Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

In Colorado, an Ambitious New Highway Policy Is Not Building Them

News Feed
Friday, May 31, 2024

You have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.When Interstate 25 was constructed through Denver, highway engineers moved a river.It was the 1950s, and nothing was going to get in the way of building a national highway system. Colorado’s governor and other dignitaries, including the chief engineer of the state highway department, acknowledged the moment by posing for a photo standing on bulldozer tracks, next to the trench that would become Interstate 25.Today, state highway departments have rebranded as transportation agencies, but building, fixing and expanding highways is still mostly what they do.So it was notable when, in 2022, the head of Colorado’s Department of Transportation called off a long planned widening of Interstate 25. The decision to do nothing was arguably more consequential than the alternative. By not expanding the highway, the agency offered a new vision for the future of transportation planning.In Colorado, that new vision was catalyzed by climate change. In 2019, Gov. Jared Polis signed a law that required the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent within 30 years. As the state tried to figure out how it would get there, it zeroed in on drivers. Transportation is the largest single contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, accounting for about 30 percent of the total; 60 percent of that comes from cars and trucks. To reduce emissions, Coloradans would have to drive less.An effective bit of bureaucracy drove that message home. After sustained lobbying from climate and environmental justice activists, the Transportation Commission of Colorado adopted a formal rule that makes the state transportation agency, along with Colorado’s five metropolitan planning organizations, demonstrate how new projects, including highways, reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If they don’t, they could lose funding.ImageA wall in the lobby at the Colorado Department of Transportation’s headquarters displays past executive directors. Shoshana Lew, bottom right, is the first woman to lead the agency.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesFor years, the Colorado Department of Transportation planned to widen this stretch of Interstate 25 through downtown Denver.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesWithin a year of the rule’s adoption in 2021, Colorado’s Department of Transportation, or CDOT, had canceled two major highway expansions, including Interstate 25, and shifted $100 million to transit projects. In 2022, a regional planning body in Denver reallocated $900 million from highway expansions to so-called multimodal projects, including faster buses and better bike lanes.Now, other states are following Colorado’s lead. Last year, Minnesota passed a $7.8 billion transportation spending package with provisions modeled on Colorado’s greenhouse gas rule. Any project that added road capacity would have to demonstrate how it contributed to statewide greenhouse gas reduction targets. Maryland is considering similar legislation, as is New York.“We’re now hoping that there’s some kind of domino effect,” said Ben Holland, a manager at RMI, a national sustainability nonprofit. “We really regard the Colorado rule as the gold standard for how states should address transportation climate strategy.”That won’t be easy. States have almost unilateral power to determine how billions of dollars in federal transportation funding is spent. A recent analysis showed that more than half of $1.2 trillion enabled by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 will be spent on highway expansion and resurfacing.“In order to fundamentally change how most federal transportation dollars are spent,” said Shoshana Lew, the executive director of Colorado’s transportation agency, “you have to get into the network of state D.O.T.s.”In other words, the people most likely to reduce cars on the road are the ones who have long prioritized them.More lanes, more cars, more greenhouse gassesThe basic principle linking wider highways to more carbon emissions has been well understood since the 1960s.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesPeople have been fighting highway expansions for as long as there have been highways. In recent years, activists in Houston, Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., have fought widenings, arguing that the increased exhaust would worsen air pollution and exacerbate high rates of asthma in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.In Denver, a fight started in 2014 when the transportation department announced a plan to triple the width of Interstate 70, which runs through majority Hispanic neighborhoods in North Denver. Growing up, Ean Tafoya would stand in his front yard, in the shade of a century-old maple tree, and look north at the highway’s elevated lanes. Beyond the highway, a smokestack at a nearby oil refinery billowed toxins. His neighborhood was among the most polluted in America, and residents experienced significantly higher rates of respiratory diseases than those elsewhere in Denver.Mr. Tafoya was working for the City Council when he heard about the plan to expand the highway just blocks from where his mother still lived. “I-70 radicalized me,” he said. He quit his job and helped organize a statewide coalition of activists and community members who tried to stop the Interstate 70 expansion with lawsuits and protests. In the end, Interstate 70 was expanded. But the fight served as a warning to leaders like Ms. Lew that future highway construction would face spirited opposition.At the same time, a larger reckoning with how transportation decisions affect greenhouse gas emissions was playing out.Ean Tafoya grew up in a Denver neighborhood where the air was polluted by emissions from refineries and cars. Now the Colorado director of GreenLatinos, he has fought highway expansions.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesThe basic principle linking wider highways to more carbon emissions has been well understood since the 1960s. Back then, an economist rebutted the prevailing assumption that adding lanes would fix traffic, showing instead that wider roads only increased the number of cars and made congestion worse. This phenomenon came to be called “induced demand.”State transportation departments nonetheless consistently underestimate how highway expansion leads to more driving. In 2019, a team led by Susan Handy, a professor of environmental science at the University of California, Davis, developed an induced demand calculator to help others translate how specific expansions led to more cars on the road.In Colorado, Mr. Holland and several other climate activists used Dr. Handy’s calculator to do more than measure increased driving. In 2021, they modeled the greenhouse gas effects of all the projects in the state transportation’s agency’s 10-year plan, which included more than 175 miles of lanes added to highways. They found that the projects could increase annual greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of 70,000 more cars and trucks on the road.The transportation agency disputed the figure, but the calculation nonetheless changed the conversation, Mr. Holland said. Until that point, “nobody was actually putting real emissions numbers behind highway expansion,” he said. The analysis galvanized climate activists, who had largely left highway fights to people like Mr. Tafoya, those living in communities directly affected by expansion.In June 2021, when Governor Polis signed a $5.4 billion transportation funding bill, it included a requirement that the Transportation Commission of Colorado, which oversees CDOT, make a plan to reduce transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. Other states had tried to reduce emissions from transportation, but with little effect because there were few consequences for failing to do so. Activists in Colorado were determined that this rule would be different.Mr. Tafoya, who was by then the Colorado director of a national advocacy group called GreenLatinos, showed up to the transportation commission’s monthly meetings and submitted detailed comments on the draft rule. When it passed in December 2021, the rule contained the forceful incentive tying emissions targets to funding.Six months after the rule passed, on a hazy morning in June 2022, advocates gathered in a bike lane with Interstate 25 thrumming behind them and asked CDOT not to widen the highway. This time, they had leverage.Why electric cars aren’t enoughMoney that would have gone to highway widening has been reallocated to public transportation.  Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesIf every car on the road were battery-powered and those batteries were charged entirely by renewable energy, transportation emissions would be close to zero. But the average car on the road is 12 years old, meaning that every gas-powered car sold today will emit carbon for at least another decade. And even though President Biden’s administration has invested tens of billions of dollars to stimulate electric vehicle production and infrastructure, electric cars accounted for just under 8 percent of new cars sold in the United States last year.“The scale of the challenge to getting a net-zero transportation system is, I think, much bigger than folks want to acknowledge,” said Costa Samaras, the director of the Wilton E. Scott Institute for Energy Innovation at Carnegie Mellon University. To meet emissions targets, “ridiculously high levels of electrification” are needed, he said. “We also, at the same time, need to be building the types of communities that enable folks to move around without needing to rely on a car.”How, exactly, to do that is the challenge now facing Colorado’s transportation department. The emissions rule does not prevent highway expansions, and several are still being planned. But the agency has begun a significant shift. When Ms. Lew was appointed in 2018, she observed that the work force “was very rooted in the old culture of highway building,” she said. “I think that actually goes part and parcel with some of the overemphasis on these big highway widening projects.”“In order to fundamentally change how most federal transportation dollars are spent,” said Shoshana Lew, the executive director of Colorado’s transportation agency, “you have to get into the network of state D.O.T.s.”Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesWhen the proposal to widen Interstate 25 came up, Ms. Lew took several things into consideration. The “tremendous amount of controversy” that surrounded the Interstate 70 expansion — the one Mr. Tafoya had tried to stop — was one issue.The widening was also unlikely to fix traffic: Years earlier, the agency had spent $800 million to expand another stretch of Interstate 25 in south Denver and ended up with worse congestion than before construction began.Perhaps most important, the department couldn’t expand Interstate 25 and meet its newly mandated climate targets. “We can’t get there with electrification alone,” said Kay Kelly, CDOT’s chief of innovative mobility. The transportation agency, she said, now has to think harder about ways “that allow people to get places without a car.”For years, Denver had been trying to build bus rapid transit, which runs more like a light rail than traditional bus service, with faster travel times and more frequent service. Then came the greenhouse gas rule, which quickened that effort by years, Ms. Lew said.In 2022, the agency allocated $170 million for bus rapid transit in Denver and $120 million for Bustang, a statewide bus service, over the next decade. Late last year, Ms. Lew announced CDOT’s first three rapid routes, including one along 18 miles of Federal Boulevard, which runs north-south across the city, roughly parallel to Interstate 25.The Colorado Department of Transportation allocated $120 million for Bustang, a statewide bus service, over the next decade. Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesThe state has plans to build a bus rapid transit line along Federal Boulevard.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times“It’ll come so frequently that you won’t need to read a schedule,” said Ryan Noles, who was hired last year to lead the transportation agency’s new bus rapid transit program. Mr. Noles hopes that CDOT will break ground on the Federal Boulevard rapid bus line in 2027, with riders on board by 2030.That won’t be soon enough to have an impact on the state’s 2030 carbon emission reduction goals, which it’s not likely to hit. Building new transportation, even without changing the course of a river, takes time. And when the new bus line is up and running, lots of people still have to change their daily habits. Reducing emissions from transportation, Ms. Kelly said, requires changing the behavior of “millions of people and dozens of decisions that they make throughout their daily lives.”Which comes first, transit or housing?Over the next decade, tens of thousands of housing units will be built in and near downtown Denver.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesOn a bright, unseasonably warm day in January, I met Danny Katz, the executive director of the nonprofit Colorado Public Interest Research Group, near the Decatur-Federal Station, one of the busiest transit stops in Denver and a future stop on the bus rapid transit line. We walked down Decatur Street toward the South Platte River, the one that was once rerouted to accommodate Interstate 25. The sounds of construction — the slow beeps of a truck in reverse, a pile driver pounding the hard earth — filled the air. But the machines aren’t for highways; they are for housing.Over the coming decade, tens of thousands of housing units will be built within a two-mile radius of this spot. “This is the perfect place not to widen a highway,” Mr. Katz said. If transit is going to work anywhere, he said, it’s here.To make it possible for people to drive less, they need to live closer to where they are going. “I think where we stand now is that the real frontier is around land use,” said Will Toor, the executive director of the Colorado Energy Office, a state agency responsible for reducing emissions. Changing zoning laws to allow for more dense development could reduce emissions in Denver by 8 percent, largely by reducing the distance and frequency people have to drive, according to a 2023 study by RMI.Governor Polis agrees. After a sweeping land use reform bill failed last year, he focused on smaller measures to increase the state’s housing supply. In May, he signed laws to create incentives for denser housing development near transit stops and to allow accessory dwelling units to be built in more neighborhoods. “Big efforts often take several years,” Mr. Polis said in an interview. “Most people don’t want to have 45-minute commutes each way. They do it out of necessity and affordability. So housing opportunities that people can afford close to job centers means less travel in a car, less emissions and less time lost in traffic.”Housing and transportation, in other words, are intertwined. Unlike most state transportation directors, Ms. Lew did not study engineering. She has a master’s degree in American history and a background in finance. Transportation represents most of the federal investment in cities, she said. But until recently, investing in transportation largely meant following a playbook written in the 1950s, building grand concrete structures that efficiently swept cars from one side of a city to another.The state and the city are working together to build a bus rapid transit line along Colfax Avenue.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York TimesNo longer. In 1958, the year that Interstate 25 opened to traffic, the State Highway Department constructed the sweeping interchange connecting Federal Boulevard to Colfax Avenue and demolished more than 240 homes and businesses in the process. That project, which shaped the city for half a century, might now be undone. In March, CDOT was awarded a federal grant to remove the cloverleaf and rebuild the street grid, complete with storefronts and apartment buildings full of people. And, if Ms. Lew is successful, a rapid bus to take them where they need to go.Megan Kimble is an independent journalist based in Austin, Texas, and the author of “City Limits: Infrastructure, Inequality and the Future of America’s Highways” (Crown 2024).The Headway initiative is funded through grants from the Ford Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF), with Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors serving as a fiscal sponsor. The Woodcock Foundation is a funder of Headway’s public square. Funders have no control over the selection, focus of stories or the editing process and do not review stories before publication. The Times retains full editorial control of the Headway initiative.

The state has made it harder to widen highways, and transportation officials are turning their eyes to transit.

You have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.

When Interstate 25 was constructed through Denver, highway engineers moved a river.

It was the 1950s, and nothing was going to get in the way of building a national highway system. Colorado’s governor and other dignitaries, including the chief engineer of the state highway department, acknowledged the moment by posing for a photo standing on bulldozer tracks, next to the trench that would become Interstate 25.

Today, state highway departments have rebranded as transportation agencies, but building, fixing and expanding highways is still mostly what they do.

So it was notable when, in 2022, the head of Colorado’s Department of Transportation called off a long planned widening of Interstate 25. The decision to do nothing was arguably more consequential than the alternative. By not expanding the highway, the agency offered a new vision for the future of transportation planning.

In Colorado, that new vision was catalyzed by climate change. In 2019, Gov. Jared Polis signed a law that required the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent within 30 years. As the state tried to figure out how it would get there, it zeroed in on drivers. Transportation is the largest single contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, accounting for about 30 percent of the total; 60 percent of that comes from cars and trucks. To reduce emissions, Coloradans would have to drive less.

An effective bit of bureaucracy drove that message home. After sustained lobbying from climate and environmental justice activists, the Transportation Commission of Colorado adopted a formal rule that makes the state transportation agency, along with Colorado’s five metropolitan planning organizations, demonstrate how new projects, including highways, reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If they don’t, they could lose funding.

ImageEight framed portraits form a grid on an  wall with a round office table and two black chairs in front of them.
A wall in the lobby at the Colorado Department of Transportation’s headquarters displays past executive directors. Shoshana Lew, bottom right, is the first woman to lead the agency.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times
For years, the Colorado Department of Transportation planned to widen this stretch of Interstate 25 through downtown Denver.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

Within a year of the rule’s adoption in 2021, Colorado’s Department of Transportation, or CDOT, had canceled two major highway expansions, including Interstate 25, and shifted $100 million to transit projects. In 2022, a regional planning body in Denver reallocated $900 million from highway expansions to so-called multimodal projects, including faster buses and better bike lanes.

Now, other states are following Colorado’s lead. Last year, Minnesota passed a $7.8 billion transportation spending package with provisions modeled on Colorado’s greenhouse gas rule. Any project that added road capacity would have to demonstrate how it contributed to statewide greenhouse gas reduction targets. Maryland is considering similar legislation, as is New York.

“We’re now hoping that there’s some kind of domino effect,” said Ben Holland, a manager at RMI, a national sustainability nonprofit. “We really regard the Colorado rule as the gold standard for how states should address transportation climate strategy.”

That won’t be easy. States have almost unilateral power to determine how billions of dollars in federal transportation funding is spent. A recent analysis showed that more than half of $1.2 trillion enabled by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 will be spent on highway expansion and resurfacing.

“In order to fundamentally change how most federal transportation dollars are spent,” said Shoshana Lew, the executive director of Colorado’s transportation agency, “you have to get into the network of state D.O.T.s.”

In other words, the people most likely to reduce cars on the road are the ones who have long prioritized them.

More lanes, more cars, more greenhouse gasses

The basic principle linking wider highways to more carbon emissions has been well understood since the 1960s.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

People have been fighting highway expansions for as long as there have been highways. In recent years, activists in Houston, Los Angeles and Portland, Ore., have fought widenings, arguing that the increased exhaust would worsen air pollution and exacerbate high rates of asthma in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.

In Denver, a fight started in 2014 when the transportation department announced a plan to triple the width of Interstate 70, which runs through majority Hispanic neighborhoods in North Denver. Growing up, Ean Tafoya would stand in his front yard, in the shade of a century-old maple tree, and look north at the highway’s elevated lanes. Beyond the highway, a smokestack at a nearby oil refinery billowed toxins. His neighborhood was among the most polluted in America, and residents experienced significantly higher rates of respiratory diseases than those elsewhere in Denver.

Mr. Tafoya was working for the City Council when he heard about the plan to expand the highway just blocks from where his mother still lived. “I-70 radicalized me,” he said. He quit his job and helped organize a statewide coalition of activists and community members who tried to stop the Interstate 70 expansion with lawsuits and protests. In the end, Interstate 70 was expanded. But the fight served as a warning to leaders like Ms. Lew that future highway construction would face spirited opposition.

At the same time, a larger reckoning with how transportation decisions affect greenhouse gas emissions was playing out.

Ean Tafoya grew up in a Denver neighborhood where the air was polluted by emissions from refineries and cars. Now the Colorado director of GreenLatinos, he has fought highway expansions.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

The basic principle linking wider highways to more carbon emissions has been well understood since the 1960s. Back then, an economist rebutted the prevailing assumption that adding lanes would fix traffic, showing instead that wider roads only increased the number of cars and made congestion worse. This phenomenon came to be called “induced demand.”

State transportation departments nonetheless consistently underestimate how highway expansion leads to more driving. In 2019, a team led by Susan Handy, a professor of environmental science at the University of California, Davis, developed an induced demand calculator to help others translate how specific expansions led to more cars on the road.

In Colorado, Mr. Holland and several other climate activists used Dr. Handy’s calculator to do more than measure increased driving. In 2021, they modeled the greenhouse gas effects of all the projects in the state transportation’s agency’s 10-year plan, which included more than 175 miles of lanes added to highways. They found that the projects could increase annual greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of 70,000 more cars and trucks on the road.

The transportation agency disputed the figure, but the calculation nonetheless changed the conversation, Mr. Holland said. Until that point, “nobody was actually putting real emissions numbers behind highway expansion,” he said. The analysis galvanized climate activists, who had largely left highway fights to people like Mr. Tafoya, those living in communities directly affected by expansion.

In June 2021, when Governor Polis signed a $5.4 billion transportation funding bill, it included a requirement that the Transportation Commission of Colorado, which oversees CDOT, make a plan to reduce transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. Other states had tried to reduce emissions from transportation, but with little effect because there were few consequences for failing to do so. Activists in Colorado were determined that this rule would be different.

Mr. Tafoya, who was by then the Colorado director of a national advocacy group called GreenLatinos, showed up to the transportation commission’s monthly meetings and submitted detailed comments on the draft rule. When it passed in December 2021, the rule contained the forceful incentive tying emissions targets to funding.

Six months after the rule passed, on a hazy morning in June 2022, advocates gathered in a bike lane with Interstate 25 thrumming behind them and asked CDOT not to widen the highway. This time, they had leverage.

Why electric cars aren’t enough

Money that would have gone to highway widening has been reallocated to public transportation.  Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

If every car on the road were battery-powered and those batteries were charged entirely by renewable energy, transportation emissions would be close to zero. But the average car on the road is 12 years old, meaning that every gas-powered car sold today will emit carbon for at least another decade. And even though President Biden’s administration has invested tens of billions of dollars to stimulate electric vehicle production and infrastructure, electric cars accounted for just under 8 percent of new cars sold in the United States last year.

“The scale of the challenge to getting a net-zero transportation system is, I think, much bigger than folks want to acknowledge,” said Costa Samaras, the director of the Wilton E. Scott Institute for Energy Innovation at Carnegie Mellon University. To meet emissions targets, “ridiculously high levels of electrification” are needed, he said. “We also, at the same time, need to be building the types of communities that enable folks to move around without needing to rely on a car.”

How, exactly, to do that is the challenge now facing Colorado’s transportation department. The emissions rule does not prevent highway expansions, and several are still being planned. But the agency has begun a significant shift. When Ms. Lew was appointed in 2018, she observed that the work force “was very rooted in the old culture of highway building,” she said. “I think that actually goes part and parcel with some of the overemphasis on these big highway widening projects.”

“In order to fundamentally change how most federal transportation dollars are spent,” said Shoshana Lew, the executive director of Colorado’s transportation agency, “you have to get into the network of state D.O.T.s.”Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

When the proposal to widen Interstate 25 came up, Ms. Lew took several things into consideration. The “tremendous amount of controversy” that surrounded the Interstate 70 expansion — the one Mr. Tafoya had tried to stop — was one issue.

The widening was also unlikely to fix traffic: Years earlier, the agency had spent $800 million to expand another stretch of Interstate 25 in south Denver and ended up with worse congestion than before construction began.

Perhaps most important, the department couldn’t expand Interstate 25 and meet its newly mandated climate targets. “We can’t get there with electrification alone,” said Kay Kelly, CDOT’s chief of innovative mobility. The transportation agency, she said, now has to think harder about ways “that allow people to get places without a car.”

For years, Denver had been trying to build bus rapid transit, which runs more like a light rail than traditional bus service, with faster travel times and more frequent service. Then came the greenhouse gas rule, which quickened that effort by years, Ms. Lew said.

In 2022, the agency allocated $170 million for bus rapid transit in Denver and $120 million for Bustang, a statewide bus service, over the next decade. Late last year, Ms. Lew announced CDOT’s first three rapid routes, including one along 18 miles of Federal Boulevard, which runs north-south across the city, roughly parallel to Interstate 25.

The Colorado Department of Transportation allocated $120 million for Bustang, a statewide bus service, over the next decade. Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times
The state has plans to build a bus rapid transit line along Federal Boulevard.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

“It’ll come so frequently that you won’t need to read a schedule,” said Ryan Noles, who was hired last year to lead the transportation agency’s new bus rapid transit program. Mr. Noles hopes that CDOT will break ground on the Federal Boulevard rapid bus line in 2027, with riders on board by 2030.

That won’t be soon enough to have an impact on the state’s 2030 carbon emission reduction goals, which it’s not likely to hit. Building new transportation, even without changing the course of a river, takes time. And when the new bus line is up and running, lots of people still have to change their daily habits. Reducing emissions from transportation, Ms. Kelly said, requires changing the behavior of “millions of people and dozens of decisions that they make throughout their daily lives.”

Which comes first, transit or housing?

Over the next decade, tens of thousands of housing units will be built in and near downtown Denver.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

On a bright, unseasonably warm day in January, I met Danny Katz, the executive director of the nonprofit Colorado Public Interest Research Group, near the Decatur-Federal Station, one of the busiest transit stops in Denver and a future stop on the bus rapid transit line. We walked down Decatur Street toward the South Platte River, the one that was once rerouted to accommodate Interstate 25. The sounds of construction — the slow beeps of a truck in reverse, a pile driver pounding the hard earth — filled the air. But the machines aren’t for highways; they are for housing.

Over the coming decade, tens of thousands of housing units will be built within a two-mile radius of this spot. “This is the perfect place not to widen a highway,” Mr. Katz said. If transit is going to work anywhere, he said, it’s here.

To make it possible for people to drive less, they need to live closer to where they are going. “I think where we stand now is that the real frontier is around land use,” said Will Toor, the executive director of the Colorado Energy Office, a state agency responsible for reducing emissions. Changing zoning laws to allow for more dense development could reduce emissions in Denver by 8 percent, largely by reducing the distance and frequency people have to drive, according to a 2023 study by RMI.

Governor Polis agrees. After a sweeping land use reform bill failed last year, he focused on smaller measures to increase the state’s housing supply. In May, he signed laws to create incentives for denser housing development near transit stops and to allow accessory dwelling units to be built in more neighborhoods. “Big efforts often take several years,” Mr. Polis said in an interview. “Most people don’t want to have 45-minute commutes each way. They do it out of necessity and affordability. So housing opportunities that people can afford close to job centers means less travel in a car, less emissions and less time lost in traffic.”

Housing and transportation, in other words, are intertwined. Unlike most state transportation directors, Ms. Lew did not study engineering. She has a master’s degree in American history and a background in finance. Transportation represents most of the federal investment in cities, she said. But until recently, investing in transportation largely meant following a playbook written in the 1950s, building grand concrete structures that efficiently swept cars from one side of a city to another.

The state and the city are working together to build a bus rapid transit line along Colfax Avenue.Credit...Elliot Ross for The New York Times

No longer. In 1958, the year that Interstate 25 opened to traffic, the State Highway Department constructed the sweeping interchange connecting Federal Boulevard to Colfax Avenue and demolished more than 240 homes and businesses in the process. That project, which shaped the city for half a century, might now be undone. In March, CDOT was awarded a federal grant to remove the cloverleaf and rebuild the street grid, complete with storefronts and apartment buildings full of people. And, if Ms. Lew is successful, a rapid bus to take them where they need to go.

Megan Kimble is an independent journalist based in Austin, Texas, and the author of “City Limits: Infrastructure, Inequality and the Future of America’s Highways” (Crown 2024).


The Headway initiative is funded through grants from the Ford Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF), with Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors serving as a fiscal sponsor. The Woodcock Foundation is a funder of Headway’s public square. Funders have no control over the selection, focus of stories or the editing process and do not review stories before publication. The Times retains full editorial control of the Headway initiative.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Report: Sustainability in supply chains is still a firm-level priority

Analysis from MIT’s Center for Transportation and Logistics finds companies are still acting to reduce emissions, but often lag in measurement techniques.

Corporations are actively seeking sustainability advances in their supply chains — but many need to improve the business metrics they use in this area to realize more progress, according to a new report by MIT researchers.   During a time of shifting policies globally and continued economic uncertainty, the survey-based report finds 85 percent of companies say they are continuing supply chain sustainability practices at the same level as in recent years, or are increasing those efforts.“What we found is strong evidence that sustainability still matters,” says Josué Velázquez Martínez, a research scientist and director of the MIT Sustainable Supply Chain Lab, which helped produce the report. “There are many things that remain to be done to accomplish those goals, but there’s a strong willingness from companies in all parts of the world to do something about sustainability.”The new analysis, titled “Sustainability Still Matters,” was released today. It is the sixth annual report on the subject prepared by the MIT Sustainable Supply Chain Lab, which is part of MIT’s Center for Transportation and Logistics. The Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals collaborated on the project as well.The report is based on a global survey, with responses from 1,203 professionals in 97 countries. This year, the report analyzes three issues in depth, including regulations and the role they play in corporate approaches to supply chain management. A second core topic is management and mitigation of what industry professionals call “Scope 3” emissions, which are those not from a firm itself, but from a firm’s supply chain. And a third issue of focus is the future of freight transportation, which by itself accounts for a substantial portion of supply chain emissions.Broadly, the survey finds that for European-based firms, the principal driver of action in this area remains government mandates, such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, which requires companies to publish regular reports on their environmental impact and the risks to society involved. In North America, firm leadership and investor priorities are more likely to be decisive factors in shaping a company’s efforts.“In Europe the pressure primarily comes more from regulation, but in the U.S. it comes more from investors, or from competitors,” Velázquez Martínez says.The survey responses on Scope 3 emissions reveal a number of opportunities for improvement. In business and sustainability terms, Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions are those a firm produces directly. Scope 2 emissions are the energy it has purchased. And Scope 3 emissions are those produced across a firm’s value chain, including the supply chain activities involved in producing, transporting, using, and disposing of its products.The report reveals that about 40 percent of firms keep close track of Scope 1 and 2 emissions, but far fewer tabulate Scope 3 on equivalent terms. And yet Scope 3 may account for roughly 75 percent of total firm emissions, on aggregate. About 70 percent of firms in the survey say they do not have enough data from suppliers to accurately tabulate the total greenhouse gas and climate impact of their supply chains.Certainly it can be hard to calculate the total emissions when a supply chain has many layers, including smaller suppliers lacking data capacity. But firms can upgrade their analytics in this area, too. For instance, 50 percent of North American firms are still using spreadsheets to tabulate emissions data, often making rough estimates that correlate emissions to simple economic activity. An alternative is life cycle assessment software that provides more sophisticated estimates of a product’s emissions, from the extraction of its materials to its post-use disposal. By contrast, only 32 percent of European firms are still using spreadsheets rather than life cycle assessment tools.“You get what you measure,” Velázquez Martínez says. “If you measure poorly, you’re going to get poor decisions that most likely won’t drive the reductions you’re expecting. So we pay a lot of attention to that particular issue, which is decisive to defining an action plan. Firms pay a lot of attention to metrics in their financials, but in sustainability they’re often using simplistic measurements.”When it comes to transportation, meanwhile, the report shows that firms are still grappling with the best ways to reduce emissions. Some see biofuels as the best short-term alternative to fossil fuels; others are investing in electric vehicles; some are waiting for hydrogen-powered vehicles to gain traction. Supply chains, after all, frequently involve long-haul trips. For firms, as for individual consumers, electric vehicles are more practical with a larger infrastructure of charging stations. There are advances on that front but more work to do as well.That said, “Transportation has made a lot of progress in general,” Velázquez Martínez says, noting the increased acceptance of new modes of vehicle power in general.Even as new technologies loom on the horizon, though, supply chain sustainability is not wholly depend on their introduction. One factor continuing to propel sustainability in supply chains is the incentives companies have to lower costs. In a competitive business environment, spending less on fossil fuels usually means savings. And firms can often find ways to alter their logistics to consume and spend less.“Along with new technologies, there is another side of supply chain sustainability that is related to better use of the current infrastructure,” Velázquez Martínez observes. “There is always a need to revise traditional ways of operating to find opportunities for more efficiency.” 

Accounting for uncertainty to help engineers design complex systems

The approach could enable autonomous vehicles, commercial aircraft, or transportation networks that are more reliable in the face of real-world unpredictability.

Designing a complex electronic device like a delivery drone involves juggling many choices, such as selecting motors and batteries that minimize cost while maximizing the payload the drone can carry or the distance it can travel.Unraveling that conundrum is no easy task, but what happens if the designers don’t know the exact specifications of each battery and motor? On top of that, the real-world performance of these components will likely be affected by unpredictable factors, like changing weather along the drone’s route.MIT researchers developed a new framework that helps engineers design complex systems in a way that explicitly accounts for such uncertainty. The framework allows them to model the performance tradeoffs of a device with many interconnected parts, each of which could behave in unpredictable ways.Their technique captures the likelihood of many outcomes and tradeoffs, giving designers more information than many existing approaches which, at most, can usually only model best-case and worst-case scenarios.Ultimately, this framework could help engineers develop complex systems like autonomous vehicles, commercial aircraft, or even regional transportation networks that are more robust and reliable in the face of real-world unpredictability.“In practice, the components in a device never behave exactly like you think they will. If someone has a sensor whose performance is uncertain, and an algorithm that is uncertain, and the design of a robot that is also uncertain, now they have a way to mix all these uncertainties together so they can come up with a better design,” says Gioele Zardini, the Rudge and Nancy Allen Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at MIT, a principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS), an affiliate faculty with the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS), and senior author of a paper on this framework.Zardini is joined on the paper by lead author Yujun Huang, an MIT graduate student; and Marius Furter, a graduate student at the University of Zurich. The research will be presented at the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.Considering uncertaintyThe Zardini Group studies co-design, a method for designing systems made of many interconnected components, from robots to regional transportation networks.The co-design language breaks a complex problem into a series of boxes, each representing one component, that can be combined in different ways to maximize outcomes or minimize costs. This allows engineers to solve complex problems in a feasible amount of time.In prior work, the researchers modeled each co-design component without considering uncertainty. For instance, the performance of each sensor the designers could choose for a drone was fixed.But engineers often don’t know the exact performance specifications of each sensor, and even if they do, it is unlikely the senor will perfectly follow its spec sheet. At the same time, they don’t know how each sensor will behave once integrated into a complex device, or how performance will be affected by unpredictable factors like weather.“With our method, even if you are unsure what the specifications of your sensor will be, you can still design the robot to maximize the outcome you care about,” says Furter.To accomplish this, the researchers incorporated this notion of uncertainty into an existing framework based on category theory.Using some mathematical tricks, they simplified the problem into a more general structure. This allows them to use the tools of category theory to solve co-design problems in a way that considers a range of uncertain outcomes.By reformulating the problem, the researchers can capture how multiple design choices affect one another even when their individual performance is uncertain.This approach is also simpler than many existing tools that typically require extensive domain expertise. With their plug-and-play system, one can rearrange the components in the system without violating any mathematical constraints.And because no specific domain expertise is required, the framework could be used by a multidisciplinary team where each member designs one component of a larger system.“Designing an entire UAV isn’t feasible for just one person, but designing a component of a UAV is. By providing the framework for how these components work together in a way that considers uncertainty, we’ve made it easier for people to evaluate the performance of the entire UAV system,” Huang says.More detailed informationThe researchers used this new approach to choose perception systems and batteries for a drone that would maximize its payload while minimizing its lifetime cost and weight.While each perception system may offer a different detection accuracy under varying weather conditions, the designer doesn’t know exactly how its performance will fluctuate. This new system allows the designer to take these uncertainties into consideration when thinking about the drone’s overall performance.And unlike other approaches, their framework reveals distinct advantages of each battery technology.For instance, their results show that at lower payloads, nickel-metal hydride batteries provide the lowest expected lifetime cost. This insight would be impossible to fully capture without accounting for uncertainty, Zardini says.While another method might only be able to show the best-case and worst-case performance scenarios of lithium polymer batteries, their framework gives the user more detailed information.For example, it shows that if the drone’s payload is 1,750 grams, there is a 12.8 percent chance the battery design would be infeasible.“Our system provides the tradeoffs, and then the user can reason about the design,” he adds.In the future, the researchers want to improve the computational efficiency of their problem-solving algorithms. They also want to extend this approach to situations where a system is designed by multiple parties that are collaborative and competitive, like a transportation network in which rail companies operate using the same infrastructure.“As the complexity of systems grow, and involves more disparate components, we need a formal framework in which to design these systems. This paper presents a way to compose large systems from modular components, understand design trade-offs, and importantly do so with a notion of uncertainty. This creates an opportunity to formalize the design of large-scale systems with learning-enabled components,” says Aaron Ames, the Bren Professor of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, Control and Dynamical Systems, and Aerospace at Caltech, who was not involved with this research. 

Olympics-LA28 Selects Highland to Supply 500 Electric School Buses for Games

By Rory CarrollLOS ANGELES (Reuters) - LA28 on Monday said it has chosen Highland Electric Fleets as the official electric school bus provider for...

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - LA28 on Monday said it has chosen Highland Electric Fleets as the official electric school bus provider for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, a partnership that will deploy 500 zero-emission buses to support transport operations.Rather than acquiring new vehicles, LA28 plans to repurpose yellow electric school buses from local districts to move accredited stakeholders during the Games, an approach the organizers say will cut emissions and costs.Highland will join the LA28 transport team to run what the partners described as a first-of-its-kind electric school bus program for the Games.The company will oversee operations including daily logistics and charging, depot management and on-site technical support across venues throughout the event."Highland Electric Fleets is honored to partner with LA28 to deliver one of the largest deployments of electric school buses ever assembled for a global sporting event," said Highland CEO Duncan McIntyre."Together, we're proving that electrification can meet the demands of the biggest stage in sports while delivering zero-emission transportation solutions."Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the partnership an example of using existing resources to reduce emissions and leave a "lasting impact for Angelenos."Bass has referred to the Los Angeles Olympics as a "no-car" Games and will encourage fans to use public transportation to get around the sprawling city.LA28 CEO Reynold Hoover said welcoming Highland was "an incredible step in the operational execution of the 2028 Games."LA28 has pledged to minimize the environmental footprint of Games operations. The event plans to rely on existing Southern California venues and not build new permanent infrastructure.Highland Electric Fleets, founded in 2019, provides electrification-as-a-service for school districts and other fleets.The company says it led the first commercial vehicle-to-grid program using electric school buses and operates the largest such project in the United States.(Reporting by Rory Carroll in Los Angeles; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Oregonians likely to see higher transportation taxes next year, lawmakers announce

The higher costs could hit Oregonians as soon as January.

Top Oregon lawmakers have indicated for months that a major transportation package they’re pushing this year will almost certainly include increased or new taxes.Thursday, they revealed the 10 tax and fee hikes they want that to entail.In a plan made public Thursday afternoon, leaders of the Joint Transportation Committee outlined an array of tax hikes they say are essential to repair and maintain Oregon roads and bridges and expand access to alternative forms of transportation — while ensuring that drivers, bikers, truckers and businesses all pay their fair share.“We’re very confident that this is a good proposal, and it really gives us a good framework to go from,” Sen. Chris Gorsek, a Gresham Democrat and co-chair of the committee, told The Oregonian/OregonLive. The highly-anticipated framework proposes hiking the state’s gas tax, raising vehicle title and registration fees and implementing taxes on tire and vehicle sales, among other tax and fee increases. The higher costs could hit Oregonians as soon as January.Lawmakers project that the increased taxes would eventually raise $1.9 billion per biennium for the state highway fund, most of which goes to the state, counties and cities for basic maintenance and operations. The state transportation agency would receive $850 million of that new funding — half the amount Gov. Tina Kotek requested from lawmakers in December — while cities would receive about $340 million and counties about $510 million.Some of those increases, including the gas tax and a tax on miles driven, would ramp up year by year, so that full amount wouldn’t be available until about 2030 or so.State and local officials have told lawmakers for months that they need more funding to operate and maintain existing transportation infrastructure, instead of shiny new projects that have been cornerstones of former transportation packages. For now, lawmakers appear willing to support that mission.“It really is back to basics,” Gorsek said. Perhaps the most ambitious proposal in the framework is a road user fee, which could drastically alter Oregon’s transportation funding mechanisms by charging drivers primarily according to the number of miles they drive rather than by taxing their gas purchases. Drivers of electric vehicles, who don’t pay the gas tax, would have to enroll in the program starting next year. But other drivers would not have to make the switch until at least 2029, meaning lawmakers would have time to hammer out the details.Lawmakers say the new funding mechanisms would put Oregon drivers on par with truckers, who have argued for years that they overpay for their share of Oregon’s roads. (State analyses support that claim.) The framework also proposes increasing tax revenue from truckers by 16.9%. “This package is really set up to make sure that we are listening to what folks across the state said,” Rep. Susan McLain, a Democrat from Hillsboro and co-chair of the transportation committee, told The Oregonian/OregonLive.The framework also outlines four new or increased taxes that would raise an estimated $364 million in additional funding per biennium for multi-modal transportation and other programs to enhance Oregon’s transportation infrastructure.For example, a new 3% tire tax would fund rail operations, new wildlife crossings over highways and salmon restoration programs to mitigate the environmental impact of tire pollution. Similarly, the framework proposes increasing the payroll tax and the bike tax to expand transit service and improve bike and pedestrian infrastructure.Lawmakers still have many questions to address as they continue negotiating details of the package. For instance, the framework does not include any accountability measures to ensure that funding is spent quickly and efficiently, which lawmakers have said will be a vital aspect of this year’s package. Lawmakers say those accountability measures will soon materialize, as out of state consultants continue their review of the Oregon Department of Transportation’s policies and ongoing work.Though the framework does not call for or fund any new projects, it would provide money to complete unfinished megaprojects like retrofitting and widening the Abernethy Bridge between West Linn and Oregon City and widening and capping Interstate 5 near the Rose Quarter. Estimated costs for both of those projects have skyrocketed in recent years, and officials say more funding will be necessary to get them across the finish line.The framework proposes allocating $250 million to help the state secure additional bonding for the projects, which would help cover debt payments and some construction costs. Lawmakers could choose to increase funding for these projects, but they have not indicated willingness to do so. McLain pointed out that these unfinished projects, which also include the long-running effort to revamp the Newberg-Dundee Bypass, already have some dedicated funding. “Are they still in the queue? Have they been started? Do they have state support in the past? Yes,” she said. “So are they going to be part of the ongoing work that’s done under safety, under maintenance, under preservation? Absolutely, yes.”That transportation committee members were able to outline the long list of proposed tax and fee hikes to raise the billions state and local transportation officials have said they desperately need is a significant milestone. Some Salem insiders for months have quietly questioned whether lawmakers will be able to produce a substantive transportation package this year. But listing tax increases is easier than getting a three-fifths majority of lawmakers – the required threshold to pass bills that raise revenue – to support them.“It is a joy that we are at this stage,” Gorsek said, with nearly three months to go until the legislative session’s deadline.Democratic lawmakers briefed about the proposal Wednesday ahead of its public release reacted with some optimism, Gorsek and McLain said. That’s significant because Democrats hold a supermajority in both chambers, meaning they could theoretically pass tax increases with no Republican support.But it likely won’t be that straightforward. Each of Oregon’s 90 lawmakers will have a different take on the package, not to mention the influential groups, including environmentalists, unions and business groups, that will continue roaming the Capitol to sway lawmakers in their favor.Gorsek and McLain say they want the package to receive bipartisan support. Whether that will be the case remains to be seen.Unlike in the past, “We’re not saying to legislators, ‘Okay, do you want a new bridge in your district? Oh, then vote for this,‘” Gorsek said. “Instead, what we’re saying is, “Do you want the roads to be paved in your district? Do you want the snow to be plowed off in your district?‘”Here is every new or increased tax or fee included in the framework. Unless otherwise specified, the revenue would go to the state highway fund:(New) 1% tax on every vehicle purchase. Oregon is one of five states that doesn’t currently have this type of tax. This is expected to raise $486 million per biennium. About half would go to unfinished major projects like the Abernethy Bridge, and the rest would go to the state highway fund.(New) 3% tax on tire purchases. Half of the revenue would go to rail operations, and the remaining half would be split between building wildlife crossings over highways and salmon restoration programs to offset the environmental impact of tire pollution. This tax is expected to raise $50 million per biennium.(New) Road user fee for delivery vehicles, like Amazon vans. Businesses with at least 10 medium duty vehicles that deliver packages to homes would be required to pay this fee, which would likely land at 2 cents to 7 cents per mile. It’s unclear how much money this would bring in or when it would be implemented.(New) Road user fee for some drivers. Details are scarce, but all-electric vehicle drivers would have to enroll in the pay-per-mile program by July 2026. Once enrolled, electric vehicles drivers would no longer pay higher registration fees than other drivers. Gas powered car drivers would not be affected until at least 2029.20 cent increase to the gas tax over six years. The statewide fuels tax, which is currently 40 cents per gallon, would increase to 48 cents in January and gradually increase to 60 cents by 2032. $90 increase to title fees. Title fees currently range between $101 and $192 for most cars, and it’s unclear when these fees would increase or if certain vehicles would face steeper rates.$66 increase to car registration fees. Registration and renewal fees currently range between $126 and $316 for most vehicles. It’s unclear when these fees would increase or if certain vehicles would face steeper rates.0.08% increase to state payroll tax. Oregon employers currently withhold a 0.10% tax from each employee’s gross pay, with all revenue used for state transit programs. This proposal would increase that to 0.18%. This is projected to raise an additional $268 million per biennium for transit.0.3% increase to vehicle privilege tax. Car dealers currently pay a 0.5% tax on all vehicle sales. This proposal would increase that to 0.8%, with all revenue used for rail, aviation and marine projects. This is expected to raise $44.8 million per biennium.$9.50 increase to bike tax. Bike purchasers currently pay a $15 tax for bikes sold for $200 or higher, with revenue used for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects. This proposal would increase the tax to $24.50, which would increase revenue by roughly $1 million per biennium.— Carlos Fuentes covers state politics and government. Reach him at 503-221-5386 or cfuentes@oregonian.com.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com/subscribe.Latest local politics stories

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.