In 2024, Boston had the fourth highest congestion rate in the United States with each driver spending approximately seventy nine hours in traffic. On average, this cost each driver $1,414 and the city $2.7 billion in total. Beyond the nuisance and cost of sitting in traffic, congestion causes numerous health issues. The longer people commute by vehicle, the more likely they are to have higher blood pressure and body mass index as well as lower rates of physical activity. Vehicle congestion also generates air pollution causing blood pressure to rise and arteries to inflame, increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke for people who live near traffic-prone areas.
Massachusetts residents view transportation and infrastructure as the biggest issue facing the state. They cite heavy traffic, increasing public transportation rates, and unreliable transit service as the main problems that will affect the incentive to work in the state.
When cities face congestion, most Departments of Transportation and urban planners look at their highways and how they can be improved but, paradoxically, if you build more highway lanes, traffic increases. This phenomenon is called induced demand. While increasing access to roadways promises to decrease the time drivers spend on the roads, it only leads to more people driving on the roads and congestion returns to its original volume. If the Commonwealth continues to spend tens of millions of dollars on road and highway infrastructure, congestion will only get worse.
Carbon Emissions
Traffic congestion doesn’t just lead to health issues and extra expenses, it’s also a major contributor to US carbon emissions. In 2019, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released data showing that transportation contributes to one-third of US emissions, of which 83 percent came from motor vehicle use. The transportation sector was the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Massachusetts, comprising 37 percent of total emissions. A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. Cars emit 274g of Co2 per person per mile compared to 4.9g by e-bikes. A study based in Oregon found that if 15 percent of daily trips in Portland were taken using e-bikes instead of cars, it would achieve an 11 percent reduction in carbon emissions, amounting to around 900 metric tons per day.
To fight increasing carbon emissions, both the Commonwealth and City of Boston have pledged to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Katherine Antos, the undersecretary of decarbonization and resilience at the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) stated that “the steepest emissions reductions are set to occur between 2025 and 2030… that’s when the most action needs to be happening.” The EEA’s 2022 Clean Energy and Climate Plan explains how e-bikes can replace car trips for commuters and that incentives and infrastructure improvements are critical to make the most of this technology.
Not only could e-bikes help Massachusetts achieve its climate goals, they’re also a fast-growing market. In 2021, the e-bike market was valued at $27 billion. Projections indicate that the market value will grow to nearly $55 billion by 2027, and nearly $119 billion by 2030. Annual e-bike sales were boosted by 240 percent between 2019 and 2021, four times the rate of increase in sales of traditional bikes, during what became known as the COVID “bike boom.”
Incentivize E-Bikes and Transit Options
If Massachusetts wants to achieve their goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 and reduce traffic congestion, they must invest in the ever-expanding market of e-bikes and modernize their transit system. The state can do this by becoming a sustained sponsor of Bluebikes, and supplementing the Bluebikes’ current revenue sources which come from municipalities, membership fees, and sponsorships like Blue Cross Blue Shield. With more authority over bike station placement, the Commonwealth can prioritize placing bike stations and racks at public transportation stops for a more fluid commuting experience. The state can also place bike stations in communities along heavily congested roadways like I-93, so commuters aren’t left with sitting in traffic everyday as their only option.
To incentivize transit use, the MBTA should develop a one-stop-shop for all Massachusetts Public Transit (T, Bus, Ferry, Commuter Rail, Bluebikes) where users can buy and charge their CharlieCard, purchase commuter rail or ferry tickets, and unlock Bluebikes with one app. Additionally, the MBTA should work towards a more efficient subscription system in which CharlieCard weekly, monthly, and annual passes can be purchased and used across all transit systems on a single MBTA app. This new payment system should feature free transfers between bike share and public transit. For example, after tapping their CharlieCard at a T stop, users who pay per ride are automatically given a single unlock for a Bluebike for a certain amount of time after purchase and vice versa. This is similar to the existing system that allows T riders to transfer between bus and light-rail transit.
Other states and cities are implementing new technology and improving infrastructure to promote transit use and discourage car use. An example is Milwaukee’s BUBLR transit card which integrates the Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) and bike provider Bublr into a single card used to unlock bikes and get on public transportation. Similarly, Pittsburgh uses a linked “ConnectCard” which provides a free fifteen-minute bike ride when users tap their transit card on the back of a public bike. While there is an undeniable reduction in Bluebike use during the colder months in Massachusetts, Bluebikes can counteract this trend by making single-use bike unlocks cheaper as it gets colder.
Cutting Back Car Usage
Incentives to use public transportation must work hand in hand with disincentives to use cars, such as cutting back highway funding to finance a bikeshare expansion. Massachusetts should repurpose highway lanes or highways altogether and phase out a portion of funding from highway construction and transfer that to public transit funding. This will place the state in a much better position to expand their transit network and improve their lines.
Similar initiatives have been taken in places like Seoul, South Korea. In 2002, the mayor planned to replace a highway that ran over the Cheonggyecheon River with a restored stream along the old riverbed. This created a 1,000-acre park in the center of the city, lower pollution, and cooler temperatures city-wide. The most unexpected change, however, was a reduction in the city’s traffic volumes. Prior to the highway’s destruction, the road carried 160,000 cars a day, but the highway’s closure convinced thousands of people to drive less as the city offered better public transportation options.
While entire highway closures might not be the best option for Boston, repurposing highway lanes, implementing tolls, and increasing city parking costs are a good starting point. These efforts must be coupled with significant improvements to the transit network in order to push drivers to switch to public transportation. If Massachusetts fails to do this, it will be extremely difficult for the state to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and meaningfully improve their transportation infrastructure. If Massachusetts does reshape their transit system to favor e-bikes and improves their infrastructure, the air will be less polluted, residents will be healthier, and commuters won’t have to face hours of traffic every day.
