The article has been updated to clarify that the 4.6-year return on carbon investment is for the ST2 project.
This is 8th and final part of the My Neighborhood News Network series on light rail arriving in Snohomish County. You can read part 1 here, part 2 here, part 3 here , part 4 here, part 5 here, part 6 here and part 7 here.
Sound Transit’s Link light rail from the Northgate Station to the Lynnwood Transit Center is complete, but the journey continues to Everett.
The opening of the Link light rail in Lynnwood on Aug. 30 marks the end of the ST2 project for those in southwest Snohomish County. Commuters will enjoy having scheduled stops that won’t be interrupted by congestion as they head toward Seattle or SeaTac.
In the immediate future, bus riders will see many changes to bus routes. Routes in Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace have been eliminated and replaced with routes that adjust for the light rail. Although all the stops are still served, some have altered end stops.
One of the welcomed changes is the introduction of flat fees for bus and light rail service in September. Community Transit will shift its price to a $2.50 flat rate for regular fare, and the Link light rail will change to a $3 flat fee, regardless of the distance traveled. Riders under 18 are free.
However, light rail’s extension into Snohomish County is far from complete, as the segment between Lynnwood and Everett has just entered the planning stages.
Sound Transit 3
The Everett Peninsula is not only the end of the light rail’s northern reach but also the end of Sound Transit’s district map. This would make the light rail a vital connector for people living in Marysville, Stanwood and Lake Stevens.
Sound Transit 3, commonly called ST3, is scheduled for completion in 2041. It will add seven stops north of Lynnwood.
The proposed stations include:
– West Alderwood
– Ash Way
– Mariner
– SR 99 and Airport Road
– Southwest Everett Industrial Center
– SR 526 and Evergreen
– Everett Station
“At 16.3 miles, the Everett Link extension will be the longest expansion project that Sound Transit has undertaken,” said Sound Transit Media Relations Manager John Gallagher. “Building that far will be a major construction project.”
The distance from the Lynnwood Transit Center to Everett Station is nearly twice the 8.5 miles between Northgate and Lynnwood.
“Current cost estimates for the Everett Link extension range from $5.05 billion to $6.9 billion,” Gallagher said. “We will have a better sense of the cost once we move into design.”
Accountability questions
Throughout its funding history, light rail has been plagued with funding challenges and goals that were realistically beyond its budget. These issues were only compounded by inflation, economic recessions, funding challenges, housing bubbles, market downturns and a pandemic.
Smarter Transit, a pro-transit nonprofit organization, has been asking for more transparency and accountability from Sound Transit. The groups is callling for a pause in all ST3 projects while a cost-benefit analysis of viable ST3 alternatives can be conducted. Further, it wants all Sound Transit board members to be directly elected by voters based on district.
With ST3 being almost twice the distance from Northgate to Lynnwood, there is potentially twice the eminent domain acquisition and at least twice the construction, two of the prime cost inflators.
In an Aug. 7 Seattle Times opinion article for Smarter Transit, Lonergan, who serves as Pierce County assessor, and Teitzel, a former Edmonds city councilmember, wrote that Sound Transit does not deliver projects on time or within budget. Voters approved $54 billion in 2016 to finish the system, but now Sound Transit says it will cost over $148 billion, including cost overruns from ST1 and ST2.
Lonergan and Teitzel wrote in their op-ed that “roads, ferries, bridges, bike lanes and sidewalks face billion-dollar shortfalls for maintenance, preservation and construction. That could mean even more regressive taxes are coming.”
“We’re acutely aware of these pressures and how they affect our projects,” Gallagher responded. “Earlier this year, we hired Terri Mestas as a deputy CEO for capital delivery; she had previously overseen capital projects at [Los Angeles International Airport].”
Gallagher said that Mestas is looking at how Sound Transit is structured to deliver on projects to see how effectively and cost-efficiently those projects can be completed.
“The [Sound Transit] Board is also keenly aware of these issues and is monitoring them closely so that projects remain affordable,” Gallagher said.
If the projects run over their budget, there is a chance that a vote will be put to taxpayers for more funding to complete the project, and those taxpayers could vote “no.”
In that event, Gallagher said the Sound Transit Board would need to weigh the options, potentially have an economic realignment, and seek federal grants.
Environmental impacts
According to Smarter Transit, in 2050, 3% of all daily trips by car, bus, rail, ferry, bike and on foot are forecast to be on light rail. Further, most passengers will be existing bus riders who must transfer to the light rail. With light rail in place, hours of traffic delay are forecast to increase by 35%.
“Our region will see only a 6% reduction in greenhouse gases from light rail while the regional goal is 80%. Huge greenhouse gas emissions from ST3 construction aren’t being counted,” Lonergan and Teitzel wrote.
That’s not to mention another vital issue Smarter Transit raises is the light rail’s environmental cost: The amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) the project releases compared to what it will prevent.
Fimia questions if the pollution spent on the project helps or hinders CO2 emissions, as more drivers in Snohomish County are starting to purchase electric vehicles.
In a 2018 Chatham House Report, updated in 2020, cement is said to account for 8% of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Further, according to the State of New York, concrete has an almost one-for-one carbon exchange rate, with a pound of concrete creating 0.91 pounds of CO2.
The Biden administration raised the social cost of carbon (SCC) — the estimated financial cost of economic and ecological damage from emitting one ton of carbon dioxide — to $51 per metric ton in 2022, from the Trump administration’s $10 per metric ton.
With 2204.62 pounds in a metric ton, that equals $0.023 per pound, giving concrete an SCC of $0.021.
However, a November 2023 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report shows the social cost is $190 per metric ton — 3.73 times President Biden’s SCC. With the EPA’s numbers, the social cost of carbon is $0.086 a pound, giving concrete an SCC of $0.078 per pound.
Sound Transit’s Gallagher said the ST2 project from Northgate to Lynnwood created 64,000 tons of carbon. That means the light rail, by the EPA’s estimation, has an SCC of $12.16 million.
Concrete weighs 150 pounds per cubic foot, there are 5,280 feet in a mile, and it is 16.3 miles of track from Lynnwood to Everett.
The return on the region’s carbon investment will depend on how quickly and large the area grows and how many people use the light rail. The Link extension will prevent an estimated 14,000 tons of CO2 from being released by vehicles a year, an SCC value of $2.66 million.
ST2 will take about 4.6 years to pay back its carbon investment, and it will be 9.2 years for ST3. Meanwhile, Snohomish County’s population will continue to grow, making the fight for carbon neutrality more difficult.. Meanwhile, Snohomish County’s population will continue to grow, making the fight for carbon neutrality more difficult.
The last 18.1 miles to Everett might be harder fought than previously imagined.
— By Rick Sinnett
Appreciate the detailed reporting and coverage about the costs and benefits of ST3. As co-chair of Smarter Transit, (See our website, smartertransit.org), I’d like to provide some clarification. All our numbers come from the 2050 Transportation Plan adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and Sound Transit. The PSRC is the federally mandated planning agency for our region. It’s hard to believe but yes, after 50 years (Sound Move passed in 1996) transit ridership will still be at around 7-8%. Only 3% of all the 24,000,000 trips/day will be on ST trains.
There are much more cost effective and faster ways to provide great options to driving alone. And yes traffic increases 35%. I’m not sure where the “4.6 years to see a return” comes from. It’s more like many many decades if at all.
Please see our power point, Promises vs. Reality on our website, sign the Petition to the Legislature to have the ST board directly elected and under “Learn More,” see our Contracts Report from 2016. It explains why these projects get built despite the abysmal numbers for ridership, CO2 emissions, traffic, impacts to communities, sensitive area and mature trees. The cost is the benefit. Hundreds of construction, legal, real estate, PR and others making billions. Between 2007 and 2015 ST spent $40,000,000 on public relations/marketing alone.
4.6 years is how long it takes for the carbon released to be offset by less drivers as per the EPA model of an scc of 12.16M of link vs 2.66M per year of cars taken off the road. Compared to the I5 resurface, which is all concrete and will not reduce any traffic, the concrete used by Link will be offset every 5 years.
The 6% reduction your campaign site keep quoting from psrc is 6% below 1990 levels, not 2024 levels. To say vision 2050 only reduces emissions by 6% is misleading as that is only true if emissions were what they were in 1990. 6% below 1990 is actually very good as it is like rolling back the clock 3 decades under vision 2050. The reduction from not implementing vision 2050 which includes st3, is actually 39%. Only decarbonization could achieve 80% below 1990 levels. Decarbonization of the region is not what pscr is pursuing or targeting. Vision 2050 includes highways, air transit, ferries, and inter city rail, not just sound transit.
However, keep in mind the table you’re quoting from psrc in appendix H is not for light rail specifically but the entire plan so it combines all modes of transport. So it is unclear why sound transit should bear the cost of say SeaTac and the ferry system not doing enough and the report doesn’t specifically say if sound transit should do more or if it can do more.
The more I read about it and consider my own experiences, I mourn the missed opportunity of BRT in the 90s or even early 2000s. Seattle really is constrained for space right where it needs the most mobility, from the stadiums to the Ship Canal.
If you have traffic reports on the air every day telling you about the same congestion, the same slowdowns, every day, you have a proven use case for BRT. Transitioning from a solid well-used BRT network to trams would have been an easier sell than the rail system we have on top of/adjacent to the freeways. We could be having a very different conversation with a lot more high-volume transit already in service.
Or we could have looked to SkyTrain up in VAN, and emulated that. But here we are, with long headways/too few trains, and a lot of miles still to connect up.
Sky train is elevated on concrete pilons and it is longer than link. We’re literally emulating it with st2 and st3. It is basically where Seattle got the idea. Vancouver started in the 80s so clearly they are way ahead but that’s Seattle decision making process for you.
BRT and trams are not practical for regional transit. They will simply get stuck in traffic. You need a dedicated grade separated system and LRT is the cheapest way to get there. Heavy Metro would be best but it would cost 3x more. That’s why Vancouver never did a metro.
Amazing how one organization is worried about concrete carbon release that will be offset in 4 years but doesn’t say a peep about Washington dot project to resurface I5…with concrete as it is beyond its lifetime use. And that project will cost more, and create legendary traffic problems right next to the light rail which basically will become the only viable way for Snohomish residents to travel to Seattle at peak hours for probably a decade. Not to mention the amount of concrete I5 replating will need dwarfs the one used on Link. So it is very strange to suddenly be appalled at concrete…
From the PSRC’s Transportation 2050 Plan: “Climate change is an urgent environmental, economic, and equity threat being addressed at all levels, from the local to an international scale. The region’s leaders have committed to taking actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and create a sustainable urban region. Together with VISION 2050, full implementation of the Regional Transportation Plan puts the region on track to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to achieve regional climate goals.” (www.psrc.org/planning-2050/regional-transportation-plan Appendix H pg. 7). No it doesn’t.
The goal for the region is an 83% reduction over 1990 levels. If we continue with this plan, we will only achieve a 6% reduction. Being “committed to take action” is not enough. How else could we be spending the $148 billion for ST3 (still in the planning stages) to reach our goal? Good public policy starts with asking the question, “What’s the problem we’re trying to solve?” Then, “What are all the viable alternatives for solving it?” Followed by, “What are the costs and benefits of those alternatives? Unfortunately, the “problem” for decades has been defined as “In order to be a world class city we need to have rail.” Our region needs a realistic transportation plan that is effective, affordable and significantly reduces CO2 emissions. Please see smartertransit.org for details and how you can help.
To provide a comparison of modes, Swift Green BRT was opened in 2019, covering the southern part of what I call Link’s “dogleg to Everett.” It would have been simple to add the northern loop to this BRT, for northbound buses would merely continue from Seaway Transit Center/Boeing on the 526 eastbound freeway to, one option, Evergreen Way, then north into downtown Everett, visa-versa in the opposite direction, a handful of stations each way. As the stations are already there on that segment – Swift Blue has been running that segment since 2009 – the cost to complete the loop would have consisted of the buses and the drivers, no right-of-way would be needed. The timeline to purchase/build/put the buses into service: about 18 months. Instead, this area, particularly southwest Everett, is paying ST taxes for minimal, peak-only ST express service while waiting until 2041 for Link to have the decisions made for station locations, the right-of-way acquired, etc. in what is presently a light-density area.