Congestion pricing works. London, Milan, Singapore, and Stockholm have all implemented congestion pricing and greatly benefited from reduced emissions, increased funding for mass transit, and fewer traffic accidents and resulting injuries. After 20 years of experience, London Transport reported that its program has reduced congestion in the central business district by 30 percent. By contrast, in May the average traffic speed in midtown fell to 4.5 miles per hour, the lowest ever recorded for the month. C40 Cities determined that Stockholm’s congestion pricing system has led to 15 percent reductions in PM10 and NOx emissions and CO2 emission reductions of 30,000 metric tons.

Congestion pricing is the MTA’s single largest source of funding in the $51.5 billion capital program, equating to almost 30 percent of the total. Without congestion pricing revenues, the MTA will be facing severe challenges to maintain the transit system as is, rather than improving and extending it. Programs such as extending the Second Avenue Subway into East Harlem, continued purchase of new subway cars, improving subway line service via the replacement of the MTA’s ancient fixed-block signaling system with modern communications-based train control (CBTC) technologies, making more stations ADA accessible, construction of the proposed Brooklyn-Queens Connector (BQX) light rail line — all are now at risk. Without congestion pricing revenues, the MTA will have to eliminate many of these programs.

The climate news remains deeply disturbing. Per NASA, the Earth’s average surface temperature in 2023 was the warmest on record since record keeping began in 1880; the last most recent years are the warmest on record. Some climate mitigation efforts, such as the production of low carbon steel for example, require engineering advances to implement. Congestion pricing does not. Transportation emissions are the second largest source of emissions in New York City, and congestion pricing is a proven tool the City can deploy now to materially reduce emissions. Governor Hochul’s sudden reversal is ill-considered, ill-timed, and morally irresponsible given the enormity of the climate crisis. The great majority of New York City citizens want reduced emissions and continued improvements in mass transit.

In summary, the ZEV for NYC Act requires NYC to begin purchasing only zero-emission motorcycles, light-duty, and medium-duty vehicles by July 1, 2025, and heavy-duty vehicles by July 1, 2028. NYC must deploy only zero-emission motorcycles, light-duty, and medium-duty vehicles by July 1, 2035, and heavy-duty vehicles by July 1, 2038. The bill includes limited exceptions in cases where a ZEV in a specific vehicle category is more than 50% more expensive than the next least-polluting alternative, where ZEVs do not yet meet the duty-cycle requirements of a specific application, or where charging infrastructure is not available. In short, the cases where NYC continues to buy fossil-fueled vehicles should be rare.