By Basil Sharp*
Prior to the Auckland’s latest lockdown, our roads post-holidays were increasingly congested, and it has been reported that air quality in the central city has further deteriorated (The health of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s natural environment in 2020). The report’s conclusion that air pollution is largely a result of vehicles, particularly diesel ones, comes as no surprise.
New Zealand has the highest level of individual car ownership in the OECD and our congested roads are testament to this. If vehicles are the problem - causing not only congestion and air pollution, but injuries, fatalities, and noise, then adding additional lanes to networks – shovel and cones – only fixes congestion for a short time and does nothing to address air quality and other pressing environmental issues.
Our road networks are capital assets and congestion also reduces their value to users. One problem is that use of the network is free. More cars using an open access resource eventually results in the depletion of the resource. We know this from our experience with natural resource - road infrastructure is no exception.
Solutions to congestion and its associated impacts - environment and health - can’t be magicked. It is time for our political leaders to consider the full range of alternatives to address this challenge.
One option is to follow Singapore’s approach that ramps up the cost of car ownership. The total number of cars is capped. Those wanting a car must bid for the right to own and use the vehicle for a limited number of years. The initial cost of a basic sedan is roughly three times the cost in NZ. As we are not as space-constrained as Singapore, it is unlikely that a rights-based approach to car ownership will find favour with the public here.
Pricing use is another option. Congestion pricing has been around for years - at least since the 1950s. Motorists are charged a fee when entering the busied parts of a city. Revenue collected can be used to cover administration and operating costs, contribute to public transport and the provision of cycle ways. This results in the roads becoming less congested, air quality improving, and the city becoming more liveable. It’s a simple idea, but one we seem reluctant to try.
Singapore also runs an electronic road pricing scheme aimed at traffic and behaviour management. Vehicles are charged as they pass a control point when entering the inner city. Price varies according to the vehicle type, location of entry and time of day.
London established a Congestion Charge Zone and most cars and vehicles entering the zone between 7am and 10pm - seven days a week - are charged a flat fee. Cameras record car number plates when entering the zone and the owner has an option of pre-pay or a slightly higher fee within three days. The fee is not based on distance travelled or time of day. The initial response was massive. Traffic volume has remained at around 30% of the pre-charging level. Revenue collected is dedicated to improving public transport and cycleways.
Stockholm’s congestion pricing scheme is a recurring charge rather than a flat daily rate like London. Traffic volume has reduced by 18%, public transport ridership increased and travel times to get into the city during peak hours cut in half. In addition to improving congestion, carbon emissions dropped by 14–18%, environmentally-friendly tax-exempt vehicle ownership tripled, and retailers reported a 6% increase in business.
We can get even smarter by using technology. Imagine real-time pricing of access to the network supported by artificial intelligence. Data feeds from the network and algorithms could report existing flows, predict peaks, price access accordingly and provide information on Apps.
Commuters could plan their trip accordingly or chose to increase their days working from home. With ongoing Covid-19 lockdowns, many people have permanently altered their work patterns, which must be beneficial for our environment.
Reducing demand for people to own vehicles by improving public transport options is also key, but for those people who still require private transport, government incentives to use zero or low-emission vehicles should be in place – including being exempt from congestion charges.
This would make an immediate contribution to the government’s emission reduction targets. It is time for owners of our assets to treat infrastructure as an economic asset and use technology to increase its value to the community – in terms of reduced congestion and pollution.
Let’s not wait for our roads and air to get worse. We need solutions now.
*Professor Basil Sharp is a chair in energy economics, and the director of the Energy Centre at the University of Auckland Business School. This article first ran here and is used with permission. This article reflects the opinion of the author and not necessarily the views of the University of Auckland.
99 Comments
Ask Christchurch City Council then. Firstly you build cycle lanes for scarcely any cyclists, winter barely none. Then you squeeze remaining room for motor vehicles so they crawl, stop, crawl, stop and on, thereby creating much more journey time and time for exhaust fumes to be emitted. QED.
Other than reducing the traffic lanes, congestion has been reduced in the Christchurch CBD because who wants to go there anyway? The periphery has better support for living, shopping, and jobs. And of course, Covid/work from home has sped up the 'no need' to.
And yet the Council are then trying to incentivize more people to come into the CBD and thus increasing the congestion.
The only reason to go into the CBD is to use a Govt. service as only the Govt. via the ratepayers can afford the high lease prices.
Is the cycling infrastructure good there? Here in Auckland we get the odd gold plated cycle path but to get near it you have to mingle with cars doing 60km/hr. Ebikes are the best invention of the last 30 years and could alone solve the congestion and environment problems but too many people don’t want to lose a tiny amount of road space they think they have a right too.
If you are old or fat or both as I am, an Ebike is wonderful. I've been saving up to buy one for 3 years but supporting adult children in this child unfriendly country has sucked out all my savings. Ebikes are pricey for pensioners. Should the govt give us a choice - goldcard or goldEbike?
The able bodied claim the disabled who cannot walk are lazy but then cyclists too seem too lazy to walk when they are completely able to. How about they try living and getting through heart attacks and internal bleeding without medical care, how about they get through life with no education access, how about they cut all access to building trades, food and services and then see how easy it is to live in NZ without. I am pretty sure if they do not die like family have they too would be advocates for more free parking around hospitals, places of education, access to work and to medical carers & trades.
Dear Foxglove,
Your comments reflect the arrogance of car drivers that think they own the road.
Having been a lifelong cyclist in Christchurch while I was there, I can only say that it is incredibly dangerous to be a cyclist on the road surrounded by tin cans doing 50 kmh+ with the risk of dying > 90% in a crash due to the speed differential.
CCC (NZ) needs to go even further and stop building on-road cycle lanes and require only fully protected cycle lanes to be built everywhere except where the operational speed environment is
No, I am a cyclist. And yes I agree with your comment regarding motorists disregard for the safety of cyclists. But in your self righteous punitive haste & proclamation of your bicycle rights you elect to completely overlook the point(s) of my comment. Firstly I do not mention the actions of motorists, you do. Secondly cyclists can threaten a pedestrian as dangerously as a motorist can them. Thirdly I have witnessed “elite” fancy lycra pants cyclists bullying ordinary folks on bikes and I have had to drive up the hill and carry my wife down a track after her ankle was broken by a “mountain” biker and his partner pushing her off a track on which she was running. But go ahead in your two wheel world of the perfect idealistic blameless bicycle people, and good luck to you.
"Commuters could plan their trip accordingly or chose to increase their days working from home."
Great for white collar office workers who have this choice, but congestion already gives people a massive incentive to WFH or change their hours so they don't get stuck in it. For everyone else, the likely outcome (in the absence of equal access to rapid transit) is likely just an extra tax for going to work.
... at the rate they're setting up committees and working groups they've solved the unemployment problem ...
Perhaps all those folks on Jacinda's junkets would be better utilized if they did something constructive for the economy ... like , go to Hawkes Bay and pick some apples ...
Brilliant - And all this from a Professor !! tax tax tax to fix the problem, lets do the same with houses, perhaps tax families with more than 2 kids, possibly a toilet tax, a pet tax, maybe tax people that travel for work, if we tax enough we can fix all our issues ! But only a Professor could come up with such brilliant ideas !
... a professor is fully funded at the expense of the taxpayer ... so , I guess it's in his DNA ..
But , TAAS ( transport as a service ) promises to solve many problems ... and without adding extra taxes... no need to own a car , no need for a garage to park it in , nor for car parks at all ... sometime in the next decade or three ...
I’d prefer we went capitalist: sell the road network to private companies and allow them to run it for profit. It will result in all the good things about capitalism: better use of resources, fairer pricing, etc. But be prepared to pay the full cost of all that valuable land under roads, all that expensive infrastructure, all that environmental degradation, etc. Want to know why even Act don’t support privatisation of the road network: because no one could afford to lose the subsidy.
I usually disagree with you but that is a new idea and well worth thinking about. For example in my own Auckland North Shore they are rapidly building apartments with either no parking or limited parking. But if you can afford the >$500k for a minimal apartment then you will buy a car - decent 2nd hand for $5k and park it on the street. Roads that 10 years ago were wide and easy are now full of parked cars on both sides leaving a chicken run down the middle.
BTW flexible congestion charges is the solution - effectively introducing capitalism into road access - rationing by wealth; it sounds bad but it is how for example sirloin steak is traded retail.
Well he’s right of course, when you provide a service at less than cost price you are bound to get excessive demand. Venezuela has government subsidised power and people are abusing it to mine Bitcoin, we have government subsidised roads and all sorts of associated problems.
It doesn’t seem very controversial to think that taxes can influence driver behaviour. The thing is the people that are the most scathing of taxes are often the same ones that think they should get a free ride on societies endeavours and the negative externalities that come from their behaviour. Own a car: I should have 30% of the city set aside for its use and shouldn’t have to pay for the environmental pollution it causes. Meanwhile people on public transport pay many times more for the use of those same roads. Something seems wrong with that equation.
'One option is to follow Singapore’s approach that ramps up the cost of car ownership. The total number of cars is capped. Those wanting a car must bid for the right to own and use the vehicle for a limited number of years. The initial cost of a basic sedan is roughly three times the cost in NZ. As we are not as space-constrained as Singapore, it is unlikely that a rights-based approach to car ownership will find favour with the public here.'
Indeed. There is a significant difference between the geography of Singapore and that of New Zealand last time I looked at a map. Who needs a car in Singapore? Forget this idea, immediately.
There is merit in congestion charging in cities. But it must be matched by greatly increasing the availability of public transport (buses, trains, ferries, shuttle-vans), and making all public transport within cities FREE for EVERYONE.
The top priority for urban areas has to be regular (generally 10 minutes or less waiting time) public transport plus safe cycling and pedestrian routes, all comprehensively covering all of the urban area.
Congestion charging does not do this and needs very careful design if it is not to be regressive and intrusive.
“the revenue generated is spent on.....” ok probably fair enough reason to trust the Swedes to honour a dedicated fund for a dedicated purpose but does anyone seriously think any NZ local council would do that, or the government for that matter. would just be another flow in the trough for all the snouts
Great example. Japan seems to get the need to reduce population. https://qz.com/1295721/the-japanese-population-is-shrinking-faster-than…
Why not aproach it from another direction.
Why do companies congregate in the one place, why the need for everyone to arrive there at the same time. Many companies only choose the city centres to be seen. Why do accountants and lawyers and head offices all need the same space.
Maybe if theres tax to be levied it needs to be on those actually making the money and causing the congestion. Years ago Fonterra shifted from Hamilton to central Auckland, no real reason, no need to, but they did anyway and produced a great example of what's not wanted.
Centralizing everything is great for the bottom line, but who actually pays for the efficiency gained?
I would imagine.. just spitballing here, because the centre of the city gives access to the widest range of talent (I.e it’s central to everyone.. go figure, all the public transport options etc.). Also it’s close to other service providers creating an (un)virtuous cycle.
Real life example.
The train to get from one side of Auckland to the CBD takes 70 minutes door to door(walk to station, walk to work).
Bicycle (non -electric) takes 60 minutes door to door.
Bicycle electric takes 40 minutes.
Car takes 60 minutes in traffic.
Anyone noticed how incredibly slow our trains are in Auckland ?
Take a number of the larger cities in the world as an example.
Those trains take half the time to get to the same destination when you look at the distances.
A Train ride from one end of Auckland to the CBD in 70 minutes in 2021, has anyone seriously thought about this when they paid for this slow train infrastructure the untold hundreds of millions in tax payer money ?
People spending their life traveling on the train.
Hilarious, I did the same for Wellington last year. Example for an 8km trip, near Jville, during rush hour:
Bicycle 27m (average down and up as we all live on hills, 22m down, 33m up)
Car 28m either way (but of course it costs $20-30 to park it)
Bus 36m
Train (then walk) 42m
Didn't have an e-bike to test, would be slightly faster than bicycle, probably average 20m. Easily bikes win. Trains all only get to one point then you end up joining an army of workers walking down the waterfront/Featherston/Lambton - lack of joined up Public Transport. Don't worry though, we will have trams through to the airport (unlikely to ever start https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/112760591/live-new-multibillion-dollar…).
In all their infinite wisdom, they plan to start charging for people to park at train stations: https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/wellington/124581861/charges-prop…
If it goes through the public transport patronage will likely drop off significantly as it's another barrier. People will just drive and be stuck in traffic, or work from home more and bye-bye Wellington shops who are already feeling the squeeze as many offices are now doing "you can work from home 1-4 days out of 5" (varies from office to office). Finally people have realised working from home isn't just possible, it leads to much happier employees.
Most the colleagues taking trains in would regularly be delayed by 1-2 hours due to points failures. Many after having spent two hours travelling each day as they would try to bus then train then bus again. A car trip took 30min, whereas the suggested AT travel planners have trips taking over 2hours regularly. It is beyond the pale why poor families are being pushed into economically expensive forms of travel that eat at all wellbeing and family care time which of course results in worsening health outcomes yet the elite able bodied council orgs and NZTA just wants to reduce access to the most vulnerable, low income families so the most rich and able bodied (who could walk for free instead) get added perks on their multiple transport options they have access to. A pink cycle lane that cost millions added literally no new access (walking and cycling access was already there from A to B), no improvements in cost and time for the low income families and actually lead to cutting disabled access along many streets and businesses in the area. These petitioners to cut vehicle access, cutting the ONLY form of access and medical care to many, seem to forget that other humans would like to be able to live and their lives and literally only form of access matter more than the colour pink or the most able bodied picking a slightly faster method to travel. The able bodied claim the disabled who cannot walk are lazy but then cyclists too seem too lazy to walk when they are completely able to. How about they try living and getting through heart attacks and internal bleeding without medical care, how about they get through life with no education access, how about they cut all access to building trades, food and services and then see how easy it is to live in NZ without. I am pretty sure if they do not die like family have they too would be advocates for more free parking around hospitals, places of education, access to work and to medical carers & trades.
Why petrol and diesel cars may soon be too costly to buy and maintain -
Will that happen with EVs? Jonas says it might, because EVs, and new manufacturing techniques and the introduction of software, connectivity and other features will likely reduce the number of parts in a car from around 10,000 to about 100, or even less.
“Based on our frequent discussions with OEMs (car makers), suppliers and domain experts in the EV business, we would not be at all surprised to see the prices of many EVs eventually fall to below $5k/unit,” Jonas writes.
https://thedriven.io/2021/03/16/why-petrol-and-diesel-cars-may-soon-be-…
The Europeans are moving away from congestion zones now and towards Ultra Low Emission Zones (ULEZs). Essentially this mean you can only drive in some previously polluted urban areas with a vehicle that meets modern emissions standards. In addition tax is charged based on the g/km of CO2 emissions: https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
Not a lot of solutions in the comments section today - just lots of moaning about the author's suggestions?
Congestion charging makes cities nicer to live in, pedestrianised city streets will be the new normal, proper personalised transport lanes (for bikes, ebikes, scooters, wheelchairs etc) help more people get safely to and from places, people getting fat and angry in traffic jams in their polluting cars is not the future, public transport is faster and more viable when cars are left at home.
I hope the Government doesn't wait for the naysayers before showing some leadership in this space.
Yep I don’t think people realise just how much the excessive cars are ruining NZ. Try having a young kid: you are just in constant fear that one of them will trip on the terrible footpaths and fall onto a road with a constant stream of cars doing twice the speed limit that the sensible Europeans adopt in cities.
It’s unsafe to bike anywhere, and even walking is becoming difficult as roads are so busy to cross.
NZ wasn’t anything like this 30 years ago, it has snuck up on us and we have accepted it as if it is inevitable. I have friends that live in Europe and when they come to NZ they can’t believe how awful the cars are.
Except most medical carers and trades need vehicle access and street parking. But sure you don't need sewage and water lines, you don't need electricity and you don't need medical care. You can communicate online, drink and cure every disease through magic moss. Tell you what go live outside NZ where there is no electricity, no medical care, no services, no food logistics and no building materials transport. Give it a go and if you do not die from infection and toxic water poisoning then we can chalk you off as some of the lucky few (with life expectancy still half of NZs), as even the most remote tribes have needs fulfilled from countries that use transport and vehicle access to produce life saving materials, services and transport them.
The able bodied claim the disabled who cannot walk are lazy but then cyclists too seem too lazy to walk when they are completely able to. How about they try living and getting through heart attacks and internal bleeding without medical care, how about they get through life with no education access, how about they cut all access to building trades, food and services and then see how easy it is to live in NZ without. I am pretty sure if they do not die like family have they too would be advocates for more free parking around hospitals, places of education, access to work and to medical carers & trades.
I’d like to see councils remove street parking. Why should you be able to store your car on the road for free? Can I build a house there too? It was fine 30 years ago when the odd car was parked on the road, but now they are full of parked cars. Some nice trees would be a much better use of that space.
In Japan, If you own a car, you have to show a permitted private park, ie no long-term on-street parking. If they bought the rule in on NZ developers, you would see a dramatic change in the style and cost of housing and transport use.
The idea that you can build a dwelling with no parking and then expect the inhabitants magically that don't need a car, or all will take poor PT shows the powers that be don't live in a real world.
More people are literally physically challenged and disabled than those who can cycle to work but then these able bodied elitists with office jobs know all about ostracising the disabled. They do it everyday when their transport planning and cycle barriers cuts off the ONLY access for many people to work, education and medical care. So clap on their success at damning the most vulnerable people. Yes that is why so many disabled don't have access to work, don't have access to training, don't have access to their communities and often die decades early prematurely after being isolated for decades before. Ever had disabled family die because they could not get access to hospital. I have in Christchurch, Auckland, even small cities have been deadly. Wellington blocks disabled private transport at nights and even Dunedin cut transport access to University and will deny disabled transport access to the new hospital buildings. Family in Wellington can only go to the supermarket and have no access to parks so they can only walk around the shop without buying anything. They went from being a trained software engineer to being denied access to work, and their community. But at least they did not die like family in Chch and Aucks from the cutting of transport access.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.