Does anyone feel that local and national infrastructures would ease GW?

Question

Has any feasability studies been done in this area?

Answer 1

Quite a few. And the answer is decidedly yes.  Expanded commitment to mass transit systems, in particular, would do a great deal to help reduce CO2 emissions.  It also has the advantages of being much cheaper for consumers and eases traffic congestion.

The lack of mass transit in the US (with rare exceptions like NYC) is one of the main reasons why the US is the world's biggest contributor to CO2 emissions. We are tehe only industrialized nation that relies almost entirely on roads and automobiles, and deny people a choice of transportation methods.

There are other ways infrastructure can be reconfigured toreduce global warming as welll--mostly by redesigning urban growth so that new or redeveloped areas are more compact. Besides making transportation easier, this reduces the amount of land required--leaving more for greenspace and trees. It also means communities that can be communities, instead of a bunch of isolated homes too far apart for children to even get together and play.

BTW--just for the right-wingers--you do realize that the endless highways and roads you keep building for cars are--as a government owned and operated system--pure socialism? While mass transit,  on the other hand, can be--and often is--privately owned and operated?

Answer 2

lots of them however except for a few big cities such as NYC where public transit is the best way to get around you will not get people to give up there cars. If one electric powered train easily replaces 500+ cars on a daily commute it's not hard to see a huge drop in oil consumed as well as emissions released. and if hydro or wind is the predominant grid source such as buffalo then it's zero emission.

amtrack is more for longer distance travel like Washington to NYC much farther than that and take a plane unless time isn't a concern I was referring to 30 mile commutes which is what most people do daily. it's done in most big cities now and used extensively. jello when was the last time you were in a NYC subway and it was empty, doesn't happen your packed in like sardines, and the reason is because a parking space will cost you as much per month as your apt. and it takes 10 times longer to get anywhere in a car as it does to take the subway.  Same as the L in Philly and Chicago Marta in Atlanta even Cleveland has a train now plus every other city not mentioned.

point is instead of everyone driving 40 miles each way to work why not drive 5 miles to the station and take a train into the city round trip that saves a minimum 4 gallons per car per day.

Answer 3

Poster "Alan from Big Easy" at The Oil Drum (http://theoildrum.com ) pushes rail as a solution to both oil depletion and global warming.  Given that light rail is electric, heavy rail can be electrified and electricity can be made with little or no GHG emissions, this is a worthwhile infrastructure effort.

It's easy to tell Jello why Amtrak doesn't make money:

1.  It doesn't own the rails it uses, so it can't set schedules (passenger trains have to wait for freight).

2.  It has to pay to use those rails, while most highways are toll-free.

3.  As part of the law which formed Amtrak, it got saddled with some very expensive labor agreements.

Answer 4

If national transit is so good, why isn't Amtrak making any money?  This is such a bad idea.

Eliminate CAFE standards.  Every time these feel good measures are taken we get more dependent on oil.  The higher the gas mileage, the further people drive, the further in the suburbs they choose to live.  This causes more traffic jams and more pollution.

Answer 5

Sure.

In addition to crabby's excellent points about things like public transportation, we need to combine reduction of global warming with actions to cope with the unavoidable effects that will be left.

The proper balance of reduction and coping is a worthy topic for debate, but both will be significant.

Answer 6

Humans cannot affect the global climate in any direction. Only natural cycles can change climate. As they have been doing for millions of years.