Live data from Hacker News

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

e360.yale.edu

391–400 of 524 posts

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

#391
post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong. I used transit for the majority of my career. Biked for as much of it. Love the ideas. The VAST majority of people I would see have conversations about this seem to want others to take transit so that traffic is better for them in their car.

The vast majority of people I know have never lived where there was a transit system that would be useful for them. So of course they want other people to use it without planning on using it themselves. Give them a system that is worth using and they will use it (there will be a multi-year delay before they try/start using it though).

I've lived in Atlanta and Seattle. Both have perfectly workable transit. Even if Atlanta does seem to have gotten a bit worse over the years.

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

#392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There never seems to be much discussion on reducing the harm from tire (and I suppose road surface) particulates. Maybe that's the next frontier?

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.

I was thinking more from the perspective "make them out of materials that aren't too bad to inhale/ingest"

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

#393
post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it's always, always a vague group of people who are apparently affected. Never specific examples. Someone on the other side of the country is only going to see the way this will impact the lives of people like them. They aren't going to say "Clearly this policy has impacted the household budget of NYC plumber Mitchell Tnenski" They don't know Mitchell. They know that congestion pricing coming to their city woul…

> They know that congestion pricing coming to their city would hurt them in very real ways. But why should they even care to begin with? Just because the news and media made them aware of congestion pricing? This is the whole problem, that local issues are made mainstream news media specifically to cultivate fear and anger in people that literally have no skin in the game and a completely different lifestyle.

> But why should they even care to begin with?

Why should they care about something that they feel will hurt them financially when they're already struggling and restrict their freedom on top of that? Why wouldn't they care?

> Just because the news and media made them aware of congestion pricing?

Uber's "surge" pricing was what first introduced many of them to a world where the price of something they depend on changes from moment to moment. Dynamic/discriminatory pricing schemes have been worrying people for a long time now. People don't like it, they consider it scammy, and they don't want it to spread.

I think that if NYC had just jacked up the toll price all the time it wouldn't have set off as many alarms, but ultimately people in other places aren't really worried about congestion pricing in New York, their worry is that it will come to where they drive and they can't afford people taking more money from them. They're struggling to keep food on the table and are drowning in record high levels of household debt. Of course they're scared of congestion pricing catching on.

Mind you, while some of their fears are reasonable, not all of them are. I've seen some of the more conspiratorial people talking about it as a way to control and restrict the movement of poor people (something shared with criticisms of 15-minute cities). The core of the problem though is that their standard of living is declining, their trust/confidence in government is bottoming out, they know that they're getting screwed over by the wealthy and they're on edge. They see NYC using some scammy pricing scheme to take more money from people like them while the wealthy are unaffected and it hits a nerve.

They'll have plenty of skin in the game if congestion pricing spreads (and its success makes that increasingly likely) and that skin is already stretched thin which is making them feel highly skeptical of government, suspicious of people's motives, and angry over being asked to make their lives worse for the convenience of the wealthy. They worry about driving where they need to go becoming a luxury they can be priced out of, and as bad as NYC's public transportation is (compared to what's seen in other countries) most of them don't have anything even close to it in their own cities. That's what I'm seeing in discussions surrounding this issue both online and offline anyway.

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

#394

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.

I was thinking more from the perspective "make them out of materials that aren't too bad to inhale/ingest"

Sure, that's great too. But the rubber lasting longer means less of those bad things to inhale floating around at any given time.

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

#395
post #300

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.

Another option is just stick to a smaller circuit.

80% of 15A x 120V = 1.4 kW

80% of 20A x 240V = 3.8 kW

Just going from a standard 15A outlet to a 20A/240V nearly triples the amount of power, and many homes that would need a new panel for a 50A charger have room for one more 20A circuit. Cars typically spend 8-16 hrs per day stationary in their own driveway, so 3.8 kW translates into tons of range.

While 40A or 50A is nice to have, it's far from necessary.

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

#396
post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of people I know have never lived where there was a transit system that would be useful for them. So of course they want other people to use it without planning on using it themselves. Give them a system that is worth using and they will use it (there will be a multi-year delay before they try/start using it though).

I've lived in Atlanta and Seattle. Both have perfectly workable transit. Even if Atlanta does seem to have gotten a bit worse over the years.

Workable is not a great endorsement. If things are not fast and frequent people will prefer to drive even if transit could work. Also both have workable transit only for some destinations - I don't live in either city, but I'd guess without looking getting downtown is easy but if your destination is one suburb over it is technically possible but you could baby crawl faster.

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

#397

It may have dropped pollution in Manhattan but I guess more pollution added up to the surrounding borroughs in addition to more traffic.

The study found the opposite: people are picking healthier choices throughout the region. This makes sense: if you switch to taking the train, in addition to not driving in the congestion zone you also aren’t driving the distance between the closest train station and Manhattan, which for many people will be more engine operating time than they spend in the zone itself.

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

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, but how does that relate to environmentalists? The people lying were the car industry, but somehow the OP questions environmentalism. Why are they not questioning the car industry?

This is something I see a lot in science skepticism.

Someone incorrectly conveys a simple science concept, and people blame the scientist, not the communicator.

Like, News says "New revolutionary battery" and people roll their eyes and say "Oh but this will never make it to prod" and decide that scientists are liars and conveniently ignore that lithium battery density has like doubled over the past 20 years or so.

The person who was wrong was the unaware journalist taking a PR person's claims at face value, and having no context to smell test such a claim, and having no time or interest to treat the claim with skepticism anyway because "Batteries slightly improve" never sold newspapers.

But they blame science!

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

#399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

21 minutes faster. https://www.tomtom.com/newsroom/explainers-and-insights/the-...

That was true at the beginning of congestion pricing and perhaps over the summer, but it is definitely not true anymore

Are there numbers to back this up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congestion_pricing_in_New_York... says "By July 2025, there were 67,000 fewer daily vehicles in the congestion zone compared to before implementation. The same month, one study found that travel times within the congestion zone had decreased, and that delivery companies were opting to use smaller vehicles (which were charged lower tolls) in the toll zone".

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

#400
post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, but that also drives the question of "why don't we have functioning public transit?" or "why aren't we building out our public transit?".

There will be a stop and balance struck everywhere, but this sort of thing really does make people that deal in the car industry nervous.

I'd gladly ditch my car tomorrow if I could catch a bus within walking distance.

I'm unfortunately 5 miles from the nearest bus stop.

Post reply on HN