Levels of congestion, noise, and pollution all increase in cities as people travel to and from work. Yet, the main culprit, cars, continue to dominate city streets at these times.

75% of global emissions come from cities, while passenger cars account for 41% of the transport sector’s emissions (more than aviation). Removing private cars from cities during peak hours would go a long way towards improving air quality and health. But it’s not without its challenges.

Cities must ensure commuters have a reliable, safe, and sustainable route to their workplace. And a growing number of cities worldwide are showing that going car-free is possible — thus becoming more desirable places to live and work.

This article explores what banning cars in cities during peak hours would look like, why it’s essential, and how it can be achieved.

Escaping rush hour traffic

Despite the name, ‘rush hour’ has never been a single hour of the day.

Typical rush hour timings fall between 7–9 a.m. and 4–7 p.m. While in some cities, rush hour is even longer, lasting between 6–10 a.m. and 4–8 p.m. (a third of the day). And, as working habits change, bigger cities are also seeing the emergence of a lunchtime rush hour!

At these times, roads flood with cars as people commute to and from work. In their attempts to aid the flow of car traffic, cities invest in building and widening roads. If this strategy worked, rush hour congestion would no longer be an issue.

Unfortunately, the significant investment in car infrastructure means that cities now give commuters few alternative options. Meanwhile, suburbanisation and dispersal mean people live farther away than ever from their place of work (and most other amenities) — car ownership is sometimes essential.

But a growing number of cities are proving that it’s possible to return the streets to people.

You only have to look back as recently as the pandemic, when the number of cars on the roads plummeted. During that time, cities acted by dedicating more space for walking and cycling — proving that action can happen quickly. And it was to the benefit of everyone as air quality soon improved across Europe as the level of pollutants in the atmosphere decreased.

Hopes were high that these changes would put cities on a more permanent path towards a sustainable future. But following the pandemic, the number of cars on the roads returned to normal, and low-traffic neighbourhoods (like those found in London) received some backlash.

Banning private cars from cities at peak hours would require that millions rethink their commute — yet this only tells part of the story.

Person cycling to work through the city

Prioritising cars isn’t to the benefit of every commuter

It’s too easy to focus on the potential inconvenience restricting cars during rush hour could cause, but that stems from the design of most cities. Let’s zoom out and view the bigger picture.

Many cities have dedicated lots of space for roads and car parking, prioritising it above every other form of transport — including walking. Yet, if all the cars in Europe were in use simultaneously, each carrying 1.45 people (the current average occupancy rate in Europe), then most people (55%) wouldn’t even be in a car.

By looking at it this way, European cities should do more to support car-free travel as it would benefit the majority.

number of people with or without a vehicle

Picturing rush hour without private cars

There’s a strong case for car-free rush hours that would benefit those who currently do and don’t drive:

Cleaner air.
Improved health.
Safer streets.
A quieter environment.
More space.

Let’s look into each of these.

Cleaner air

Carbon emissions from cars increase by 20% during rush hour. And the daily commute makes up more than 98% of an employee’s work-related carbon footprint.

Removing private cars at these peak times would result in cleaner air, make the city more environmentally friendly, and improve the health of everyone commuting and living in the area.

Improved health

Air pollution is associated with 7 million deaths yearly, while those driving during peak hours can experience anxiety and depression due to stress. To avoid rush hour, drivers get to work earlier and leave later. But this means they spend an extra two days a month at work, potentially pushing them closer to burnout and expanding rush hour.

With fewer cars travelling at peak hours, the air would be cleaner — and not driving would give commuters more time to switch off from work.

Safer streets

Cleaner air isn’t the only way that reducing the number of cars on the roads can save lives, as vehicles kill 1.3 million people annually. Restricting cars makes commuting safer for everyone.

Quieter environment

Cities are known for being noisy places. But cities aren’t loud; cars are!

The sounds of car engines, tyres on the road, and blaring horns are ubiquitous in cities worldwide (anyone who’s been to Rome will know what that’s like). Without them, cities would be relatively quiet places.

And all of that noise isn’t good for your health. The sound of traffic can cause headaches, sleep disturbance, stress, high blood pressure, and an increased risk of heart disease, according to the World Health Organisation.

Noise pollution isn’t a problem solved by electric vehicles (despite not having a loud combustion engine), as when a vehicle reaches 35 km/h, the most audible sound comes from tyres in contact with the road, not the motor.

More space

The average car occupancy rate in Europe is 1.45 — a low number considering most cars have room for 5 people. With 200 cars on the road, and at this occupancy rate, that’s 290 people! If those people were to travel by public transport, walk, cycle, or use micromobility, they would take up much less space.

Road space isn’t the only area where cars dominate either; people commuting to work by car need somewhere to park at home and work. With that increased space, companies and cities can reduce car park management costs.

cities for people

Getting commuters out of their cars

After a century of prioritising cars over all other modes of transport, councils and governments are employing various tactics to reduce the number of vehicles in the city. These strategies have successfully reduced private cars while increasing public transport use.

Removing parking spaces

Between 2017 and 2019, Oslo removed all 760 roadside parking spaces from the city centre, turning them into cycle lanes and miniature parks. With no places to park, people stopped driving into the city — between 2016 and 2019, the number of cars in the city reduced by 28%.

Workplace parking charges

Rather than removing parking spaces, some cities have introduced workplace parking charges. This approach charges companies with 11 or more parking spaces per space — employers can then pay this cost or pass it on to employees. Cities can use the money raised from these charges to fund public transport and encourage more people to make the switch.

Congestion charges

With a congestion charge, drivers must pay for car use in the city. Big cities across the world have introduced congestion charges in recent years, including:

London;
Stockholm;
Milan.

Adding a congestion charge to the ever-growing list of expenses attached to owning a car encourages drivers to find other routes into the city. After introducing a congestion charge in London, traffic levels dropped by 30% while bus passengers increased by 33%.

Free public transport

In 2020, Luxembourg became the first country in the world to offer free nationwide public transport. Malta soon followed by making public transport free to residents in 2022.

While these are the only countries offering to that extent, more are following a similar path. There’s the €9 public transport ticket in Germany (which will be replaced by the ‘Deutschlandticket’ for €49 per month), a €3 per day national transport pass in Austria, and the £2 bus ticket cap in the UK.

Public transport services are also being made more affordable and accessible on a city level. Paris plans to offer free public transport by 2026, following in the steps of several European cities already offering free public transport:

Tallinn, Estonia.
Dunkirk, France.
Livognio, Italy.

While it’s free to the person travelling, there’s still the cost of operating the services. Funding sources often come from taxes, and those against free public transport often point to the funding methods. But little funding comes from ticket sales when public transport charges travellers.

Take Dunkirk as an example, where ticket sales made up around 10% of the financing of public transport before it was free to use.

But making public transport free comes with many benefits, as it improves air quality, reduces congestion, and gives those on lower incomes a convenient way to travel.

free public transport

But free public transport within a city (especially when only for residents) doesn’t help those who commute from further afield — most will still have to rely on a car. For these commuters, improved out-of-town transport, car-sharing, and ride-hailing services are vital to going car-free.

If a city restricts private car usage and supports alternative travel methods, people will adapt — as cities worldwide are proving, including Bogota.

Where citizens voted to restrict cars during rush hour

On 24 February 2000, Bogotá held its first car-free day.

Interestingly, this date was a Thursday — in the middle of a busy work week. The initiative kept over 800,000 vehicles off the roads that day, but people still made it to work. Rather than getting behind the wheel, people travelled by bus, bicycle, taxi, and on foot.

Most importantly, for the first time in 4 years, nobody was killed in a traffic accident.

Within a day, the future of the city and commuting had changed. A car-free day is now an annual event in Bogotá, and residents voted to restrict cars on weekdays all year round (cars permitted on the roads alternate daily depending on their licence plate number).

The chance to vote on how to use street space is rare. Residents in other cities have never had that option — it’s all decided for them. And this is a crucial point because if residents could vote for how to use the space in their cities, the streets could look much different.

It’s time to change your commuting habits

Your employer expects you to arrive on time and ready for work, but the current state of rush hour in cities supports neither expectation.

Congestion will worsen if everyone drives in their own private or company car. And this adds to the time it takes to get to work, which, in turn, increases stress and anxiety levels. Private cars may get you to work, but not always in the best frame of mind.

Not everyone has an alternative, though — especially if you don’t live near a convenient public transport service. That’s where the Bolt Work Profile will help.

Bolt is available in 45 countries in 500 cities across Europe and Africa. And with the Work Profile, you can conveniently keep your business travel separate from your personal rides (you can even add a company payment card).

Depending on your city, you can book a ride, jump on an electric scooter or e-bike, and get behind the wheel of a Bolt Drive vehicle — all within a single app.

Having these options to you makes it much easier to go car-free when travelling to and from work — which is vital as cities impose more restrictions on private car usage.

How restricting private cars at rush hour would change commuting forever

Affordable work rides, without the paperwork

Recent posts

Progress report: One year of global climate impact