News
Seattle: Driving More, Polluting (Slightly) Less
Too late for his reelection hopes, but Mayor Greg Nickels met (and/or exceeded) his Kyoto emissions-reduction targets: According to a new report from the city's Office of Sustainability, the city exceeded Kyoto targets (reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to seven percent below 1990 levels by 2012) last year. Since 1990, the report reveals, the city has seen a population increase of 16 percent, but reduced emissions 7 percent. Per capita, that's a reduction of nearly 20 percent.
"The combination of population growth and emissions reductions means that on a per person basis, we’ve made significant strides in lowering our carbon footprint," the report concludes.
However, there's some bad news embedded in the city's report: Emissions from transportation, which makes up more than 62 percent of carbon emissions in the city, have actually been increasing—going up 7 percent since 1990. The vast majority of that pollution—two-thirds—comes from cars and trucks on Seattle streets. That means that our biggest source of pollution is getting worse, not better.
To dig down into the numbers: Emissions from cars and "light-duty trucks" (e.g. SUVs) have gone up 6 percent since 1990; emissions from heavy-duty commercial trucks have gone up 16 percent; and emissions from buses and vanpools have gone up a whopping 30 percent. Although emissions from ship, rail, and boat traffic have gone up modestly, emissions from Washington State Ferries have declined 15 percent. And while emissions at SeaTac Airport have gone up 7 percent, emissions from King County Airport have declined dramatically—30 percent. According to Office of Sustainability director Mike Mann, bus emissions went up because ridership has increased 31.8 percent across Sound Transit and Metro; ferry emissions have gone down because of cuts to the ferry system; and King County Airport emissions have improved because of improvements to the efficiency of the airport's ground-transportation fleet.
The overall reduction in the city's emissions came from reductions in emissions from building and industrial uses, as well as the purchase of carbon offsets by City Light. But since transportation makes up so much of Seattle's pollution problem, any long-term solutions are going to have to focus on transportation—namely, getting people out of their cars, which produce nearly two-thirds of the city's transportation-related emissions. That isn't happening now—in fact, the report finds, improved fuel efficiency has been vastly outpaced by an increase in passenger vehicle miles traveled, which have gone up 16 percent since 1990.
As evidence of the scope of the problem, the report finds that just keeping greenhouse-gas emissions at 2012 levels "will be challenging as our city continues to grow in population and bounces back from the economic downturn."
The report recommends a "paradigm shift in transportation planning"—"shifting our focus to one of moving people and goods rather than vehicles." The specifics, however, are familiar, not radical (as the phrase "paradigm shift" would imply): Adding bike lanes, improving sidewalks, creating better public spaces, and continuing to expand transit options like light rail. (It even goes so far as to reassure: "Sometimes it's necessary to drive.")
No radical proposals for taking down the viaduct, making a massive new city-funded investment in transit, or building light rail beyond the scope of what Sound Transit has proposed here; instead, the report recommends using "our road resources more efficiently. ... prioritiz[ing] [greenhouse gas] reductions" and "shift[ing] our fuel source [for vehicle trips] away from fossil fuels to non-food-based biofuels and green Seattle City Light electricity." Mann sums up the recommendations as follows: "As we look at this progress report, it shows that we've reached a milestone and the path to midcentury is going to be more difficult than the path so far."
Will Mayor-elect Mike McGinn propose a real "paradigm shift" on transportation, instead of tepid recommendations from the Nickels-era office of sustainability?
I've got a call in to him to see what he thinks of the recommendations in the report.
"The combination of population growth and emissions reductions means that on a per person basis, we’ve made significant strides in lowering our carbon footprint," the report concludes.
However, there's some bad news embedded in the city's report: Emissions from transportation, which makes up more than 62 percent of carbon emissions in the city, have actually been increasing—going up 7 percent since 1990. The vast majority of that pollution—two-thirds—comes from cars and trucks on Seattle streets. That means that our biggest source of pollution is getting worse, not better.
To dig down into the numbers: Emissions from cars and "light-duty trucks" (e.g. SUVs) have gone up 6 percent since 1990; emissions from heavy-duty commercial trucks have gone up 16 percent; and emissions from buses and vanpools have gone up a whopping 30 percent. Although emissions from ship, rail, and boat traffic have gone up modestly, emissions from Washington State Ferries have declined 15 percent. And while emissions at SeaTac Airport have gone up 7 percent, emissions from King County Airport have declined dramatically—30 percent. According to Office of Sustainability director Mike Mann, bus emissions went up because ridership has increased 31.8 percent across Sound Transit and Metro; ferry emissions have gone down because of cuts to the ferry system; and King County Airport emissions have improved because of improvements to the efficiency of the airport's ground-transportation fleet.
The overall reduction in the city's emissions came from reductions in emissions from building and industrial uses, as well as the purchase of carbon offsets by City Light. But since transportation makes up so much of Seattle's pollution problem, any long-term solutions are going to have to focus on transportation—namely, getting people out of their cars, which produce nearly two-thirds of the city's transportation-related emissions. That isn't happening now—in fact, the report finds, improved fuel efficiency has been vastly outpaced by an increase in passenger vehicle miles traveled, which have gone up 16 percent since 1990.
As evidence of the scope of the problem, the report finds that just keeping greenhouse-gas emissions at 2012 levels "will be challenging as our city continues to grow in population and bounces back from the economic downturn."
The report recommends a "paradigm shift in transportation planning"—"shifting our focus to one of moving people and goods rather than vehicles." The specifics, however, are familiar, not radical (as the phrase "paradigm shift" would imply): Adding bike lanes, improving sidewalks, creating better public spaces, and continuing to expand transit options like light rail. (It even goes so far as to reassure: "Sometimes it's necessary to drive.")
No radical proposals for taking down the viaduct, making a massive new city-funded investment in transit, or building light rail beyond the scope of what Sound Transit has proposed here; instead, the report recommends using "our road resources more efficiently. ... prioritiz[ing] [greenhouse gas] reductions" and "shift[ing] our fuel source [for vehicle trips] away from fossil fuels to non-food-based biofuels and green Seattle City Light electricity." Mann sums up the recommendations as follows: "As we look at this progress report, it shows that we've reached a milestone and the path to midcentury is going to be more difficult than the path so far."
Will Mayor-elect Mike McGinn propose a real "paradigm shift" on transportation, instead of tepid recommendations from the Nickels-era office of sustainability?
I've got a call in to him to see what he thinks of the recommendations in the report.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
