3 ms·
Eh, not really. Cities are better for Co2
by muninn_ 9y ago
Eh, not really. Cities are better for Co2
- Nelson69 9y agoIs that established? I believe that there are major giant cities that operate with a lower CO2 footprint than suburban and rural areas might, per capita. But there is the cost of all the CO2 that allowed that urbanization; NYC didn't get the subway without a carbon cost, all that steel in the buildings released a lot of carbon, etc..
- rplst8 9y agoCO2 per capita is not the only measure of absurdity.