Congestion Pricing in the Skies

As the debate over congestion pricing on the streets of New York heats up, it occurs to me that maybe we're looking at the wrong congestion.

If Mayor Bloomberg's idea for unclogging the streets is valid, then it should also work to help unclog the metro area's most serious congestion problem — that in the skies.

New Yorkers who have flown anywhere in the past couple of years know what I'm talking about. Flight delays have gotten out of hand. Any problem with the weather, anywhere, seems to back up flights, creating a domino effect that leads not only to delays, but flight cancellations.

Our skies are among the most overcrowded of all, fed by three major airports and a handful of small general aviation fields. Flights are packed so tight that any deviation from the schedule throws the entire operation into chaos, a result that leads to inconvenience, frustration, and even danger.

Air traffic doesn't seem all that different than conventional land traffic. You have mass transit, the scheduled airlines flying large and medium sized aircraft, and you have the stratospheric equivalent of the Manhattan motorist, private aircraft.

The problem is that a corporate jet takes up as much airspace as a 747 — and that space is considerable. This is to safely control the movement of air traffic by keeping a significant distance between aircraft. Ever wait on the tarmac, sweltering in a jam packed jumbo jet, as some tiny corporate jet takes off ahead of you? But the corporate jet may only have one or two passengers, as opposed to the hundreds on the commercial aircraft. Since the tiny planes may be making up in excess of a quarter of the flights over the New York metropolitan area, a small group of privileged travelers is taking up a disproportionate amount of our precious airspace.

Certainly, many of these flights are important, and the successful folks who travel on these jets are among those who help to drive the economy for the rest of us. But there are a lot of productive people flying first class on commercial airlines, and even some budget-minded business people who might join the rest of us in coach.

So if it is valid to suggest that the small proportion of commuters who come into Manhattan by automobile — as opposed to the huge numbers on subways, commuter rail, and buses — pay a "congestion tax" to use the streets, would it not be just as valid to impose a congestion tax on air traffic?

Here's how it can work. Let's impose a flat tax on every aircraft that takes off, say a nice round number like $80,000. After all, there are a lot fewer take off and landing spots available to accommodate airplanes than the huge number of cars that only occupy a small amount of space at any one time. So a factor of 10,000 seems right to me.

Just as Mayor Bloomberg proposes to use the proceeds of his congestion tax imposed on motorists to subsidize mass transit, I would suggest a credit on the order of $500 per passenger sounds equitable. If you transport 160 passengers or more, the plane flies free. One mogul weekending in Tucker's Town, Bermuda would be charged $79,500 at takeoff.

This would potentially raise a lot of money, since folks who can afford private jets would keep on flying. After all, Mayor Bloomberg assures us that there are plenty of rich folks who will gladly pony up another $8 every day to drive into Manhattan — after all, they already willingly shell out as much as $50 just to park — and arguably Tucker's Town is a much nicer place.

This could prevent airfare hikes for those taking the blue sky equivalent of mass transit, the commercial airliner.

Corporate types could save money, of course, by jet pooling. That would mean more slots available for commercial aircraft and perhaps fewer delays and cancelled flights. And then, of course, there is the issue of global warming. The mayor has vowed to make New York the greenest of cities, leading the way toward the reduction of greenhouse gases worldwide.

Can you imagine how many tons of carbon are being added to the shroud covering the earth so that Mr. Mogul can enjoy a cheaper flight to Bermuda? To fulfill the mayor's mandate to reduce carbon emissions, isn't it only right that we demand restitution from those who would dump so much carbon on us to move so few people?

So I say let's give congestion pricing in the air a fair test. And after a few years we can then talk about moving the concept back down to earth.