax on polluting vehicles cut people’s exposure to pollution, or when California’s adoption of EVs reduced air pollution, anyone should have expected these effects.

And yet, London’s tax was a big political football prior to its implementation, and there are still people who seem to think that non-polluting vehicles are somehow more polluting than polluting ones (I’ll let you try to work out the mental gymnastics required for that one).

But the way that all of this has played out is not actually a surprise at all.

The fact is, congestion charges do work. Wherever they are tried, they lead to less traffic, less noise, more walkability. Basically, universal goods for the people who live in the city.

However, there’s another pattern: congestion charges are, typically, opposed before they are implemented, only to be accepted soon after once people see the tangible benefits.

Here’s a TEDx talk from 13 years ago which shows how all of this played out in Stockholm, with much similarity to how New York’s rollout of a congestion charge has occurred:

In fact, in this case, residents of Stockholm liked the effects of the charge so much that they were even convinced they had never opposed it in the first place.

In a way, it’s similar to EV driving.

Many of our readers here on this EV-focused site will know that ever since they got their EV, they really haven’t put much thought into range or charging, and that the ownership experience has been much easier than they expected, and in fact, even more convenient than their previous gas car ownership was.

It was only fear of the unknown that kept them skeptical beforehand, but after jumping in, they recognize that the ownership experience actually is as simple as EV owners always claimed it was.

City residents around the world could learn from this pattern. If congestion pricing has been successful and popular wherever it gets implemented, perhaps it’s not something that merits opposition the next time it gets floated in your area.

One of our strengths as humans, as social creatures with large brains, is our ability to learn from the example of others. So perhaps we should look at these examples and say “hmm, well, if this works there, maybe it could work here.”

You, too, could have a better living space, more free from the scourge of car dependency, if you support policies to make it so. Keep it in mind, if it ever comes up (San Francisco? Chicago? I’m looking at you…)

Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*