No matter where you stand on the climate-change debate, the fact that Loudoun and the Greater Washington, DC region does not meet federal air pollution standards is undeniable. Ground-level ozone and fine particulate pollution (PM2.5 = Particulates finer than 2.5 microns) exceed acceptable levels. Research shows that air pollution does have human health impacts, especially for higher risk populations like the elderly and those with respiratory issues. You can read more about the affects of PM2.5 at the New England Journal pf Medicine, Science Daily, Scientific American, and NewScientist.
Evidence appears to link Global Warming with an increase in CO2 in our atmosphere. One of the major contributors of CO2 is transportation. You can perform a rough calculation by multiplying 20 pounds of CO2 per gallon of gas. For most of us that means every time you fill-up at the gas station you’ve packed the potential for about 300 to 400 pounds of CO2 emissions into your gas tank. Multiply that by the millions of gas tanks in the region and it adds up fast.
In Loudoun County the main source of air pollution is tailpipe emissions. Many, if not most of us, are commuting to jobs through the week. Then on weekends we all have to catch up on errands – run to Cosco, the grocery store, bank, Lowes, etc. It’s not really our fault; it’s just suburban living. Everything is spread out and transportation options are few. Based on a recent survey 86 percent of Loudoun residents drove to work alone in a car. About 10 percent carpool and only about 4 percent use public transit, walk or bicycle to work.
We have seen some improvement in air quality through more efficient engines and cleaner fuels. But, any prior gains or technological improvements in the near future will be overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Loudoun alone is expected to add about 100,000 people in the next ten years; adding nearly 200,000 by year 2030. <Link to the Loudoun County 2006 Annual Growth Summary here>
The Wall Street Journal has a February 5 article titled “Next Car Debate: Total Miles Driven” by Joseph B. White. The author says the next big debate over the role of the automobile in America will be over Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMTs).
“Congress and President Bush late last year agreed to order car makers to boost the average fuel efficiency of new vehicles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Last year’s energy debate centered around CAFE, the acronym for Corporate Average Fuel Economy. The next phase of the energy/climate change debate over cars will force us to learn another piece of technical jargon: VMT, or vehicle miles traveled.
Car makers and consumers will bear considerable costs to switch to a fleet of cars that meets the 35 mpg CAFE goal. But that might not result in a significant reduction in U.S. petroleum consumption or cut the CO2 we add to the atmosphere if we keep driving more and more miles.
From 1977 to 2001, the number of miles driven every year by Americans rose by 151% — about five times faster than the growth in population, according to data compiled for a 2006 report to the U.S. Department of Transportation written by Stephen Polzin, a transportation researcher at the University of South Florida in Tampa.
The reasons for the big growth in miles traveled are pretty obvious if you don’t live in the center of a big city endowed with functioning public transport. To make space for ever larger suburban homes, housing developers pushed further and further from city centers and shopping areas. New neighborhoods often had street layouts cluttered with cul de sacs that forced people to drive farther to get to main roads or stores. Local zoning laws — reflecting the preferences of residents — tended to separate commercial and residential uses, and single family from multi-family dwellings.
Meanwhile, the bulk of the money spent on transportation infrastructure was directed to building more and bigger highways. We could have subsidized bullet trains and more light rail systems, but we didn’t.
Now, many of the environmentalists, politicians and scientists who made the case for boosting vehicle fuel efficiency are turning their attention to the problem of how much we drive — and the legacy of 20th century land use and transportation choices.
Just how much more driving Americans will do is a matter of some debate. Higher gas prices, changes in demographics, and a recent upturn in urban redevelopment aimed at luring empty nesters back to city neighborhoods all could result in vehicle miles traveled growing more slowly in the future than it did during the past 30 or so years.
Still, the U.S. Department of Energy projects that miles driven will keep increasing in coming years, and by 2030 could grow by 59% compared with 2005 levels — still outpacing population growth, though not by as much in the last three decades of the past century. That means even though we’ll be driving vehicles that slurp less petroleum per mile, carbon dioxide emissions could grow by as much as 41%, according to a report titled “Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change,” published by the Urban Land Institute. <continued>
Report by Urban Land Institute says building more roads is not the answer
A report by the Urban Land Institute, Smart Growth America and other national and state organizations warns that total vehicle miles driven in the United States are on track to increase 59 percent by 2030, and the exhaust from all those vehicles driven those millions of extra miles will overwhelm expected emissions reductions produced by more efficient, cleaner-running cars and trucks. Since 1980, the number of vehicle miles traveled in the United States has increased at three times the rate of the population, the report says, primarily because of the vehicle-oriented way communities and commercial areas are designed and built. Even with expected increases in vehicle fuel efficiency, emissions of carbon dioxide in 2030 will be 41 percent higher than today, far from the goal of reducing vehicle emissions to 1990 levels by that date. Even if the most stringent fuel-efficiency proposals under consideration are enacted, vehicle emissions still would be 40 percent above 1990 levels in 2030.
“Curbing emissions from cars depends on a three-legged stool: improved vehicle efficiency, cleaner fuels, and a reduction in driving,” said lead author Reid Ewing, Research Professor at the National Center for Smart Growth, University of Maryland. “The research shows that one of the best ways to reduce vehicle travel is to build places where people can accomplish more with less driving.”
Three-fourths of Americans believe that being smarter about development and improving public transportation are better long-term solutions for reducing traffic congestion than building new roads, according to a survey sponsored by the National Association of Realtors® and Smart Growth America. The 2007 Growth and Transportation Survey details what Americans think about how development affects their community. Nearly three-quarters of Americans are concerned about the role growth and development play in climate change, as well as remaining concerned about traffic congestion. Half of those surveyed think improving public transit would be the best way to reduce congestion, and 26 percent believe developing communities that reduce the need to drive would be the better alternative. Only one in five said building new roads was the answer.
You can read more about Air Pollution in Loudoun County <here>
“Historically, most examples of female mate choice and its evolutionary consequences are found in birds. The classic case is the peacock’s tail. The ornate tails do nothing to help peacocks survive. Rather, they emerged because peahens prefer to mate with males that have showy plumage. Unlike birds, many mammal species are sexually active at night. So mammals may be less inclined than birds to base preferences on visual cues. Instead, females of many mammalian species may be more likely to choose males using olfactory cues.”
COMMENTS