Stockholm launches Congestion Charge
The Congestion Charge is a toll that must be paid in order to drive in a city centre. The most famous is in Central London, where it's managed by a sophisticated system of cameras that read the vehicles' license plates. It isn't cheap, either, with 8 GBP (paid in advance, 10 afterwards, which is 16-20 USD). Singapore has it too, and other places are considering implementation, such as Manchester (UK), Italy, Barcelona (Spain) and Japan. Manhattan has shelved the idea, at least for now.
Now it's time for Stockholm, Sweden's capital city. After several months of trials, those who want to drive around the city center from Monday to Friday, from 6.30 AM to 6:29 PM will have to pay depending on what time of the day a driver enters or exits the congestion tax area. The maximum amount of tax per vehicle per day is 60 SEK (roughly 9 USD).
Exempted vehicles are foreign-registered cars, vehicles adapted to disabled people, emergencies... Alternative cars, such as electrics, hybrids and E85-powered are exempted until the end of 2012.
Other ideas some cities are planning to reduce traffic problems (and probably getting money from drivers if they aren't provided an alternative), are banning old cars from city centers, creating Park&Ride spaces together with mass transit systems, favouring motorbikes and many more. What are your ideas to reduce traffic problems in cities?
Related:
[Source: Moteurnature, Wikipedia, BBC]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Anthony 8:45AM (8/03/2007)
Actually Stockholm has a very good public transportation system, but the city does have many cars in the downtown area.
Same with London, its expensive to live in the city centre and its forced residences to places like where my friend lives about 20 miles outside of the city.
People rather drive than take public transport.
I guess that's one way to solve the congestion problem.
Reply
Peter Hansen 8:49AM (8/03/2007)
Call me a cynic, but it appears that in many cases congestion pricing is little more than a way to raise revenue. Worse, it's short-sighted.
First, for those cities that have limited mass-transit capacity or which have mass-transit running at full capacity during rush hour, those people who have been using mass transit will suffer as overloaded systems begin to fail under the strain. It's exceptionally difficult to build new mass-transit and the lead time for such projects often stretches into decades. And no matter what the announced plans for the revenue might be (mass-transit, saving baby seals, etc.) it will a constant battle to prevent those revenues from going into the general fund.
Second, as it becomes more difficult for workers to get to their jobs, more companies will relocate outside the cities and, in some cases, relocate more of their operations off-shore. The result will be a lowered tax base.
I'm not against congestion pricing, but it needs to be part of a much larger (and more difficult-to-implement) solution that provides real alternatives to personal transport. It's all too easy to reach into peoples pockets under the guise of "saving the planet" without actually delivering a viable alternative.
Reply