Comments on: Reason Online: climate bill must do more for clean transportation

By: Stephen Lee Davis

Stephen Lee Davis — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:21:20 +0000

Dave, FYI, the transportation sector will be generating roughly 20% of the revenues raised by cap-and-trade, according to recent estimates. It’s not a matter of taking money out of something they won’t be contributing to — if anything, transportation will only be taking back a tiny fraction of the revenues generated by the sector.

By: orbit7er

orbit7er — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 00:28:10 +0000

It is CO2 and other long-term greenhouse gases which lead to a possible feedback loop in which
increased warming from CO2 increases lead to corresponding increases in water vapor which in turn may lead to further warming. See http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html#wv for more info.

Gabriel’s comment is another attempt to dismiss the crucial role of manmade increases in CO2 and other Greenhouse emissions in global warming.

Based on that reasoning we do not have to do anything about the 33% of CO2 contributed by transportation, coal power plants or any other human CO2 contributors!

CO2 is one of the key instigators of global warming and the fastest way to cut CO2 emissions in the US is by cutting cars and trucks which contribute 90% of transportation’s greenhouse emissions.

And the best way to do that is via mass transit and rail freight which gets cars and trucks off the road.

An illustrative success model of what is possible in a short period of time is Portland, Oregon which has actually CUT its greenhouse emissions below 1990 levels primarily by investing in mass transit and sustainable transit-oriented development instead of highways and suburban sprawl.

Oil usage and greenhouse emissions have gone down some 5-6% since 2008 with $4 gas leading to less driving and then the recession cutting further even as ironically mass transit was actually CUT.

Another success story is the recent opening decades late of train service to major events in the Meadowlands in New Jersey. The opening of this service was used by over 20,000 people taking thousands of cars off the New Jersey highways which have perennially been jammed every time there is a major Meadowlands event. If frequent and reasonably convenient mass transit is provided people will use it in droves to avoid traffic jams and stress.

By: Dave Morse

Dave Morse — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:13:57 +0000

So how is the bill raising revenue? I don’t see my uncle’s Buick Brontosaurus paying into cap&Trade. Maybe it makes sense that the transportation sector also isn’t withdrawing from an account that its not paying into.

By: Stephen Lee Davis

Stephen Lee Davis — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:41:32 +0000

So to clarify, you’re saying that 1/10 of one percent of our national GHGs come from transportation? And 2 percent of our carbon emissions come from transportation? Did I read that right?

By: Gabriel Roth

Gabriel Roth — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:45:10 +0000

Why does the author repeat the fiction that “The U.S. transportation sector produces one-third of our carbon emissions”?

According to the EPA, the transportation sector is responsible for 28 percent of US Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHGE) RESULTING FROM HUMAN ACTIVITY, which are less than 5% of GHGE due to CO2, which, in its turn, is less than 5 percent of total Greenhouse Gas, most of which is water vapor.

The proportion of “carbon emissions” due to transportation is therefore more like 28 percent of 5 percent, which is less than two percent of the total.

And, as “Carbon emissions” are less than 5 percent of total GHGE, the contribution of transportation to total US GHGE is 28 percent of 5 percent of 5 percent, which is less than one tenth of one percent.

By: bossyman15

bossyman15 — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:20:24 +0000

Wasn’t Reason Foundation against California High Speed Rail? Now they support clean transit. I still don’t trust them. They must be up to something.