Metrorail by Ben Schumin licensed under Creative Commons.

Metro’s recent restoration of most of its bus and rail services means more people can get where they need to be. Experts say that if standard public health precautions are taken and wider local transmission rates are stable, transit poses no greater risk than being in any other indoor public space, maybe even less.

Several major cities have reopened their transit services at near or near-full levels without causing detectable outbreaks, though it hasn’t been ruled out that they could exacerbate existing outbreaks. It’s a lifeline service that’s been shown can be safe for riders and operators with the right mix of safety interventions.

How do Metro’s safety measures stack up against current evidence for how to protect riders and operators from COVID-19, and what do expected budget cuts mean for safety?

A "wear your mask" sign at a Metro station. Image by Elvert Barnes licensed under Creative Commons.

What safety measures matter most?

Masks: Universal mask wearing comes out on top of key safety measures while riding transit. But getting people to wear masks isn’t all that simple, so Metro’s approach to encouraging everyone to wear masks at all times (with a few key exceptions) is as important as having a policy.

Several cities are implementing effective and creative approaches to ensure everyone who can is wearing a mask, such as making masks freely available and placing “ambassadors” (without legal enforcement capabilities) on transit.

Philadelphia is piloting a program in which “coaches” encourage distancing and mask-wearing, and hand out masks. But with Metro facing major budget cuts due to COVID-19 impacts, starting up a new mask-encouragement program like MTA’s “mask force” in New York City might not be feasible.

Though there have been reports of WMATA distributing some free masks, promotion seems based more on the notion of peer pressure, with no concrete data available as to compliance levels, and mixed anecdata.

Air: Air circulation and ventilation are vitally important for preventing transmission, with the number of times air is fully exchanged per minute seen as a key metric. Philadelphia’s SEPTA system claims a high-frequency ventilation system both on trains and the wider transportation network. COVID-19 transmission can be limited specifically on buses that are outfitted with systems in which the operator can control bus airflow to bring in fresh air from the front of the vehicle, and sophisticated filtration systems. Metro didn’t respond to requests for comment on its ventilation systems on rail and bus.

Handwashing: Handwashing is touted by experts as an important way to prevent transmission, including by Metro, which calls into question the agency’s closure in early summer of public bathrooms at all Metro properties (though WMATA reported in July that it’s working to provide employees access to mobile handwashing stations).

What about social distancing?: Would lots of riders on a bus or train make it unsafe? Not necessarily: several major cities have returned to 50-80% ridership levels without causing COVID outbreaks. Physical distancing is a vital factor in limiting transmission, especially in indoor settings. But it’s plausible, on the basis of available evidence, that masks and air circulation are as or more important on buses and trains than strict six-foot distancing.

But since avoiding actual crowding is known to increase risk of COVID transmission, it’s even more important than usual that services are running regularly without disruptions such that tons of riders aren’t stuck on one train or bus.

Metro officials made it clear that the budget cuts will mean less service in the future, which raises pressure on the agency to protect high-ridership services to keep riders and workers safe from crowded, riskier settings. This has critical equity implications in that workers who continue working on-site are more likely to be living on lower incomes, female, and/or people of color. It also raises the possibility that apps that communicate crowding levels in real time could be especially useful to riders in taking control of their own risk - if such apps work and are accessible.

Transit versus other settings

Stephanie Lotshaw of TransitCenter, a national advocacy group, points out that whether a given transit mode in a given city is less a matter of protocols, and more about how much the coronavirus is circulating among the local and adjacent populations. The risk of transmission on transit may be also lower than that of other settings to which people are returning in numbers.

“Evidence shows that once areas reach lower transmission levels, denser transit ridership is ok,” Lotshaw said. “However, in a situation where the spread is increasing, density on transit should still be cautioned….[If] we think about the situations where COVID is most likely to spread, it is when people are in confined, poorly ventilated spaces for long periods of time where there is a lot of airborne particle transmission (talking, dancing, eating, etc).” On transit, passengers are less likely to speak and interact closely than they are in offices or social settings.

In workplace settings, furthermore, workers may spend eight hours at a time together, talk to colleagues or customers, and gradually tire of mask use, which could become less effective as the masks get damp from breathing, sweating, nose running or sneezing.

Given that evidence points toward most coronavirus transmission as being airborne rather than surface-based, it’s unclear how much of a difference deep cleaning measures (like the ones WMATA reports) can make. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention emphasize that person-to-person contact and airborne transmission are seen as the main routes of infection, rather than touching common surfaces.

Though it may make sense to clean some high-touch surfaces like poles and turnstiles as they may still carry some risk, WMATA reasonably notes that it’s impossible to clean these between every use. Deep cleaning measures (especially of infrequently touched places) can also be costly, and of virtually no public value if undertaken for the purpose of appearances rather than actual risk reduction.

People boarding a DC Metrobus from the rear. Image by Elvert Barnes licensed under Creative Commons.

Demand for service will take a while to return, but we still need the service

Restoring service could benefit bus riders in particular. Bus ridership has crept back at a faster rate than rail ridership, with 167,000 bus trips reported on Monday 8/24 and 136,000 on Monday 8/17 versus 71,000 rail trips and 68,000 on those dates, respectively. But many potential riders are avoiding Metro due to concerns about risk, choosing cars instead if they still need to get somewhere.

Riders had more good news recently, when DDOT announced that it will restore some Circulator hours cut back during the pandemic’s more intense months. In addition to restoring service, it’s imperative that riders and workers understand what Metro is doing to make them safe.

For Metro to restore service well ahead of the demand curve is better for equity than waiting for a majority to turn up and ask when their train or bus is coming. According to WMATA, 82% of Metrobus riders are people of color, and most are classified by the agency as making $30,000 or less a year.

Transit access can reduce risk of COVID-19 with appropriate safety measures in place

Could more transit access induce people to move around, thereby driving up COVID risk? Transit riders are more likely than drivers to be traveling out of necessity than choice, especially bus riders. Making services safe and available is less likely to induce ridership than it is to make trips (which will increasingly happen given the Washington region’s gradual “reopening” process) less crowded and less burdensome on travelers.

When riders turn away from transit in favor of cars, it indirectly contributes to population risk of COVID-19 complications. Higher carbon emissions put more people at risk of lung conditions like asthma, which are both associated with worse outcomes for COVID-19 patients and also known to be more common among communities of color.

But transit’s a setting in which people don’t necessarily undertake some of the riskiest behaviors, such as talking in close proximity or being close to others outside one’s household for a lengthy period of time (making service regularity and avoidance of disruptions even more essential, both of which were threatened by recently announced budget cuts).

Transit can be safe. It needs money.

Metro’s choice of safety measures and ability to build public confidence in transit has implications for both equity and the economy, as riders face choices about whether to return to Metro or not. Riders and operators have to be safe on transit to both reduce the spread of coronavirus and to allow our economy and society to function at a basic level.

With revenues down dramatically for now and the foreseeable future, WMATA and other transit agency’s ability to limit COVID transmission needs resources, and currently one of the most viable sources is federal funding being held up in Congress. One thing’s clear though: economic recovery depends on the ability to keep people traveling to work safe.

Caitlin Rogger is deputy executive director at Greater Greater Washington. Broadly interested in structural determinants of social, economic, and political outcomes in urban settings, she worked in public health prior to joining GGWash. She lives in Capitol Hill.