2/21/2020 |
Alex |
Pierschalla |
Citizen |
Chesapeake |
Virginia |
I support the Transportation and Climate Initiative. Modernizing the regional transportation system in Southeastern Virginia is overdue. This system desperately needs attention to reduce air... read more I support the Transportation and Climate Initiative. Modernizing the regional transportation system in Southeastern Virginia is overdue. This system desperately needs attention to reduce air pollution and traffic accidents, while helping us reduce Virgina's impact on climate. Each day, we have thousands of military commuters who need reliable and efficient transportation to bases. Each day, we see more and more shipping vehicles on our streets. Most people in our area live in one city and work in another, placing additional burdens on roads and air quality. There are a variety of vehicles spewing clouds of pollutants into our air - I see this every single day. Citizens are not protected from the toxic air quality in our region. We need strong policies that hold fossil fuel industries accountable for the pollution that they are creating, while making our cities healthier. These industries should not be allowed to make profits by contributing to asthma and lung disease in our citizens without taking responsibility and paying for clean and modern transportation solutions that benefit everyone. |
- |
2/21/2020 |
Alex |
Kowalski |
none |
New York |
New York |
I support and appreciate the work being done on the Transportation and Climate Initiative. There are many parts that I laud and a few I'm wary of. I live in NYC and I have a skewed view of... read more I support and appreciate the work being done on the Transportation and Climate Initiative. There are many parts that I laud and a few I'm wary of. I live in NYC and I have a skewed view of how transportation works or have limited insight how it could be improved for the rest of the region. I also am very lucky to live near work where all I need is to walk 10 minutes while my wife's commute is a combination of walking and taking the subway for 45 minutes. I would want the policymakers to be aware that some solutions work in one municipality but may not work for others. Because NYC is so densely populated it needs a vast subway and train network, other areas do not. I feel like many transportation initiatives in NY have given opportunities to small groups, while potentially inconveniencing others. For example, additional bike lanes have made safer and easier for some to commute, however may have increased congestion for cars with fewer lanes and slower speeds. Although I favor slower speeds in urban neighborhoods for safety reasons, I am also aware that slow speeds make transportation by car very inefficient and more polluting as ICE cars burn much more fuel and emit more pollutants per mile at lower speeds. With all of the transportation options, NYC has some of the slowest transportation speeds leading to potentially more emissions. Another problem I see that could be easily improved is the amount of tailpipe emissions coming from idled or parked cars. I hate trying to feel concerned about the environment and climate change while I see so many of my fellow New Yorkers do silly human things like burn fuel and emit pollutants to sit in a car. This tells me the public at large may say they want to see policies to "fight" climate change while they are not willing to change their behaviors. This also means that educating the public and fining outright unnecessary pollution. Where everyone can agree on is that using less and wasting less fuel is good for the environment and individual pocket books. Due to the tremendous waste and misuse of motor fuel, I believe there's room for a "substantial" additional tax of at least 10c/gallon. I am aware that it might be an additional burden on poorer individuals, however I believe it is overblown due to decreased miles driven and a small portion of total expenditures on fuel. There are many used cars that are compacts, hybrids, and even electrics that are available, but people are choosing to buy costlier, more polluting trucks and SUV's, even by people who claim to care about the environment. You could have incentive program as there have been in the past where you can trade in your car for a more fuel efficient car, with bigger rebates going to bigger increases in fuel mileage ratings, with the highest going towards purchases of electric cars. We should also fine individuals who idle their engines while parked (maybe make exceptions during winter and summer) but this behavior needs to be stopped. The same should go for increased enforcement of speeding on open highways, they are not enforced enough. As our cars improve and are safer people drive faster and faster. Again, faster freeway speeds lead to more fuel consumption per mile, pollution, and increased fatal accidents. I think that we need to take effort to work with our school bus makers to quickly transition to all electric school busses in our region and eventually nationwide. This would work on improving child health, reduce medical bills, and educate our young bus riders and their parents, while overtime becoming more economical. Also, if you choose to allow a ton of Ubers/Lyfts to come into your city to take over taxis, make sure they're follow the same regulations. Don't try to "fix" it by adding more charges to all taxis and Ubers to try to ease congestion. Make sure the cars are hybrids or incentivize electric vehicles. By now, there should be plans made that all municipal fleet cars should be either hybrid or electric and future taxis the same. Invest in some chargers at depots and parking lots and add more when needed.
Being a resident of NYC I also see how notoriously long construction projects can take and how much inconvenience they cause, along with how much burden they put on local budgets with cost overruns. Future rail and road work should only be done where necessary and in places where it adds convenience to their users. We do not to build new roads to coastal areas that will be prone to flooding and need repairs. We do not need many new rail systems that make 20-30 years to complete which by that time robo-taxis will have been around for years and be much more efficient and can take passengers door to door whether it's a 5mile journey or 100mile journey. I am not impressed by the plans for the much overdue rail link to Laguardia Airport and while there may be some users, I doubt that will greatly reduce auto traffic and pollution. I feel like the policy designers need to focus on making all future transportation improvements by focusing on making them environmentally friendly, convenient, and not overly costly, not doing so will add more headaches and will not help attain the goals of the initiative. Also make it reliable and keep costs down to ensure as most people take advantage of it. Regardless, people have to know that there will be some sacrifices and increases in usage taxes, but as long as there is transparency, more and more people will get on board. Again, convenience while polluting less and less over time is the key to success, and incentivizing lower pollution transport while putting a higher cost on higher polluting. One has to wonder why an average person going to the airport would pay 200-300% and even 1000% more by choosing taxi/Uber over subway/train for maybe only 20-50% improvement in time (possibly less if traffic); it's the convenience. Sorry for my rambling thoughts, I'm not a good writer and don't have the time to spruce up my writing, but I hope the committee listens to stakeholders but more so to experts and shows some leadership in these important endeavors.
|
- |
2/28/2020 |
Alex |
Peterson |
Rutgers |
Highland Park |
New Jersey |
Reducing pollution from transportation is a key component to reducing New Jersey's emissions. Public transit investments that could be made with TCI proceeds would be valuable. Leaders need... read more Reducing pollution from transportation is a key component to reducing New Jersey's emissions. Public transit investments that could be made with TCI proceeds would be valuable. Leaders need to choose the aggressive greenhouse gas reduction target that the most recent climate science tells us we need!
Please prioritize clean investments in areas overburdened by pollution and/or for those who don’t have access to transportation choices! |
- |
3/1/2020 |
Alex |
Epstein |
City of Somerville Vision Zero Task Force |
Somerville |
Massachusetts |
I support reducing pollution from transportation, now the largest emitter in Massachusetts, because clean air is important for my family's health, and the impacts of sea level rise and... read more I support reducing pollution from transportation, now the largest emitter in Massachusetts, because clean air is important for my family's health, and the impacts of sea level rise and worsening storms associated with climate change will threaten our safety and wellbeing
more and more in the coming years.
I appreciate Governor Baker's leadership and sincerely hope that Massachusetts formally joins the TCI program. I urge leadership to adopt the most aggressive greenhouse gas reduction target that current climate science indicates is needed to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change.
I believe TCI policy should prioritize clean transportation investments including electric transit, walking, and biking/micromobility in areas overburdened by pollution and in increasing access to reliable, clean transportation choices to those who currently lack them. |
- |
1/23/2020 |
Alexander F |
Janisieski |
retired |
Westfield |
Massachusetts |
Please stop this back door tax. Please stop this back door tax. |
- |
2/21/2020 |
Alexandra |
Romito |
Resident |
Staten Island |
New York |
We need to expand public transportation to combat climate change and use less cars. We need to expand public transportation to combat climate change and use less cars. |
- |
1/16/2020 |
Alexandra Sturtevant |
Sturtevant |
Concerned Citizen |
Portland |
Maine |
Clean, affordable, modern and accessible transportation across the mid-Atlantic is imperative to bring our communities into the 21st Century. As a resident of Maine, I see the lack of... read more Clean, affordable, modern and accessible transportation across the mid-Atlantic is imperative to bring our communities into the 21st Century. As a resident of Maine, I see the lack of accessibility for many of the rural citizens, due to not having any form of public transportation. Those who do not live in the Greater Portland area are restricted to only using a car to get places, and have to travel to the more populated areas which can be expensive if they are lower income. This increase of need to be driving a car increases carbon output and is detremental to the environment, much more than a public transportation. People in northern New England would be willing to utilize affordable public transportation if it was an option. Connecting the mid-Atlantic would also increase people's ability to travel and spend money in other states, which would ultimately boost the economy. Lastly, it would allow people with medical conditions, disabilities or other impairments to access more services in a greater area because there would be accessible and affordable public transportation. Please consider funding this project and allowing residents in even some of the most rural areas to be able to access public transportation. |
- |
1/22/2020 |
Alexis |
Khalil |
None |
Watertown |
Massachusetts |
I am excited to see a high-impact, regional approach to tackling carbon emissions moving forward; this is critical work, especially in the face of the short-sighted, dangerous approach currently... read more I am excited to see a high-impact, regional approach to tackling carbon emissions moving forward; this is critical work, especially in the face of the short-sighted, dangerous approach currently being taken by the federal government. |
- |
10/30/2019 |
Alfred |
Andrews |
Maine Resident , tax payer |
Machias |
Maine |
Don't let this happen, live on social security and they are driving prices up. Not able to afford electric cars . Not a good fit for Maine ! read more Don't let this happen, live on social security and they are driving prices up. Not able to afford electric cars . Not a good fit for Maine ! |
- |
11/14/2019 |
Alice |
Kennedy |
Independent |
Townsend |
Massachusetts |
The voters of Massachusetts made it abundantly clear that they reject an increase in the gas tax by a referendum just a few years ago. We pay enough taxes already. You need to use the funds you... read more The voters of Massachusetts made it abundantly clear that they reject an increase in the gas tax by a referendum just a few years ago. We pay enough taxes already. You need to use the funds you already have more responsibly and stop taxing everyone.
You can't do this without a vote.
|
- |
11/25/2019 |
Alice |
Mercer-Medeiros |
Retired |
NORTH DARTMOUTH |
Massachusetts |
I can't believe what is happening to the state I was born and raised in. This is just another name for a tax. As a senior citizen who struggles, this additional cost is really going to hurt.... read more I can't believe what is happening to the state I was born and raised in. This is just another name for a tax. As a senior citizen who struggles, this additional cost is really going to hurt. We have to make choices. Do I cut back on groceries or prescriptions. Also you are driving our young people away. My son and DIL has sold their home and are moving to NH because of the taxation in this state. My daughter and SIL are looking at relocating next year, My best friend just informed me her son has just sent out resumes looking to relocate out of state. These are 3 educated couples. Can Massachusetts afford to alienate more residents? |
- |
2/24/2020 |
Alice |
White |
Independent |
Kittery |
Maine |
Train travel and bus travel could lessen our carbon output in New England.
Why don’t we have adequate train and bus transport? Crazy to rely on individual Autos. Train travel and bus travel could lessen our carbon output in New England.
Why don’t we have adequate train and bus transport? Crazy to rely on individual Autos. |
- |
2/25/2020 |
Alice |
Barbera |
Contributor to Climate and Health Alliance |
South Burlington |
Vermont |
It's about time we support a bill like the TCI. Vermont's emissions have increased 16% above 1990 levels. Stop this now! read more It's about time we support a bill like the TCI. Vermont's emissions have increased 16% above 1990 levels. Stop this now! |
- |
2/25/2020 |
Alice |
Barbera |
Contributor to Climate and Health Alliance |
South Burlington |
Vermont |
It's about time we support a bill like the TCI. Vermont's emissions have increased 16% above 1990 levels. Stop this now! read more It's about time we support a bill like the TCI. Vermont's emissions have increased 16% above 1990 levels. Stop this now! |
- |
12/1/2019 |
Alicia |
Sherwood |
none |
BARRE |
Massachusetts |
We already voted against the gas tax! This is an unconstitutional method to further tax us and take more of our hard-earned money! Stop overspending in this state and start representing the hard-... read more We already voted against the gas tax! This is an unconstitutional method to further tax us and take more of our hard-earned money! Stop overspending in this state and start representing the hard-working taxpayers for once. |
- |
2/21/2020 |
Alicia |
Czechowski |
self-employed |
Baltimore |
Maryland |
Mass transportation is good for the environment and good for people. The fossil fuel industry has lobbied and propagandized everyone away from the most efficient and enlightened form of... read more Mass transportation is good for the environment and good for people. The fossil fuel industry has lobbied and propagandized everyone away from the most efficient and enlightened form of transportation in order to peddle WASTE and POLLUTION. |
- |
2/25/2020 |
Alicia |
Leonard |
VT resident |
Isle La Motte |
Vermont |
I don’t support this. It will hurt low and middle class families and local businesses. It will drive more people out of Vermont and hurt our economy. I don’t support this. It will hurt low and middle class families and local businesses. It will drive more people out of Vermont and hurt our economy. |
- |
2/26/2020 |
Alicia |
Contelmo |
WRWC |
Providence |
Rhode Island |
I support TCI because transportation is the largest source of carbon emissions in my state and we have to act on climate. I support TCI because transportation is the largest source of carbon emissions in my state and we have to act on climate. |
- |
2/28/2020 |
Alicia |
Stillwagon |
Conservative |
Penobscot |
Maine |
Trying to reduce miles driven by adding a gas tax is unconscionable. There is no avoiding driving great distances in rural areas to the doctor, groceries for just normal everyday needs.... read more Trying to reduce miles driven by adding a gas tax is unconscionable. There is no avoiding driving great distances in rural areas to the doctor, groceries for just normal everyday needs. Residents will be hit twice...who do you think will pay for increased charges from contractors, truckers, etc. who will be forced to increase their prices and pass on to consumers. Electric cars are not practical in Maine. These "initiatives" are going to cripple an already poor state. And that does not even account the new waste streams car batteries and solar panels create.
The state is not all about what portland thinks. |
- |
12/1/2019 |
Alician |
Quinlan |
Ph.D. [Environmental Engineering], P.E. |
Falmouth |
Massachusetts |
Alician Quinlan, Ph.D., P.E.
Falmouth MA
1 December 2019
I oppose implementation of the Transportation and Climate Initiative [TCI].
Claims of... read more Alician Quinlan, Ph.D., P.E.
Falmouth MA
1 December 2019
I oppose implementation of the Transportation and Climate Initiative [TCI].
Claims of catastrophic warming of Massachusetts, New England, and the contiguous 48 States, now or soon, are not supported by temperature data collected by NOAA's United States Climate Reference Network [USCRN] and United States Regional Climate Reference Network [USRCRN], which are the sources of the most accurate and unbiased climate data available for the United States. Network description, data, and graphs are available for public scrutiny via:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/land-based-station-data/land-based-datasets/us-climate-reference-network-uscrn
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/ - national scale
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/usrcrn/ - regional scale
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/qcdatasets.html - access to datasets and graphs of datasets
According to these websites: USCRN and USRCRN programs aim to maintain sustainable high-quality climate observation networks that 50 years from now can with the highest degree of scientific confidence answer the question: How has USA climate changed over the past 50 years? USCRN is NOAA's premiere land-surface temperature observation network. It is managed by NOAA's National Climatic Data Center and operated in partnership with NOAA's Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division. It consists of a network completed in 2008 of 114 stations distributed across the 48 contiguous states, two stations in Hawaii, and a network of 29 stations in Alaska begun in 2009 and still being deployed. These stations were designed with climate science in mind. Three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation are made at each station, insuring continuity of a well-calibrated, highly accurate observation record. The stations are placed in pristine environments that are expected to be free of development for many decades. Stations are monitored and maintained to high standards and calibrated on an annual basis. In addition to temperature and precipitation, these stations also measure solar radiation, surface ‘skin’ temperature, and surface winds. They also include triplicate measurements of soil moisture and soil temperature at five depths, as well as atmospheric relative humidity for most of the 114 contiguous U.S. stations. Stations in Alaska and Hawaii provide network experience and observations in polar and tropical regions, respectively. Regional-scale USRCRN maintains the same high quality of climate science measurements as national-scale USCRN, but its stations are spaced more closely and focus solely on temperature and precipitation. Beginning with a pilot project in the Southwest that was completed in 2011, USRCRN stations will be deployed at an 80-mile [130 km] spatial resolution across the United States to provide for the detection of regional climate change signals.
So far, 15 years of USCRN data have been collected. These data do not support claims that temperature is rising inexorably and catastrophically, or even moderately, in the United States. For an example, see the plot in the attached PDF of USCRN temperature data for the contiguous 48 states from 2004-2019., one out of many data-plots available via http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/qcdatasets.html. This plot reveals, contrary to computer climate model predictions, that during the past fifteen years there has been, in fact, no inexorable, catastrophic rise in temperature across the 48 contiguous states. As a consequence, there is no factual scientific basis justifying the Transportation and Climate Initiative. For that reason, the it must be abandoned.
State and Federal government officials should be relying on USCRN and USRCRN observations such as those plotted in the attached PDF to formulate rational fact-based policies, regulations, and legislation rather than on computer model predictions that are known to conflict substantially with observed temperatures. A computer model is merely a hypothesis stated in the language of mathematics. The scientific method requires that the predictions of hypotheses be compared with observations. If predictions and observations conflict, the scientific method deems the hypothesis [e.g., the computer model] to have been falsified. The scientific method further requires that falsified hypotheses be discarded or re-formulated and re-tested, over and over again. The scientific method is an iterative process that can tell us with certainty only what is not true, never what is absolutely true, because the next observation might conflict with a prediction and thereby reveal the falsity of the hypothesis. As a consequence of the substantial discrepancies between temperature observations and climate computer model predictions, belief that climate models speak truth is an act of faith rather than of science, making the Transportation and Climate Initiative a faith-based initiative, not a science-based initiative. Faith should never be the basis for environmental regulations, legislation, and fees. They should be grounded in scientific fact [observation and measurement], not discrepancy-laden computer model predictions [make-believe]. |
TCI statement .pdf |