Re: CO2 and global warming
From: Dave O'Neill (daveon_at_atomic.raz.spam.or.com)
Date: 09/27/04
- Next message: Dave O'Neill: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Previous message: AA Institute: "Re: What makes an ideal Moon base?"
- In reply to: George William Herbert: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Next in thread: Dave O'Neill: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:15:08 GMT
"George William Herbert" <gherbert@retro.com> wrote in message
news:41572ed1$0$78143$a1866201@newsreader.dsl.net...
> Alex Terrell <alexterrell@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Thanks for your detailed input, which is appreciated, even if we
> >disagree on most things below.
> >> This sort of change requires that there be housing closer to their
> >> place of work, which requires that there be space to build housing
> >> closer to their place of work, which is not physically present
> >> in a lot of places. Or, it requires knocking down existing
> >> structures close to places of work and replacing them with
> >> high(er) density housing.
> >
> >Or it requires improved public transport, which would be a benefit in
> >any case.
>
> Public transport is only cheaper in one measure: fuel consumption.
> In all other measures it costs more.
> If CO2 emissions were not at issue, the cheapest solution is to
> build as many roads as we can so that as many people can drive
> as want to. Some people can't afford to, but society is subsidizing
> their trips by diverting other taxes into transit. If everybody
> had to use it then there's nowhere to subsidize it from, and the
> total economic impact of transportation will be higher, another
> net drag on the economy.
It depends on the cost of the land you're turning into roads. A sensible
mass transit system using a variety of solutions; trams, trains, large buses
and small buses...
Evidence from many large cities suggests that popular, well planned transit
systems can run quite profitably. One problem arises when you try and apply
mass transit to situations where it isn't practical.
> >Planning authorities are aiming to prevent this by insisting that new
City
> >Centre developments have a certain percentage of social housing.
>
> True.
>
> >> Which is another regressive tax on the poor, who now need to
> >> commute more to reach their jobs.
> >
> >Only if you allow a world where the poor aren't allow to live any
> >where near the rich.
>
> Let me give you a real world example: the San Francisco Bay Area.
>
> The poor can live wherever they can afford to. This is the US and
> people are free to move around. And it's the SF Bay Area, which
> is fairly egalitarian and progressive even by European standards.
That wasn't quite my feeling about the Bay Area when I was living in Redwood
City in 2001. By US standards it is more progressive and egalitarian than
other parts of the US (Dallas for example) but compared to Seattle or a
comparative European area like the Thames Valley in the UK, it's far less
people friendly and has a lot less provision for the poor or low incomed.
Compared to somewhere like Lund in Southern Sweden (Sweden's Silicon Valley)
and, well, it doesn't.
> The reality is that as the economy and job growth come to various
> subareas around the bay, each time it happens the poor are displaced
> by incoming higher paid workers, and in large part despite the
> building of low income housing the poor end up having to move
> further away from job centers... out to Contra Costa County,
> or the Central Valley, where they face 2-3 hour commutes.
Which given the traffic on the 101 isn't an uncommon scenario in the Bay
Area. If my company hadn't been paying for an apartment, there's no way we
could have afforded to live within an hour of the office (directly across
from the Oracle campus in Redwood Shores) - not at $2500 for a 2 bed
appartment a month.
> There are certainly things wrong with the planning in this
> area, but the reality of the situation is that the economics
> shift faster than social and government planning can keep up,
> and the poor keep getting squeezed out.
>
> >> >- Created a market for diesel cars, as in Europe. Diesel cars of like
> >> >performance emit much less CO2 than petrol/gasoline cars.
> >>
> >> There's already a market for diesel cars.
> >
> >Like 50% as in Europe?
>
> No. But it's there.
>
> >> Diesel cars, however, emit too much particulates in the exhaust
> >> to comply with current environmental regulations. There's this
> >> little problem with carcinogenics.
> >
> >Not any more - this is a legacy issue. And in about 10 years I think
> >most cars will be diesel electric hybrids.
>
> The tech edge diesel engines now are cleaning up. Those motors are
> not in widespread production. They require the low sulphur diesel
> as well, which is going to cost more to produce, which is going to
> be a net drag on the economy.
It doesn't have to be. Low Sulphur is pretty universally available in the
UK and the fuel economy of a Diesel still makes it worthwhile compared to
petrol.
Despite petrol prices the UK economy has been undergoing the longest period
of consistant growth since the 19th century.
<snip>
> >Aluminium cars are already being produced in Europe, and exported to
> >the USA.
>
> And have already been produced in the US as well.
> Proof of concept is not the question... The Fiat X1/9
> was around decades ago.
>
> The transition from "A few cars" to "Most cars" is going to
> be a HUGE shift in technology of production and in the
> vendor chain.
The car market is probably more flexible than you'd think. Consider, after
all, that the car market in Europe looks very different to the US - the
types of cars made are signficantly different, most are manual gear boxes
and that they have to be made in right and left hand drive models. It
already deals with a lot more variety than I see when I visit the US.
Dave
- Next message: Dave O'Neill: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Previous message: AA Institute: "Re: What makes an ideal Moon base?"
- In reply to: George William Herbert: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Next in thread: Dave O'Neill: "Re: CO2 and global warming"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
