Rural states like Maine struggle with mass transit issues.  With limited federal funds and even more limited state and local funds, getting the requisite amount of money to fund transit infrastructure can be a herculean task.  Maine has 23,142 miles of roads, compare that to New Hampshire – it has less than half the state roads as Maine yet a slightly smaller population (1,318,301 versus NH’s 1,324,575) and the same transportation funding.  The result is that Maine must squeeze every bit of value it can out of each transportation dollar it receives.  So when it comes time to funding expensive, long term transit projects, it can be a tough sell.  Witness the recent reaction of the transportation committee to the ZOOM bus bill.

So how do Mainers cope with rising gas prices and the need to traverse long distances, often around rural or semi-rural areas, just to get to work?  Well, thousands of available seats already exist in vehicles traveling down the very same roads you commute on, every day, going the same way you are going, at the same time you are traveling.  Yep, it’s all those empty car seats right next to you.  Ok, groan if you must about pre-conceived notions about carpooling, but you might be surprised at how easy it is, thanks to GoMaine’s  interactive commuter ride-matching website.

Not ready for a long term commitment?  No problem, GoMaine just launched a single trip carpool finder so you can catch a ride to Camden for a festival, or save on parking by taking one car downtown for a show.  Not sure about the exact address of where you are heading?  The site uses Google maps so you can at least get close.  The ride-matching system on the GoMaine site has a trip planner, a commuter log that tracks your commuting choices and calculates the pollution and financial savings that go with it.  So, let’s talk about those pollution and money saving benefits.

Take a very typical commute – Lewiston to Portland.  Because housing costs are relatively cheaper in Lewiston but more job opportunities  are in Portland, many Mainers find themselves making the 49 mile haul each way, every day.  First, let’s address the environmental impact of that commute.  If you are going solo five days a week, that commute is releasing 20,012 lbs of carbon into the atmosphere every year.  (By comparison, the average CO2 emissions for a single occupancy vehicle in America is 11,634 lbs per year).   If you had just one person sharing that ride with you, you at least bring your commuter carbon emissions down to the national average.

Next, let’s talk about your wallet.  Assuming you never drove anywhere else but to work and back in your 25mpg car, at today’s gas price of $3.97, you are paying $3,890 a year, in gas alone.  Add to that tolls, wear and tear on your car, and you are paying a lot of money just to get to your job.  But say you have 3 people in your car so you all split that cost.  Each of you pays $972.50 a year instead.  What could you do with an extra $2,000 in your wallet?

Be a superhero. Take the T.

In his column in yesterday’s Boston Globe, Harvard economics professor Edward Glaeser illustrates that densely developed cities are better for the environment than leafy suburbs. The column correctly states that the average household in Boston’s urban core emits significantly fewer pounds of carbon dioxide per year, in part because people in the city drive less. Unfortunately, the column also states that public transportation “does little to balance the scales”— a statement that could easily be misinterpreted to mean that the use of public transit does little to decrease carbon emissions. In fact, Glaeser’s research that formed the basis for his conclusions indicates that although city dwellers tend to use more public transportation than suburbanites, their carbon footprint is still significantly lower precisely because the emissions from transit are modest relative to the contributions of cars. Travel by public transportation emits about half as much carbon dioxide per passenger mile than private vehicles, and uses about half the fuel.

Glaeser’s message is clear. If we’re going to minimize our carbon footprint, we need to not only support denser development in downtown Boston, but also greater investment in our underfunded public transportation system.

Learn more about CLF’s work to build livable cities and innovative transportation for all New Englanders.

Boston’s iconic Longfellow Bridge serves as a poster child for public transit. Every few minutes, the bridge transports Red Line commuters between Boston and Cambridge, affording its passengers a breathtaking view of the Charles River and Boston skyline– and the parallel lanes of bumper-to-bumper vehicle traffic that the speeding train leaves in its wake. While that’s a positive situation for MBTA riders, it’s a dangerous one for the rest of the city’s commuters who don’t cross the bridge by car– cyclists and pedestrians.

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Highway Division had released plans to rebuild the historic bridge as is. In May 2010, CLF advocated for an alternative plan that would make the bridge more bike and pedestrian-friendly. In response to CLF’s call to action, MassDOT created the Longfellow Bridge Rehabilitation Task Force, which recently released its recommendations on what alternatives should be included in the project’s Environmental Assessment to submit to the Federal Highway Administration.

Last week, CLF submitted written comments to the Administrator of the Highway Division at the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) in response to those recommendations. In a letter to MasDOT Highway Division Administrator Luisa Paiewonsky, CLF explained that to comply with federal and state law, MassDOT should include at least one strong alternative plan for presentation and analysis that retains the current structure of the bridge throughout while altering its traffic pattern so that only one lane exists in both directions with a two-lane release into Charles Circle on the Boston side. Such an alternative would uphold the structural and architectural integrity of the bridge, help the state reach its health and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and improve safety for bikers and pedestrians.

Learn more about what CLF is doing the improve transportation alternatives in communities throughout New England.