By Chris McCahill
More states are now tracking harmful carbon emissions, setting ambitious goals to reduce those emissions, and exploring opportunities to meet those goals, even as the federal government walks back its commitment to public health and well-being. With transportation accounting for around 30% of emissions, more than any other sector, state DOTs play a key role. Several states—California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington—have set an early example of what’s possible.
These examples, along with lessons learned and key opportunities, are outlined in a new policy brief released jointly by SSTI with the Georgetown Climate Center. The need for this brief, and many of the insights that informed it, arose from our Sustainability Network—an informal group of state DOT officials, co-led with the Georgetown Climate Center.
Each state mentioned above took a somewhat distinct approach, with the shared goal of reducing transportation emissions, often through a combination of clean vehicles and reducing the need to drive long distances for every daily need. While most required some changes in state law, many of these efforts were spearheaded by state DOT leaders and staff. Importantly, they affect both long-range statewide planning and more short-term project funding procedures, along with data collection and transparency.
The brief outlines six key steps:
- Measuring: Taking stock of existing conditions and establishing performance measures to track progress toward climate-related goals.
- Planning: Incorporating climate goals and GHG reduction strategies into transportation plans.
- Investing: Identifying and prioritizing projects that expand travel options and support progress toward climate goals.
- Mitigating the impacts of projects that are expected to increase travel demand or GHG emissions.
- Monitoring performance and re-evaluating strategies as needed.
- Coordinating and collaborating with state, local, and community stakeholders.
What makes these steps powerful is not any single policy, but how they change routine decision-making. This isn’t about adding climate language to a plan. It’s about changing what gets measured, what gets scored, and what gets funded. Colorado requires transportation plans to stay within an emissions budget. Oregon analyzes each potential investment before choosing projects. California and Minnesota require offsetting any new emissions or car travel created by highway expansions. Other states can choose an approach that best fits their local context and legal frameworks.
To read the full report, visit SSTI’s resource library or access it directly through the Georgetown Climate Center.
Photo credit: Alexey Demidov via Pexels. License.