5 ms·
But if you asked those people to spread out, wouldn't they use more resources? Longer distances to transport goods, more land to live on, less opportunities to
by dtwest 6y ago
But if you asked those people to spread out, wouldn't they use more resources? Longer distances to transport goods, more land to live on, less opportunities to walk or use mass transit, etc.
- fastball 6y agoWhat I mean is that more people == bad. The single easiest way to eliminate global warming to have fewer people in general. Looking at per capita stats does the opposite – encourages more people so that even if it increases your absolute emissions, your per capita ones go down. This is not what you want. Yes, there are obviously efficiency gains from cities. The whole problem is that those gains are not worth a densely packed cities capacity to just have more people, because the earth / global warming doesn't care about your efficiency, it cares about absolute numbers.