4 ms·
Just looking at reducing CO2 emissions, 0.94 lb CO2e per dollar spent is a terrible return. That money applied to more efficient CO2 reduction options could ret
by WillPostForFood 4y ago
Just looking at reducing CO2 emissions, 0.94 lb CO2e per dollar spent is a terrible return. That money applied to more efficient CO2 reduction options could return 100-1000x better.
- dylan604 4y ago[flagged]
- WillPostForFood 4y agoWhy? Because it is the #2 bullet point on their presentation of benefits. They could have left it off, but they are trying to make it like like a some sort of win. Considering the opportunity cost, it is not a benefit.
- ackfoobar 4y agoI get around by bike. Reducing CO2 emissions was the last in the list of pros of that choice. Scratch that, it did not cross my mind at all.
- jeffbee 4y agoCDOT spent $1.2 billion on 10 miles of I-70 widening. How much CO2 did that reduce per dollar? Oh, none?
- acdha 4y agoIt’s a long game. Removing a car from the road lowers CO2 now and saves the rider a ton of money for years, but it also reduces demand for expensive infrastructure which locks in a massive CO2 footprint for decades. If you build society around driving, people will expect endless road expansion and repair projects; give them better alternatives and that feedback process works in the other direction, not to mention the general benefit from saving lives and improving quality of life.