November, a month where conversations tend to lament the long lost days of summer, has seen a remarkable number of conversations about a similarly depressing topic: overcrowded transportation infrastructure in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area (GTHA).  At the beginning of the month, the Canadian Urban Transit Association held its fall conference. Sponsored by TTC and Metrolinx, the title was Public Transit: Investing in Quality of Life. This was followed up with Toronto Talks Mobility, a session organized by the Pembina Institute, Councillor Joe Mihevc and the University of Toronto’s Cities Centre. Coming up later this month is a “Mobility Pricing Stakeholder Forum” sponsored by Transport Futures.  These conversations are driven by projections that the GTHA will add close to 3 million new people in the next 20 years. Given current car ownership trends, this will result in an additional 1 million automobiles trying to access roads that are already hopelessly congested.   But isn’t the GTHA already at “peak car” with traffic congestion rates among the worst in North America? And aren’t vehicles already the largest sources of greenhouse gases in Ontario (see chart below)? Can we afford to put all these additional vehicles on the road, you ask? Good question.

The message emerging from these conversations is that we need to get serious about moving people out of their cars and onto mass transit. But with the GTHA’s public transit system in its own state of chronic underfunding, significant investment – $80 billion dollars was the amount being tossed around at the Toronto Talks Mobility session – is required to make it a viable alternative.  That is a huge sum of money for cash strapped governments in a time of fiscal austerity, and so innovative funding mechanisms will be required. Metrolinx is required to release an investment strategy to find the money by no later than 2013; why the delay? Let’s get this strategy released for public discussion sooner so that it can influence and inform transit planning and decision-making in 2012. The longer we wait, the greater the chance that we’ll continue to make planning decisions that will lock-in our commuting patterns for decades to come.

While I have pointed to the potential for road pricing to bridge the funding gap in both my 2010 and 2011 annual greenhouse gas progress reports and in a recent blog, most decision-makers in the region are reluctant to entertain it as a possibility. Most of the speakers at the Toronto Talks Mobility session danced around the issue of road pricing. Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion did suggest, however, that road tolls and related road pricing will have to be evaluated as a funding option. She stressed repeatedly that this will be tough to sell to the commuting public, especially those traveling to work in single-occupancy vehicles. She conceded however, that if the monies were put towards funding rapid transit – and only rapid transit – this would be an easier sell.  The elephant in the room is making its presence known.

In my recently released Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Progress Report, I highlighted my concerns about traffic congestion in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). It’s far more than just an inconvenience; it imposes huge costs on the economy, the environment and public health. Fully one-third of Ontario’s GHGs originate from the transportation sector, with the bulk of these emissions coming from gasoline consumption for personal vehicle use. A recent study by the C.D. Howe Institute called Congestion Relief: Assessing the Case for Road Tolls in Canada reported that congestion in the U.S. in 2005 resulted in just under 4 billion hours of travel delay and nearly 9.5 billion litres of wasted fuel that costs the U.S. economy $63 billion!

The OECD has noted that the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) suffers from the worst traffic congestion in North America, with an average commute of 80 minutes – worse than Los Angeles – while costing the Ontario economy $3.3 billion each year in lost productivity. The Pembina Institute reports that growth in the GTHA is occurring twice as fast as the supply of roads and 2.5 times faster than transit capacity. The Ontario Ministry of Finance expects the GTHA to grow by an additional 2.5 million people by 2031, bringing an additional 1.4 million vehicles with them.

These facts lead to one unalterable conclusion: Traffic gridlock in our cities is only going to get worse if we stick to the current way of moving people and goods around. Based on these facts, we have basically two choices: 1) accept more traffic and greater gridlock as inevitable; or, 2) DO something about it by pricing the commodity. We will have no choice but to price this limited resource (our road capacity) and the downtown parking that supports (encourages?) its overuse.

Road pricing need not be – in fact, it shouldn’t be – a cash grab … it’s about reducing unsustainable gridlock. Highway 407 just north of Toronto is a strong demonstration that the costs of congestion can be reduced while speeding up the flow of traffic. Road pricing has been shown to work in London, Stockholm and Singapore where average speeds almost doubled. And, local businesses are on side too. A global survey by the New York City Small Business Council called Congestion Pricing and Its Effect on Small Business reported that businesses within the City of London England’s congestion charge zone outperformed those outside, in terms of profitability, productivity and job creation once the congestion charges were introduced.

As was noted recently, paying by time and place of use rather than with fuel or property taxes sets up price signals that are more transparent while reducing congestion. I believe that a reliance on fuel taxes will continue to fail us. If you drive an internal combustion engine, for how long are you going to put up with subsidizing those who will be driving electric vehicles in the coming years?

A properly constituted “Special Purpose Fund”, with citizen oversight, can ensure that funds raised through any road pricing initiatives (gas tax, road tolls, congestion charges and/or parking fees) go to fund more transit (and, possibly, to maintaining the existing road network but, not to building new roads). When the Toronto Board of Trade suggests that we need to at least look at road pricing in their thoughtful The Move Ahead: Funding “The Big Move” that says a lot!

Toronto, 31 May, 2011 – The Ontario government will not, with its current programs, meet its targets for reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs). This is one conclusion from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario’s 2011 Greenhouse Gas Progress Report, released today.

• Click to download the full report
• Click to watch videos of the Commissioner outlining key points of the report:
  • Overview
  • Recommendations
• Click for more information about the report

“Recently released federal government data indicate that Ontario’s GHG emissions in 2009 were at the levels the government wants to achieve by 2014,” Miller says. “While the drop in GHGs is encouraging, it is highly likely that emissions have increased each year since 2009 with the return of economic growth. So I expect the government will need to renew its efforts to meet its 2014 reduction target.”

The Commissioner says this highlights the need for governments to break the link between GDP growth and GHG emissions. Miller is convinced the best way to do this is to put a price on carbon. “It is unfortunate the Ontario government recently announced a delay in participating in a regional cap-and-trade system.” Noting that the industrial sector is responsible for 30% of Ontario’s GHGs, Miller says “putting a price on carbon now will guide investment decisions, and help families, businesses and municipalities transition to a low-carbon economy.”

Miller is also concerned with the lack of action in reducing emissions from the transportation sector. “The transportation sector is responsible for almost a third of all emissions, making it the largest contributor of GHGs in the province” says Miller. The Ontario government is cutting back programs it’s using to reduce transportation emissions. It has cancelled a tax credit for fuel-efficient vehicles as well as the Ontario Bus Replacement Program, and frozen funding for the Green Commercial Vehicle program. “The government needs to make a much more concerted effort to control this large and growing source of emissions, if it hopes to meet its near and medium-term reduction targets”

The Commissioner says the government must also begin a serious discussion about tolls and road pricing, in order to lessen traffic congestion. “We have to reduce the number of single-passenger vehicle trips in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area. They are already at a higher level than in most global cities, and car traffic is expected to increase by another 7% by 2020,” says Miller. “Traffic congestion is more than just an inconvenience; it imposes huge costs on the economy, the environment, and public health.”

For more information, contact:
Hayley Easto
Communications and Outreach Coordinator
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario
416-325-3371 / 416-819-1673
1-800-701-6454
hayley.easto@eco.on.ca

Road pricing refers to any direct charge levied to the user of roads, and can take the form of fuel taxes, parking fees, road tolls and/or congestion charges. The latter two — road tolls and congestion charges — are getting a lot of media buzz lately.

Simply put, with road tolls, you pay-as-you-drive, usually on multi-lane highways.  Ideally, the money goes to build better rapid transit and, if implemented properly, can improve public transit to the point where it really does get people out of their cars in their daily commute.  Better transit, less gridlock, lower emissions.  Win-win-win!  It’s a neat and tidy way to capture the full costs of our transportation network: both the direct costs of building and maintaining our roads; and, the current indirect externalities that don’t get factored in, like pollution, GHGs and health impacts.

If you choose to drive on a designated toll route like Hwy 407 just north of Toronto, you get a bill each month via a tracking transponder in your vehicle or via a photo record of your license plate.  The advent of satellite technology is making “smart transportation pricing” much more efficient and cost-effective.  No need for 407-styled lights, cameras and transponders.  A small GPS unit in your vehicle will automatically track where you go and the company running the system sends you a bill each month.  Some systems use GPS units that electronically debit your account!

Congestion charges work a bit differently.  The most famous one is the City of London Congestion Charge Zone (CCZ).  Similar to road tolls, the intent is to reduce traffic gridlock while raising funds to invest in public transit.  If you enter the London CCZ between 7 am and 6 pm, a camera records your license plate and you are automatically charged the equivalent of about CDN$14.  Milan, Italy has a similar system called Ecopass; if you drive into the city centre you pay a fee.  But, if you drive an alternative fuel vehicle, you get a free pass.

So, how much can road tolls reduce pollution like greenhouse gases?  The San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) suggests that road pricing policies combined with supporting land use policies could reduce GHGs from transportation by 11-14 per cent.  Let’s assume 10 per cent in the GTA; that could translate into about 5 million tonnes of GHGs per year by 2020.

Road pricing: a very effective transportation demand management (TDM) measure that reduces traffic congestion, curbs gasoline consumption, cleans the air and pays for better public transit.

Find out more in the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario’s 2008/09 Annual Greenhouse Gas Progress Report