Cars And Air Pollution: Who Pays The Real Cost?

Cars impose many external costs on society, including carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to air pollution, congestion on roadways, and health costs. According to Harvard University, the main externalities of driving are local and global pollution, oil dependence, traffic congestion, and traffic collisions. These externalities contribute to social injustice as disadvantaged communities often bear a disproportionate share of these negative impacts. The external costs of air pollution from cars include the health costs associated with respiratory issues, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, and hospitalizations for asthma attacks and other health problems. The costs of air pollution from cars are not limited to health but also include economic costs such as lost time and wasted fuel due to traffic congestion.

Carbon dioxide emissions

The external costs of carbon dioxide emissions from cars are significant. These externalities, or costs not borne by the motorist, include the health and environmental impacts of air pollution, congestion, and climate change. For example, vehicle exhaust contributes to hospitalizations for asthma attacks and other health issues, such as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Additionally, carbon dioxide emissions from cars lead to increased congestion on roadways, causing delays and wasted fuel, further adding to air pollution.

The social cost of carbon dioxide emissions surpasses the private cost, resulting in a market failure. This negative externality leads to an overconsumption of cars, as the social optimum quantity is not reached. To address this issue, Pigovian taxes, such as fuel taxes and road taxes, have been proposed to correct the negative externalities by increasing the cost of using automobiles. The revenue generated from these taxes can be used for infrastructure investment and repair, and environmentally friendly initiatives.

While some countries have implemented road taxes, the external costs of driving are not entirely covered by taxes or limitations on car usage in most western nations. This discrepancy results in society bearing the burden of these externalities, including air pollution, noise, congestion, and road maintenance costs. Furthermore, disadvantaged communities often disproportionately suffer the negative consequences of these externalities, contributing to social injustice.

To mitigate carbon dioxide emissions from cars, governments and regulatory bodies have implemented various strategies. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier I regulations for tailpipe emissions in the United States have successfully reduced emissions by about 90% since the 1970s. Additionally, consumers can compare carbon dioxide emission rates for specific vehicle models and make more informed choices to reduce their carbon footprint.

Health costs

The health costs of air pollution from cars are significant and wide-ranging. Vehicle exhaust contributes to a high number of hospitalizations due to asthma attacks and other health issues. Car-related pollution is also linked to lung diseases and heart attacks. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, car accidents in 2002 resulted in nearly 43,000 deaths and 356,000 injuries in the United States alone. These accidents impose substantial social costs, including medical expenses, material damages, administrative costs, and production losses. Furthermore, cars are a leading cause of smog in modern cities, and their emissions contain harmful pollutants such as NOx, particulate matter, and ground-level ozone.

The health economic loss attributed to air pollution from car fuel combustion in the UK was estimated by Brand and Hunt (2018) to be between £22.6 billion and £71.3 billion. Another study found that the total health cost to the UK from cars and vans is £6 billion annually, with diesel vehicles accounting for almost 90% of this amount. These costs are expected to persist and even increase in the future, with estimates projecting up to 4,300 additional premature deaths nationally per year by 2050 in the United States due to combined O3 and particle health effects.

The impact of air pollution from cars on public health has been described as a "silent killer" by health experts. Both PM 2.5 and nitrogen dioxide, which are emitted by vehicles, have been linked to serious health issues such as heart attacks, lung cancer, bronchitis, and asthma. The problem is particularly acute in urban areas, where the concentration of vehicle emissions is higher. However, it is important to note that the health costs of air pollution are not limited to respiratory and cardiovascular issues. For example, traffic congestion caused by cars leads to wasted time and fuel, contributing to economic losses and increased stress levels for commuters.

To address these health costs, various solutions have been proposed. One approach is to implement congestion pricing in city centers, as seen in London and Stockholm, to reduce traffic and pollution. Another strategy is to introduce or increase fuel taxes and road taxes, with the revenue generated being used for environmentally friendly initiatives or infrastructure improvements. While these measures may be effective, they are often controversial and face opposition from various groups.

Additionally, technological advancements and regulatory controls play a crucial role in mitigating the health costs of air pollution from cars. For example, the retirement of older, more polluting vehicles and the introduction of more stringent emission standards can significantly improve air quality. The adoption of electric vehicles is also a promising solution, as they produce significantly lower emissions compared to diesel and petrol vehicles. Overall, a combination of policy interventions, technological innovations, and behavioral changes is necessary to reduce the health costs associated with air pollution from cars.

Congestion and scarcity costs

Traffic congestion is a well-known consequence of the widespread use of motor vehicles. It is a significant externality of driving, as it affects people who are not driving, such as pedestrians and commuters, as well as the drivers themselves. Congestion leads to increased emissions of greenhouse gases, which contribute to climate change, and it also results in wasted fuel and lost time. According to the Texas Transportation Institute's 2004 Urban Mobility Report, traffic congestion in the United States costs $63 billion annually in lost time and wasted fuel, with 5.6 billion gallons of gasoline wasted by idling in traffic.

The increasing severity and duration of traffic congestion can greatly increase pollutant emissions and degrade air quality, particularly near large roadways. This has significant health impacts on drivers, commuters, and individuals living near busy roads, increasing the risk of morbidity and mortality. For example, a study by Zhang and Batterman in 2009 found that a 30-minute daily travel delay accounted for 21% of the exposure to benzene and 14% of PM2.5 for a typical working adult on weekdays. Another study estimated that the public health cost of mortality attributable to congestion in 83 US cities in 2000 was $31 billion.

The negative effects of traffic congestion are not limited to air pollution and health risks. It also contributes to noise pollution, particularly from tire noise at speeds above 20-30 miles per hour. Additionally, the expansion of road capacity and the construction of parking spaces often result in the loss of agricultural or uncultivated land, leading to suburban sprawl. This sealing of surfaces can have negative consequences for groundwater quality, as lubricants and fuels can leak and cause contamination.

To address the negative externalities of traffic congestion, several cities have introduced congestion pricing or toll systems. London, Stockholm, and other major cities have implemented congestion pricing to reduce traffic and pollution in city centres. This involves charging a toll for automobiles entering the city centre during peak hours, with the aim of changing consumer behaviour and making drivers more aware of the costs their choices impose on others. Congestion pricing has been shown to effectively reduce traffic, encourage the use of public transit, and generate revenue for infrastructure improvements.

Another approach to mitigating the congestion externality is through the use of Pigovian taxes, which increase the cost of using automobiles to reduce consumption and raise tax revenue. This can be achieved through fuel taxes and road taxes, which can then be invested in infrastructure improvements and environmentally friendly initiatives. However, fuel taxes have been criticized as regressive, disproportionately affecting low-income individuals. As an alternative, feebates have been proposed, where buyers of fuel-efficient cars receive a rebate, while buyers of less efficient cars pay a fee.

Accident costs

While insurance may cover some of these costs, it does not account for all of them. For instance, car insurance typically does not cover expenses such as fire and police department costs or costs related to death and pain and suffering. Additionally, insurance is usually a lump-sum payment, so motorists may not consider accident costs when deciding how much to drive a particular vehicle.

The presence of trucks on the road has been shown to increase the number of car accidents, which can lead to higher insurance premiums for other drivers. Trucks can be considered underinsured, and when they are involved in accidents, they can impose additional costs on those who are fully insured. The external costs of accidents involving trucks can be larger due to the higher cost of damages and repairs.

To address the negative externalities of accidents, Pigovian taxes can be implemented to increase the cost of using automobiles and reduce consumption. This can be achieved through fuel taxes and road taxes, with the revenue generated being used for infrastructure investment and environmentally friendly initiatives. However, fuel and carbon taxes have been criticized for disproportionately affecting low-income individuals.

Climate change costs

Additionally, climate change can lead to more frequent and severe weather events, such as hurricanes, floods, and droughts. These events can cause extensive damage to infrastructure, crops, and property, leading to economic losses and increased insurance premiums. The costs of adapting to and mitigating the impacts of climate change can also be substantial. For instance, transitioning to a low-carbon economy may require significant investments in renewable energy infrastructure and the retrofitting of buildings to make them more energy efficient.

The costs of inaction on climate change are also significant. If greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise unchecked, the impacts are likely to become more severe and costly to address. This includes not only environmental impacts but also social and economic consequences, such as displacement of communities, reduced agricultural productivity, and loss of ecosystem services. The costs of climate change are distributed unevenly, with vulnerable communities, including the poor, marginalized groups, and developing countries, often bearing the brunt of the impacts.

In conclusion, climate change costs encompass a wide range of economic impacts, from healthcare expenses to infrastructure damage and adaptation measures. These costs are already significant and will continue to rise if action is not taken to mitigate and adapt to the changing climate. It is important to recognize that the costs of inaction are likely to be far greater than the costs of taking decisive action to address climate change. Therefore, addressing climate change costs requires a combination of policy measures, technological innovations, and global cooperation to ensure a sustainable future for all.

Frequently asked questions