BOSTON -- Advocates for clean transportation are fighting a proposed ballot initiative, which would prevent Massachusetts from taxing gas and other fuels.

The ballot initiative is in response to the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) supported by Gov. Charlie Baker, a multistate commitment to a "cap and invest" policy in which fossil-fuel-emitting power plants, gas and diesel suppliers pay for the emissions they generate.

Josh Ostroff, interim director of Transportation for Massachusetts, said dropping the gas tax would do more than reject the TCI program, and contended it would put a huge portion of the Commonwealth's transportation funding at risk.

"If this ballot question takes away that revenue source, then we're going to have to find another way to repair our roads and bridges, to fund public transportation, and to make the kinds of repairs and upgrades in the face of climate change," Ostroff pointed out.

Environmental groups have also criticized TCI for not going far enough, and not focusing on communities on the front lines of the climate crisis.

But Ostroff argued there are other ways to bypass TCI, without wiping out a billion dollars in transportation funding. Backers of the initiative are now gathering signatures, after the Attorney General cleared it as technically constitutional.

Ostroff added powerful interests are supporting the ballot initiative, including the petroleum industry, but he asserted it is important to limit fossil-fuel emissions, especially on the heels of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's recent report calling climate change a "Code Red for humanity."

"The 90-degree-plus days we've had across Massachusetts, or the amount of rainfall that we've had and the catastrophic storms that we've experienced, show that human-caused climate change is truly a crisis that threatens the well-being of every community and every person," Ostroff remarked.

He noted many areas have structurally deficient bridges, hundreds of miles of substandard roads and inadequate bus service, and warned losing the state's gas-tax revenue would only allow problems to worsen.

A leading consumer publication says electric vehicles are gaining ground on gas-powered cars when it comes to feelings about reliability.

However, an EV enthusiast and Nebraska electrical engineering professor and said there's an information gap, while also highlighting improved technology.

The new reliability survey from Consumer Reports found that EV owners reported 42% more problems than gas-only cars.

That compares to nearly 80% from the previous survey, indicating a major improvement.

Retired University of Nebraska professor Don Cox said the batteries in most EVs are much better than they used to be, potentially easing concerns about them performing in colder climates.

"Batteries have improved a lot over the last 10, 15 years," said Cox. "A huge amount. They are continuing to improve."

However, he said EV batteries will always need a little time to warm up when it's cold, impacting their range in the winter.

Even though that perfection might never be achieved, Cox and other researchers say EVs are proving to be more efficient than gas models, overall.

He said he disagrees with how Consumer Reports puts together its evaluations, and added there isn't enough widely circulated ratings for buyers to lean on.

Dissecting issues such as reliability often coincides with measuring sales of electric vehicles. Cox was one of the first EV owners in Nebraska, which still lags other states for these purchases.

But with the help of federal investments, he said more chargers are being added, including near interstates to accommodate longer trips.

And the median range has increased from 80 miles in 2010 to roughly 250 miles today.

"I think that as people understand more about electric cars," said Cox, "that they're going to be more useful almost everywhere."

Nationally, researchers say issues still have to be sorted out in building up a strong charging network.

That includes drivers encountering broken charging equipment and the need for these sites to be maintained.



get more stories like this via email

The number of pedestrians and bicyclists killed on roadways in the U.S. has nearly doubled in the past 12 years and a New Mexico researcher wants to know why.

Nick Ferenchak, associate professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering at the University of New Mexico, said if you're in a car, you are safer than you have ever been. But it is not true for what the engineering world calls "VRUs," vulnerable road users. Although pedestrian deaths in 2022 were about the same as in 1975, he noted they have increased 83% since reaching their lowest point in 2009.

"Pedestrians and bicyclists are about a quarter of the people killed on our roadways in America," Ferenchak reported. "To put that in context, I think about 400 New Mexicans are killed every year on roads, about 100 of them are pedestrians and about 10 are on bikes."

Nationwide, about 45,000 Americans lose their lives on roadways each year, including 6,000 pedestrians. Another 76,000 pedestrians are injured. Ferenchak leads the newly-formed Center for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety, which is studying why the increase has occurred among VRUs and helping to identify engineering solutions for city and county planners.

Ferenchak pointed out cyclists tend to raise safety issues and demand roadway improvements, while pedestrians do not have strong advocacy networks. In Albuquerque, he added, many pedestrian deaths occur on dark, arterial roads.

"It doesn't make the problem easier to solve but a lot of the issue is actually at night, which is kind of surprising," Ferenchak observed. "You'd think most people are out walking and biking during the day but a lot of the issues are happening at night."

He emphasized while about 95% of people in Albuquerque drive to work, similar to other cities, but everyone is a pedestrian at some point and higher fatality rates need to be understood and addressed.


get more stories like this via email

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has revived congestion pricing after a five-month pause.

The program's biggest change is a $9 toll, down from $15 but by 2031, the toll will increase to $15 for all drivers. The program's mixed reception from New Yorkers is partly to blame for the pause.

Renae Reynolds, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, said the program faced opposition from commuters.

"There have been a plethora of critiques from folks in New Jersey who have complained about the cost of the toll, who have made claims that people are going to create congestion in other areas as they aim to avoid the congestion pricing fee," Reynolds noted.

An environmental assessment showed congestion pricing could increase pollution in the outer boroughs and New Jersey. Specifically, the Bronx might see increased soot from more than 700 trucks entering the borough daily. MTA is spending $130 million on mitigation efforts. Congestion pricing will go into effect at midnight on Jan. 5, 2025.

Lawsuits were brought forward or considered to both terminate and reinstate congestion pricing. Estimates showed canceling it would have cost New York 100,000 jobs. The program is slated to generate more than $15 billion for MTA.

Reynolds pointed out it will go toward overdue improvements to the city's subway system.

"That's signal upgrades, making sure our system is accessible for all folks regardless of abilities by installing elevators where there need to be," Reynolds outlined. "Because we are well behind the requirements of ADA accessibility."

Only 113 stations of the entire subway system's 472 are accessible. The MTA's capital plan calls for 70 stations to be made entirely accessible. Congestion pricing would also pay for the next phases of the Second Avenue subway to be built, and transitioning the city's bus fleet to all electric.