The electric vehicle "revolution" is status quo for cities

From Super Bowl commercials to conversations in The White House, electric vehicles (EVs) seem to have many Americans charged up.

Like many cities, Tucson is implementing an EV Master Plan (aligned with the statewide goal for widespread electrification) as part of its strategy for addressing the climate change crisis. The mass adoption of EVs has been called a 'revolution' — one that has garnered uniquely bipartisan and corporate industry support. This technology is certainly a step in the right direction away from fossil fuel emissions, but can a solution that maintains the status quo of car culture and infrastructure really be thought of as revolutionary? With billions of dollars being invested in proliferating this technology, it’s worth examining its true potential. 

Over the next couple of months, we’ll examine EVs potential impact on our cities and on broader climate change goals.

A world built for cars

Whether fueled by electricity or gasoline, all cars require the same infrastructure and planning strategies that generate byproducts like fragmented communities, millions of road deaths and injuries, poor mental and physical health, inefficient land use and municipal budget shortfalls. EVs take one step on the pathway toward a more sustainable future, but making the necessary strides requires that we identify and address the foundational issues that underlie our current, perilous position.

US cities were made in the image of the personal vehicle to prioritize ease of car travel over the health, safety and comfort of living things—including those that drive. Markers of car-centric planning are familiar sights in our built environment: multi-lane roads with fast speed limits, limited or non-existent pedestrian/bicycling infrastructure on these arterial roads, neighborhoods without sidewalks, parking lots that remain empty 75% of the time, and public street space reserved for parking. Road-widening projects have been the most common answer to traffic jams and highway congestion in US cities, with the goal of getting cars moving faster on arterial roads through urban and suburban areas. However, increasing speeds mean more car wrecks and fatalities, while making the experience of people navigating the city using other modes of transit, including people on foot and people on bike, less pleasant and more dangerous. What's more, new roads don’t help with the congestion problem they are built to solve, as data show that building wider roads actually increases traffic in a 1-to-1 correlation called induced demand.

US cities have dedicated the largest proportion of urban land and staggering percentages of local budgets to wide, car-friendly roads and parking lots that increase the distance between the places people need to go. Urban planning for cars destroys natural habitats and isolates neighbors from each other, tears apart mostly Black and Brown neighborhoods in the US (see the work of local historian Lydia Otero for more about how highways destroyed historic Tucson barrios), and kills over 1 million people each year globally. Regrettably, vehicle-centric planning further increases car dependency with each new investment, making it more difficult to live, work, play, shop, travel, and connect without owning a car.

Of course, the ramifications of this style of planning don't cease when the car trip is complete. We need somewhere to store personal vehicles. There are an estimated 3-8 parking spaces per registered vehicle in the United States, often made of impervious asphalt. Commercial parking lots can occupy more surface area than the buildings they serve, and it’s not uncommon for over half of downtown real estate to be eaten up by car infrastructure. Still the mandate to continue building more parking is one of the biggest constraints on building desperately needed affordable housing or high-density, mixed-use developments. 

In a landscape of limited funding, investment in car infrastructure is divestment in more effective adaptations that reverse the negative effects to individuals and communities. There are bigger questions beyond that of power source; we need to examine the transportation ecosystem. Is it efficient with limited resources? Does it contribute to a low-carbon future? Does it support our health and communities? 

Where to start

The good news is that treating root causes will in turn bring about improvements in urban livability as well as environmental and mobility justice. Big-picture transformations that address climate change can create greener, more accessible public spaces and allow for everyday spontaneous interactions that strengthen communities. In order to get there, the conversation around adapting transportation technologies should start with analysis of car infrastructures and urban planning, use of resources, interlocking energy systems, and histories of environmental injustice. 

If EVs are to be part of a ‘revolution,’ the landscape within which they operate will have to look different than the gas-powered one has. For starters, EV technology and funding can be put to better use by powering public and active transportation modes that decrease single car trips and car dependency. We know that reliable and well-funded public transportation systems like buses carry environmental, social and economic benefits. Locally, Tucson’s Sun Tran is electrifying its fleet and will be free for passengers through 2022.

Electric variants of active transportation devices (e-scooters, e-bikes) promote health and efficient land use while being smaller, cheaper and cleaner to produce than their vehicle counterparts. A two-way protected bike lane can move up to 7,500 people per hour, while private vehicles transport a maximum of 1,600 people in the same 1-lane area. Re-envisioning mobility at the city scale could reduce the need for expansive car infrastructure and support convenience and livability through density.

Next month, we’ll dive deeper into the ramifications of EVs as we examine the additional environmental impacts of maintaining car-centric planning and adding more cars to our cities.