By Jesse Halpern

The Port Authority is talking a big game when it comes to sustainability. At a glance, several initiatives on the AP website are:

• Solar;
• Electric vehicles;
• LEED construction.

And given enough time, these measures could significantly reduce our emissions.

But time is not on our side.

The latest climate data shows that the United States is significantly behind in meeting its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement. And we, as a planet, continue to move towards the disastrous tipping point of +1.5°C.

The above measures that the Port Authority is implementing are certainly not nothing. But none of them seriously address the elephant in the room: As a society, we consume a lot of energy. Especially for getting around. In fact, it is our second largest energy consuming sector.

Yes, adopting electric vehicles by installing chargers is a good thing. But electric vehicles are not the silver bullet we want to believe. Electric vehicles always use energy. Quite a bit actually. Indirectly, electric vehicles, such as ICE (Internal Combustion Engines) cars, have many negative impacts in terms of sustainability:

• Electric vehicles still encourage low-density driving. High density is one of the main reasons why public transport and rail transport are considered much more energy efficient.
• Car ownership is not conducive to more dense and sustainable development.
• And of course, electric vehicles will not solve the timeless problem of traffic control. They still depend on the roadway to get around. And they use that space much less efficiently than public transportation.

And that’s on top of other issues with electric vehicles, such as microplastics and, at best, maintaining the status quo when it comes to pedestrian safety.

So what can the Port Authority do to demonstrate its serious commitment to reducing its carbon footprint? What can he do to show courage in tackling the elephant in the room? Do what is necessary to protect our climate?

The good news is that we already have the technology. In fact, it’s been around for centuries now and has only gotten better in terms of energy efficiency.

These are not electric vehicles.

It’s not solar.

It’s not LEED.

This is not a proprietary secret.

They are trains.

At the recent PA board meeting, only a few minutes were spent discussing PATH. Yet PATH is one of the PA’s greatest weapons in its climate change toolbox. Data is readily available from countless sources showing that electric trains are more energy efficient than electric vehicles. The Port Authority plans to make New York area airports world-class transportation hubs.

What’s one of the best ways to do this while simultaneously reducing emissions? Trains.

Jersey City is the second largest city in New Jersey by population and is just seven miles from Newark Liberty International Airport. However, it is significantly more convenient to access the airport from JC by car than by public transport.

So I’m asking the Port Authority to think bigger. I ask the Port Authority to be bold. Be bold. Think bigger than all the popular, eye-catching technologies companies sell. Having the courage to embrace an idea that has a global impact on the way we live, making our lives safer and more sustainable. I’m asking the Port Authority to think about what I and thousands of New York area residents think about every day when we want to travel.

Making PATH the method of choice for getting around the Hudson County area, even during off-peak hours.

Build the Marion station which will encourage sustainable development and living.

Build EWR’s PATH expansion and make PATH the method of choice for accessing our new world-class airport terminals.

I’m asking the Port Authority to consider trains.

Jesse Halpern is a Jersey City resident and PATH regular who wants the next generation to enjoy a more livable and sustainable New York neighborhood.

Send Jersey Journal letters to the editor and guest columns to [email protected].