Deborah Gordon, Stephen D. Ziman
Source: Getty
The Role of Transportation in Driving Climate Disruption
Given that on-road transportation has the greatest negative effect on the climate compared to all other economic sectors, cutting air-pollutant emissions from this form of transportation would be good both for the climate and for public health.
The Earth’s rapidly warming temperatures over the past several decades cannot be explained by natural processes alone. The science is conclusive: both man-made and natural factors contribute to climate change. Human activities— fossil-fuel combustion in transportation and other sectors, urbanization, and deforestation—are increasing the amount of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere. These record levels of greenhouse gases are shifting the Earth’s climate equilibrium.
Climate impacts differ by sector. On-road transportation has the greatest negative effect on climate, especially in the short term. This is primarily because of two factors unique to on-road transportation: (1) nearly exclusive use of petroleum fuels, the combustion of which results in high levels of the principal warming gases (carbon dioxide, ozone, and black carbon); and (2) minimal emissions of sulfates, aerosols, and organic carbon from on-road transportation sources to counterbalance warming with cooling effects. Scientists find that cutting on-road transportation climate and air-pollutant emissions would be unambiguously good for the climate (and public health) in the near term.
Transportation’s role in climate change is especially problematic, given the dependence on oil that characterizes this sector today. There are too few immediate mobility and fuel options in the United States beyond oil-fueled cars and trucks.
U.S. and international policy makers have yet to tackle transportation-climate challenges. In its fourth assessment report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found that the global transportation sector was responsible for the most rapid growth in direct greenhouse gas emissions, a 120 percent increase between 1970 and 2004. To further complicate matters, the IPCC projects that, without policy intervention, the rapidly growing global transportation sector has little motivation to change the way it operates, because consumer choices are trumping best practices.
Herein lies a fundamental mismatch between the climate problem and solutions: transportation is responsible for nearly one of every three tons of greenhouse gas emissions but represents less than one of every twelve tons of projected emission reductions. Clearly this sector is a major contributor to climate change; therefore, it should be the focus of new policies to mitigate warming. Government must lead this effort as the market alone cannot precipitate the transition away from cars and oil, which dominate this sector.
Policy makers need to remember four essential findings and recommendations when developing new strategies for ensuring that the United States maintains its leadership position in the global economy:
- On-road transportation is an immediate high-priority target in the short term for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change in the United States and around the globe.
- The transportation sector is responsible for high levels of long-lived carbon dioxide (CO2) and ozone precursor emissions that will warm the climate for generations to come.
- The United States (and other nations) must transition quickly to nearzero greenhouse gas (GHG) emission cars and trucks, largely through low-carbon electrification for plug-in vehicles.
- America’s transportation culture must adapt to rely less on fossil fuels through technological innovation, rational pricing, and sound investments that expand low-carbon mobility choices and fundamentally shift travel behavior.
About the Author
Former Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and Climate Program
Gordon was director of Carnegie’s Energy and Climate Program, where her research focuses on oil and climate change issues in North America and globally.
- Petroleum Companies Need a Credible Climate PlanArticle
- Advancing Public Climate Engineering DisclosureArticle
Deborah Gordon, Smriti Kumble, David Livingston
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?Commentary
Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.
Nikita Smagin
- Is There Really a Threat From China and Russia in Greenland?Commentary
The supposed threats from China and Russia pose far less of a danger to both Greenland and the Arctic than the prospect of an unscrupulous takeover of the island.
Andrei Dagaev
- Ukrainian Villages Are a Bigger Prize for Putin Than a Deal With TrumpCommentary
Western negotiators often believe territory is just a bargaining chip when it comes to peace in Ukraine, but Putin is obsessed with empire-building.
Andrey Pertsev
- Has Trump the Destroyer Eclipsed Putin the Destroyer?Commentary
Unexpectedly, Trump’s America appears to have replaced Putin’s Russia’s as the world’s biggest disruptor.
Alexander Baunov
- Russia’s Latest Weapons Have Left Strategic Stability on the Brink of CollapseCommentary
The Kremlin will only be prepared to negotiate strategic arms limitations if it is confident it can secure significant concessions from the United States. Otherwise, meaningful dialogue is unlikely, and the international system of strategic stability will continue to teeter on the brink of total collapse.
Maxim Starchak