Conservation 101: the Compete to Conserve Blog

photo credit: kke227

This Tuesday, San Francisco officials will consider the feasibility of congestion pricing as part of an ongoing effort to ease traffic and reduce pollution in some of the city’s busiest areas.

Congestion Pricing a Tough Sell

Congestion pricing, which requires motorists to pay a toll to drive in heavily trafficked areas, is already at work in London and Stockholm. But starting congestion pricing in the United States is a tough sell: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg had suggested charging drivers $8 to enter certain parts of Manhattan, but his ambitious plan was killed the the New York state Assembly in April.

The idea of congestion pricing has the support of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, as well as some of the 11 elected county supervisors who make up the San Francisco County Transportation Authority’s board.

But when city planners present various pricing and zone scenarios to the board this Tuesday, a wide-ranging group that includes business owners and motorists will be ready to voice their dissent. Even San Franciscans who might otherwise support the idea of congestion pricing may be leery of imposing an obstacle to business in these challenging economic times.

Voice Your Opinion on Congestion Pricing

The public is invited to attend meetings in San Francisco to learn more about the city’s congestion pricing plans, Tuesday, December 2, 2008, and Monday, December 8, 2008. City planners are also hosting an online meeting Friday, December 5, 2008, for those unable to attend the other sessions in person. For details and to register for the online event, visit: http://www.sfcta.org/content/view/302/148/

Local thoughts on San Francisco’s congestion pricing study that kicked off last year:

“Congestion Pricing in the News,” Transbay Blog, September 17, 2007:
http://transbayblog.com/2007/09/19/congestion-pricing-in-the-news/

“Baby, You Can Charge My Car,” SFist, September 19, 2007:
http://sfist.com/2007/09/19/baby_you_can_ch.php

photo credit: stevelyon

CEOs of some of the world’s most prominent companies are floating the idea that the U.S. “consider raising taxes on gasoline,” according to Real Time Economics on The Wall Street Journal Online.

Idea “Tucked Away”

The idea, which according to Journal editors was “tucked away” in a proposal on long-term tax policy, came about during a two-day session this week in which nearly 100 CEOs of global companies gathered to define the priorities they believe President-elect Barack Obama and the new Congress need to tackle when they take office in January. (Finance and the U.S. economy; energy and the environment; health care; and America’s role in the global economy were the four key issues the CEO Council discussed, underscoring that there will be no dearth of work Obama’s administration will face.)

Proponents of raising the gas tax say that it will lower gasoline consumption, encourage both the production and market for fuel efficient vehicles, lower imports, and decrease polluting emissions.

Critics argue that increased taxes unfairly burden consumers, especially the poor, and that reduced consumption hurts industry. (I haven’t found anyone yet that says pollution is good, but I’m sure there’s someone out there!)

Support Gaining Steam?

Raising the gas tax, of course, is nothing new. But until now its support has been limited. Because most Americans are dependent on cars to get to work, school, and every else, opponents have been able to build a broad coalition that makes politicians think that championing the cause would be certain political death.

But now something different is happening. There is an increasing awareness of the interconnectedness of energy use, economy, the environment, and public health. And when CEOs of companies that collectively employ 5.9 million people and $2.2 trillion in annual revenues say officials should consider raising the gasoline tax, my bet is that this idea won’t go away quietly this time.

The Wall Street Journal will report results of the CEO Council Monday, November 24, 2008.

More resources:

The Wall Street Journal CEO Council:
https://ceocouncil.wsj.com/index.html

Turmoil in the financial markets, declining consumer confidence, and a renewed interest in the environment have created a perfect storm for conservation. Suddenly, it’s chic to be cheap.

As the Wall Street Journal reports: “Retail and manufacturing clients are seeing almost an aversion to consumption,” says Todd Lavieri, chief executive of Archstone Consulting, which tracks retail spending patterns. “In previous downturns [such as in 1991 and 2001], we have often seen shopping as therapy.” Now, with credit conditions so tight, Mr. Lavieri says, “people aren’t shopping to feel better. They actually are not shopping to feel better.”

To aid in the catharsis, the new website Spendster.org invites consumers to record their former profligate ways and post videos to share. For anybody who has ever regretted purchase (that’s pretty much everybody), the site is a humorous relief. Take a walk through users’ homes and you’ll see closets bulging with seldom-worn purses and hats and never-used appliances–electric can openers, anyone?–and other next-to-useless items likely found in your home, too.

The idea, of course, is to be mindful of one’s purchases. Though Spendster focuses on the financial benefits of buying less, it’s easy to see the environmental benefits as well.

More:
“Luxury Consumers Scrimp for the Sake of the Planet, and Because It’s Cheaper,” Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2008:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122575617614495083.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

“Shoppers Turn to Consignment Stores,” Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2008: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576228664895683.html?mod=dist_smartbrief

Join these CTC members in their Cheap Is Chic goals:
Buy Less Stuff
Buy All My Clothes at Secondhand Stores
Create Less Waste
Have a “Green” Christmas
Purchase More Bulk Items = Less Packaging Waste