Climate Change – How Far Should It Go?

Climate change legislation is a top priority for President Obama and this administration. But striking the proper balance of incentives, penalties and costs to consumers is difficult. The American Trucking Association (ATA) recently posted commentary to a report by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. The report itself expressed concern about the taxes to the public and businesses as a result of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 proposed by Congressmen Waxman and Markey (aka Waxman-Markey bill) earlier this year.

Creating climate change legislation is challenging to say the least. This type of legislation impacts everyone both with environmental improvements and the direct and indirect costs to achieve these improvements.

I’m not an expert on environmental science or politics, but the debate about this legislation brings up many questions related to my profession. First of all, as expected, climate change legislation will target motorists in attempt to reduce VMTs (vehicle miles traveled) with high gas taxes, congestion tolls and other fees. But for the already over-tolled trucking freight industry, these costs just pinch struggling profit margins, raise costs and have other indirect impacts such as deferred fleet maintenance. So naturally, the trucking industry must pass at least some of the costs to consumers. That’s us, everyday Americans who like fresh produce, lots of retail choices and nearly every other product. Even locally grown produce or locally made items must be transported. I love bicycling as much as anyone but I recognize the carrying capacity limits of a bicycles. So back to my point, everything is carried by freight and it impacts everyone.

I could get into a lengthy debate about the merits of climate change efforts in other countries, some notable, some disappointing. But I want to look at another side of this issue, the importance of investment in public transit and use of non-motorized transportation (e.g. walking, bicycling, roller-blading, etc).

I spent the summer of 2003 in London. The Central Area Congestion Fee has recently been instituted. That didn’t impact me much as I didn’t have a car but I did ride the Underground (Tube) and couldn’t help but notice and be delayed by significant construction on the transit lines. It turns out that the congestion fees collected funded this construction. What a fabulous idea!

While the Waxman-Markey bill’s primary feature is “Cap and Trade”, it does address the relationship to public transit. But why aren’t Americans talking about this more? This is the one of the worst economic situations we’ve seen. There is no better time to adopt cost-effective (and environmentally friendly) changes. I know that I’ve noticed differences in my habits. If I can ride my bike, I will. If I can avoid refilling the gas tank, I will. So are other Americans doing the same and I am just missing it? I can’t help but notice the high percentage of passenger vehicles in the “SUV” category. Did these people just not get the memo about fuel efficiency and the cost of fuel?

Now back to climate change legislation. As I mentioned earlier, the ATA has expressed concerns of the trucking industry. Higher costs trickle to all Americans and even in a good economy, these costs are painfully felt. The ATA has supported other sustainable practices such as speed limit reductions and the use of idling reduction equipment. But climate change legislation has effectively been on a 30-year hiatus. Now is the time. Much of the world is far ahead of the U.S. in this arena.

Climate change legislation is the perfect opportunity to marry the benefits of public transit and environmental improvements. The challenge is finding a mechanism to get Americans onto public transportation, which is dreary if not disgusting in many places, and off the roads. This will allow more capacity for freight vehicles with no alternative to driving.

I’m not saying that the legislation should miss the freight industry entirely. I do believe that a comprehensive and progressive approach should be adopted. Since congestion is a major cost burden for all roadway users, clearly congestion reduction measures are needed. I think these measures can be more innovative than ever before. Perhaps incentives such as tax breaks for riding public transit, working off-set hours or living within 5 miles of work are a start. Utilizing ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) to their full potential should be another goal.

This bill has passed the House. We’ll have to wait and see what revisions are made but I would like to see a truly comprehensive approach to a delicate issue that impacts everyone and every business.

To view the text of H.R.2454 - American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009 visit:


American Trucking Association: