Live data from Hacker News

In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

e360.yale.edu

231–240 of 524 posts

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#231
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was also an endless parade of NY Post stories about how Manhattan restaurants would suffer because their customers couldn't just drive in from Long Island and New Jersey.

Parking garages: the OG congestion fee.

They could just park right in front of the restaurant if it wasn't for those damn bike lanes.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#232
post #77
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't change my mind about emissions in NYC . NYC is full of modern, western cars. Two-stroke engines are terrible , classic automobiles are terrible, cars with no emission regulations will tend to be terrible. Cars in NYC will have catalytic converters and other technologies to reduce tailpipe emissions.

The notable source of bad tailpipe emissions in NYC are heavy diesel trucks, which, to my understanding, produce a large proportion of tailpipe particulates (and NOx) in the US, despite being a small fraction of overall vehicles on the road. There are strong correlations with heavy truck traffic and asthma rates.

Yeah, my neighbor at my last place had a diesel pickup and I could both hear and smell that it was diesel whenever he started it up.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#233
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a lot if EV buyers are interested in the environmental impact of their purchase?

I say this as someone who owns an electric scooter and whose next car will be an EV—the sales pitch for EVs right now is basically pay more (especially now that the tax credit is gone) to have a worse time and maybe eventually claw some of it back over the lifetime of the car in fuel savings. The environmental impact is the pro in the pro con list. So if that doesn't pan out, or doesn't pan out enough it's going to b…

What do you mean by a worse time? The advantages are substantial- No oil changes ever again, performance that is on par with high end sports cars, less moving parts which should lead to higher reliability, in my state you don't even need to do an annual inspection. Those types of unexpected appointments are what really aggravate me when they are unexpectedly needed and eat up weekend time.

Depending on your commute length, you may be able to just use your regular plug to top up over night. Infra upgrades to support the future are unfortunate, but it should be a one and done kind of thing. It was probably time to update the panel and get 200 Amp service- you will recoup a portion of that if you ever sell the house.

The best part is batteries get signficantly (for some values of signficant) cheaper and better each year. Gen 1 Nissan Leaf owners can now actually replace their batteries for about 1/5th the initial pack cost and increase their range.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rich were driving before, and are still driving. The difference is that now they are paying for that service they were already using, and those funds are going to public transit which serves the majority of New Yorkers especially those with lower incomes.

Are the funds actually going to public transit, or are they being used to pay off all the people whose support was needed to implement the congestion charges?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing_in_New_York...

> In June 2025, revenue from the congestion toll was used to increase service on more than a dozen bus lines citywide… In October 2025, the MTA sold $230 million worth of bonds to help fund the first projects that were being partially financed using congestion-toll revenue.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also noise pollution, and above ground trains are hella loud. (Or at least CalTrain and BART are...)

This is a widely debunked bad faith NIMBY talking point. A train, even at high frequencies, is less noise pollution than a highway or major road.

In the house I lived it was not debunked. It was fact. The caltrain blasted it's horn hourly (or more) 24/7 within earshot of my house. I could not sleep with my window open and often slept with ear plugs even with the window closed. I get you might be tempted to spout generic statistics, but I can tell you without a doubt it was ear blistering loud up close, and sleep disturbing even 2 blocks away.

Also for what it's worth you have no idea if it's good or bad faith.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#236
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even without congestion pricing, the poor are the least likely to drive. Spending public money to subsidize driving (which we’re still doing on balance, even in Manhattan) disproportionately helps the wealthy.

IMO it would be even better if was an auction based system, maybe 24/7. That way if someone has an <= $8.99 threshold/need to drive, and they find a slot, they will. I think the static pricing will create a distortion in the usage, maybe having dynamic pricing (with a ceiling) would be smarter?

By the time you could build such a system, autonomous cars will have completely taken over, so the rules could be as complicated as you wish.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#237
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

working class people are predominantly using public transit to get around nyc this claim has been debunked many times and anyone with eyes can see who the private drivers in NYC are

Because it's economically infeasible to drive?

That was the case before congestion pricing too.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#238
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're speaking about individual actions, isn't avoiding air travel more effective than any other form of individual vehicle travel choice?

Yes, and the northeast has the best rail transit in the US, which NYC sits right in the middle of.

Rail transit in the north east is the best in the US. But it is terrible in many ways. As someone who lives in an area that would be marginal for rail even in the great rail countries of Europe of Asia I really need the north east to develop great rail - only by bringing great rail to places where it is easy can we possibly get it good enough that it would be worth bringing to me. Instead I just get examples of why we shouldn't bother with transit at all here: when all we can see is the stupid things New York is constantly doing to transit (where the density is so high they can get by with it) there isn't an example I can point to of that would be worth doing here.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#239

I'm curious how congestion pricing became a national issue. The strength of conviction people have about this policy–almost either way, but certainly among those against–seems to scale with distance from the city. Nobody in Idaho gets uppity about New Jersey's tolls. But they have strong, knowledge-free, almost identity-defining opinions about congestion charges. Is it because it's a policy that's worked in Europe an…

Cars are en extension of some Americans' identity and driving is something they feel utterly entitled to.

I've lived all over the world and in NYC for decades so it seems silly to me. Bust most Americans have never seen or ridden an effective form of public transport. So they view congestion pricing as an infringement on their rights and quality of life.

Re: In New York City, congestion pricing leads to marked drop in pollution

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that brake dust is the primary PM2.5 emission from vehicles in an urban environment. However the PM2.5 component from tail pipes are still very significant, higher than the contribution from tires. The order is: 1. brake dust 2. road dust 3. engine emissions 4. tire dust https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00456... https://electrek.co/2025/05/27/another-way-electric-cars-cle...

and would it be true to say that regenerative braking on electric cars reduces significantly this dust?

I recall a discussion on HN explaining that while true, this might be offset by the higher average weight of EVs, leading to more dust from the tires and the road. Again, no easy solution unfortunately, just trade offs.
Post reply on HN