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

301–310 of 524 posts

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

#301

Post by afthonos »

pixl97 wrote: post #219
awongh wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The love for diesel engines in many European countries was always confusing to me. And turns out the whole thing was a lie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_emissions_scandal It's unfortunate that so much rhetoric around environmentalism is based on faulty claims. It's starting to make me sceptical of environmental claims in general. The latest one is AI data center water use- the extreme numbers like 5 liters…

>It's starting to make me sceptical of environmental claims in general. What does that even mean? Honestly whatever it means it sounds like you would be the kind of person that would fall for the firehose of falsehood rather than look for the truth behind the actual claims.

For 99.9% of issues, we rely on trust to make up our minds. We assume people are mostly not lying. If a group of people are found to lie, then yes, maybe “look for the truth behind the actual claims” is worth it, but more likely shooting them out of the discourse and into the metaphorical sun is the right response. If you walk around lying, you don’t get to complain that people aren’t doing research on your claims.

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

#302

Post by offsign »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #241
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 t…

Didn't advocate for "more highways" -- I totally get it. More offering that maybe these problems shouldn't be viewed as a purely zero-sum game, where cities get all the benefit at the expense of the larger region due to a form of geographic tyranny. (Or at least, perhaps we shouldn't pretend that externalities don't exist through studies that largely look at quality-of-life factors in the hub.)

You can see some of these same dynamics playing out in SF with the decommissioning of the 'Great Highway' on the west side, which led to a recent recall of the local council member. Why does the majority vote of a city of 800k people get to unilaterally dictate the transportation options for a region upwards of 7MM?

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

#303

Post by afavour »

autoexec wrote: post #282
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #199

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…

I think it's because it disproportionately impacts the people who can least afford it. It allows the wealthy to continue to enjoy the convenience (relative to alternatives) of driving into the city while polluting and causing traffic at a price that has zero impact on their lives while it punishes those who already have much less and whose lives will be impacted by the fines and the often significant amounts of time…

I think this comment is a great example of what the OP is talking about. Your comment is completely divorced from the context of congestion pricing in New York City. For example:

> Taking a basic task like driving into the city, something many people are forced to do for work

That is simply not the case in NYC. Very, very few people must drive into the center of Manhattan to work. It was already unaffordable to do so anyway because parking is incredibly expensive. People take the subway. Car ownership is already disproportionately preserved for the rich.

NYC is different from much of the country. I'm not going to make an argument that it's any better or any worse, but it is different. NYC congestion pricing as a national debate is missing the forest for the trees.

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

#304

Post by ceejayoz »

selimthegrim wrote: post #284
ceejayoz wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's quite a bit of materials science work in that direction. For example, I have Michelin's CrossClimate tires, which are all-weather tires that do better in snow but don't break down as fast as dedicated winter tires do in warm weather.

How would you recommend them based on winter performance?

I live in a snowy area and am quite happy with them.

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

#305

Post by donkyrf »

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…

People are not cross-shopping the Model 3 with a full-size pickup truck. They're cross-shopping against Camry, Accord, BMW 3, etc...

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

#306

Post by gWPVhyxPHqvk »

MLgulabio wrote: post #104
tantalor wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Concern trolling.

Whats concern trolling? This mechanism allows people with more money to enjoy driving in the city or is this congestion prcing based on your salary? no its not its based on the time in the city independent of what you make. A person with their high end car and miillions now can buy himself a nice little drive into the city while everyone else can't.

Do you seriously think that multi-millionaires drive to and from Manhattan to commute?

Our C-suite and top quant traders at our firm take the train, bike, or walk to the office daily. I asked around my office - no one has ever driven regularly to our office in 20+ years.

The reason why is because driving objectively sucks in the city.

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

#307

Post by afavour »

raldi wrote: post #285
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Best they can do now is, “Well, we’re not New York" But that's a real argument. They're not a $1.3tn economy ($1tn of which is Manhattan alone) [1] with fewer than one car per household (0.26 in Manhattan) [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_New_York_City [2] https://www.hunterurban.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Car-L...

Some cities are more like New York; they’ll go first. Eventually the argument will have to be, “We’re completely unlike everywhere else in America.”

I dunno, I think there's a hard stop at "having a functioning public transit system". I could imagine DC implementing a congestion charge. Nashville less so.

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

#308

Post by bryanlarsen »

rconti wrote: post #298
iambateman wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true of tires, you would expect an EV’s tires to get substantially less range before wearing out…which I don’t believe is the case.

IME they only wear out maybe 15-20% faster than you'd think. On the other hand, over the span of 40,000 miles, a tire loses a LOT more rubber by weight/volume than a brake pad loses pad material. No idea what the PM2.5 breakdown is though.

The difference is that only about 1% of the worn rubber ends up in the air whereas most of the brake pad ends up in the air. Most of the worn rubber stays on the road. Where it will get washed away by the rain to end up as microplastics in the water.

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

#309

Post by fullstop »

Spivak wrote: post #300
fullstop wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just the cost to get my garage outfitted with a charging port is about to be in the thousands because it requires me to replace the entire breaker panel. Now this is a me problem because that panel is ancient but it does add to the total cost of "doing this" and going EV. You likely don't need to replace the panel, as load management options exist. Wallbox, in particular, has an option where you can add a modbus do…

I'm probably just going to bite the bullet and replace the panel but this is really good to know.

How many amps is your current service? I have 200A service where I live, but the house is 100% electric -- water heater, range, heat pump, washer, dryer, etc. All electric. There's even a little medallion on the front of the house about it: https://i.imgur.com/BrHj1XQ.jpeg The 70s were weird.

And when you say that your panel is old, just how old are we talking?

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

#310

Post by ceejayoz »

CryptoBanker wrote: post #286
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no one in NYC, rich or poor, has any confidence in the MTA's ability to properly and efficiently use these funds They're already using them, and the results show. They could have done it cheaper. But the LIRR is operating at Swiss rail efficiecies since the recent electrification and signalling improvements.

What electrification and signal improvements are you talking about? Signal upgrades are a constant thing in the MTA, both for the LIRR and the subways. They are not something that just started with congestion pricing funds. Also, efficiency was already on the upswing for the LIRR long before congestion pricing funds[1]. [1] https://www.mta.info/press-release/icymi-governor-hochul-cel...

Congestion pricing was agreed to in 2019.

Expected revenue was used to budget quite a few projects; this caused a bit of a scare when Hochul put it on hold for a while. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/16/nyregion/congestion-prici...

Post reply on HN