4 ms·

Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gases in the US. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https:

Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gases in the US. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-... Not all of that is personal transportation, but a lot of it is. This is not a blip on the graph. I also agree that large polluters need to change, and that we need state action. I was just pointing out that people who seem to believe climate change is a problem rarely make major lifestyle changes consistent with their stated beliefs. Saying this is primarily a collective action problem is passing the buck. It's a convenient excuse for doing nothing. Collective action is much harder than personal action. Ultimately, we need both collective and personal action. > Calling into question the sincerity of people concerned about climate change but also concerned about actually getting to work on time and not stinking and getting fired because their bosses don't care is just some nasty, uncharitable stuff. You seem to believe that cycling to work is much more challenging than it actually is. You may be surprised, but no cyclist I know has the problems you've mentioned. Those problems can happen, but they are not that common in my experience. Yes, the US is a car dependent society, but you can choose where to live and choose your job. Like most people choose where to live based on their driving commute, I choose where to live based on my cycling commute. It is not a long commute, and I arrive on time and usually am not sweaty. Also, cycling was just an example. It doesn't need to be cycling. Work at home, switch from your gas guzzler, etc.

Symmetry 8y ago
Cars are bad but they're a pretty small problem compared to airplanes. A single trip across the Atlantic and back is about equivalent to commuting in a SUV for a year. Per passenger-mile cars and planes use about the same amount of carbon but people tend to take far longer plane trips.
- btrettel 8y ago
  I agree in principle. But it seems to me that the marginal cost in terms of CO2 emissions is not exactly clear for flying. Whether I fly or not, the planes will fly. My addition to a single plane in terms of the weight is not that significant. It becomes a more murky economic argument. I agree people should not fly, but this is more of a collective action type approach in my view. It takes roughly a plane load of people to make a difference. In contrast, a driver has much more direct control over the CO2 emissions. The marginal addition of CO2 is much clearer.
  - Symmetry 8y ago
    If people stop or reduce flying one by one there's clearly some point at which a stepwise reduction in service occurs. Your are unlikely to be the person who triggers this but the reduction will also be proportionately larger than your contribution too. So you should think of yourself as reducing carbon emissions by the person-mile amount in expectation even if it will never actually be that amount. Or to frame it another way, when you fly you're playing Russian roulette with adding an amount of CO2 to the atmosphere dwarfing anything else you might be causing.

Symmetry 8y ago

Cars are bad but they're a pretty small problem compared to airplanes. A single trip across the Atlantic and back is about equivalent to commuting in a SUV for a year. Per passenger-mile cars and planes use about the same amount of carbon but people tend to take far longer plane trips.

btrettel 8y ago
I agree in principle. But it seems to me that the marginal cost in terms of CO2 emissions is not exactly clear for flying. Whether I fly or not, the planes will fly. My addition to a single plane in terms of the weight is not that significant. It becomes a more murky economic argument. I agree people should not fly, but this is more of a collective action type approach in my view. It takes roughly a plane load of people to make a difference. In contrast, a driver has much more direct control over the CO2 emissions. The marginal addition of CO2 is much clearer.
- Symmetry 8y ago
  If people stop or reduce flying one by one there's clearly some point at which a stepwise reduction in service occurs. Your are unlikely to be the person who triggers this but the reduction will also be proportionately larger than your contribution too. So you should think of yourself as reducing carbon emissions by the person-mile amount in expectation even if it will never actually be that amount. Or to frame it another way, when you fly you're playing Russian roulette with adding an amount of CO2 to the atmosphere dwarfing anything else you might be causing.