Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 524 posts

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

#241

Post by JumpCrisscross »

offsign wrote: post #229

One thing that irks me about these schemes is that they often ignore cities role as regional hubs -- i.e. many cities became cities because they serve as geographical gateways interlocking the surrounding region. They are happy to take the benefits of being at the hub, but (increasingly) adopt a nativistic dialogue with the rest of the spokes. I get that no one likes highways running through their communities, but wh…

> when you decommission historical arteries

There are no highway arteries running through the congestion zone. Building one would require hundreds of billions of dollars of eminent domain.

Manhattan has a $1tn GDP [1], on par with Switzerlad [2]. Its economy is larger than all but 6 states (between Pennsylvaia and Ohio) [3]. More than all of New Jersey. If it crossed the pond it would be the fifth-largest member of the EU, between the Netherlands and Poland [4].

It's a tremendously productive jewel that towers–literally–over the economies of its neighbors. Sacrificing Manhattan to save a few bucks on a trucker who doesn't want to take a highway through the Bronx is absolutely mental from a social, economic and environmental perspective.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_New_York_City $939bn in 2023

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...

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

#242

Post by lkbm »

Spivak wrote: post #116
Angostura wrote: post #12

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…

You likely don't need to install a special charger or breaker panel. A regular 120V wall outlet will give probably give you 30+ miles of range just charging overnight. If your commute is longer, you might want a better charger, but don't let someone upsell you on a high-speed charger if your average daily travel is under 30mi and 90%ile under 100mi.

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

#243

Post by fullstop »

awongh wrote: post #180
bryanlarsen wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That source is Europe, not New York. It claims EV's are 24% heavier than ICE vehicles. That might be true in Europe but definitely not the case in the US where the average ICE vehicle is a 6000 pound truck and the average EV is a 4000 pound Tesla. It also assumes they're using the same tires. EV owners put on EV tires, which are formulated to have a lower rolling resistance, quieter and last longer. All 3 of those co…

But a 6000 pound truck doesn't get replaced with an EV sedan. Or vice versa. As things move to EV I don't know why the proportion of car body types (whatever you call this) wouldn't stay the same.

> As things move to EV I don't know why the proportion of car body types (whatever you call this) wouldn't stay the same.

It's the same problem as giant phones. They make them this way in order to fit a bigger battery in.

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

#244

Post by ixtli »

offsign wrote: post #229

One thing that irks me about these schemes is that they often ignore cities role as regional hubs -- i.e. many cities became cities because they serve as geographical gateways interlocking the surrounding region. They are happy to take the benefits of being at the hub, but (increasingly) adopt a nativistic dialogue with the rest of the spokes. I get that no one likes highways running through their communities, but wh…

I understand what you're saying but after 100 years of uninhibited car-centric design i think its reasonable for those of us who live here to want to prioritize the experience of people who live and work in manhattan, south bronx, and west queens and brooklyn. if people want to commute from places surrounding the city in a more efficient fashion i think its reasonable for them to redress that with the local or state governments instead of using nyc infrastructure for free in a way that inhibits community growth here.

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

#246

Post by coryrc »

somewhereoutth wrote: post #216
bryanlarsen wrote: post #150

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?

Absolutely. Nearly eliminates. Even non-plugin hybrids have greatly reduced.

There was a "study" going around claiming otherwise, which sampled air captured by passing vehicles with a trash bag on a busy road, claiming EVs did not reduce brake dust, but even my brief summary here makes it extremely obvious how flawed this "measurement" is.

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

#247

Post by fullstop »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #181
conception wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minus brakes on EVs. They usually do not use their break pads.

ehhh, they certainly can and do... but I think there's a case to be made that this can be lower when managed appropriately

They can, obviously, but it is done very very sparingly.

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

#249

Post by ixtli »

MLgulabio wrote: post #81

[flagged]

you clearly dont live here or you'd know that the poor of NYC are not the ones that own cars. they're the ones that take public transit. also, there are state benefits that offset congestion pricing and other fees for people who are poor

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

#250

Post by [deleted] »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #168
Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"relatively clean" means 85% of PM2.5 is from non-exhaust sources, and 15% is from exhaust after catalytic conversion. In New York EV and ICE are pretty much on par when it comes to this category of pollution, as the additional weight increases non exhaust sources. Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522... It is different in Africa, where catalytic converters are harvested for precious m…

That source is Europe, not New York. It claims EV's are 24% heavier than ICE vehicles. That might be true in Europe but definitely not the case in the US where the average ICE vehicle is a 6000 pound truck and the average EV is a 4000 pound Tesla. It also assumes they're using the same tires. EV owners put on EV tires, which are formulated to have a lower rolling resistance, quieter and last longer. All 3 of those co…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN