Environmental movement sets sights on America’s highway sprawl

For decades, the United States has built and expanded a 220,000-mile network of state and interstate highways, easing cross-country travel while dividing cities and boosting suburban sprawl.

But as the planet warms, some activists are fighting back — citing the future emissions of adding lanes and the devastation faced by communities razed to make way for them. Their push against giant multilane highways represents an emerging frontier for the environmental movement, which has historically been more focused on fossil fuel projects than seven-lane roads.

“We don’t often think of it in those terms, but expanding highways is essentially like building new oil pipelines,” said Ben Crowther, the policy director for America Walks. “It increases emissions in the same way.”

Last week, a coalition of almost 200 groups called for a nationwide moratorium on expanding highways — citing their environmental harm and the forced relocation of nearby low-income communities of color. A new national group called the Freeway Fighters is uniting local organizations under one umbrella, helping activists learn from each other on how to slow expansion — from an almost $10 billion project to widen Interstate 45 around downtown Houston to a plan to enlarge I-5 around Portland, Ore.

It might seem to be an improbable fight for a country long known for its love affair with the car. But with the United States aiming to cut emissions to zero by 2050 — and fewer than 1% of cars on the road electric — activists say America’s main transportation system has to change.

Historically, much of America’s public money spent on transportation has gone to highways. In 2017, $177 billion in public money went to highways, according to the Congressional Budget Office, more than double the $75 billion spent on mass transit and rail infrastructure. Even now, with many of the nation’s highways in disrepair, about 20% to 30% of all public highway spending goes to expansion, rather than programs to fix and repair existing roads.

State and local transportation officials say highway expansions can help relieve traffic jams, improve road safety and boost economic development. If planned correctly, they also say, such projects can boost bus movement and ride-sharing.

But experts argue expansion projects do little to reduce traffic congestion — while adding to the country’s climate problems. Almost 30% of U.S. carbon emissions come from transportation — most of it from cars and trucks. While interstate highways make up only around 1% of the nation’s roads, they carry around a quarter of its traffic.

One of the arguments against such expansions is the theory adding more lanes just leads to more traffic — what economists call “induced demand.” Sitting in traffic on a highway during rush hour may seem like an advertisement for expanding the highway — after all, more lanes allow a greater flow of traffic. Under that logic, traffic operates a bit like water through a pipe: The larger the pipe, the more water can get through.

But economists and traffic engineers say that’s not a good analogy. When lanes are added to a highway, more cars arrive to fill the available space. People might decide to drive more, or the expansion might further develop an area and encourage people to move in.