4 ms·
Honestly this is not great efficiency. While getting more people of the road is great, the CO2e avoided per dollar is magnitiudes less than what can be done at
by j_walter 4y ago
Honestly this is not great efficiency. While getting more people of the road is great, the CO2e avoided per dollar is magnitiudes less than what can be done at the private company level.
$4.77M for 2,040 MT CO2e reduced/avoided yearly
My company was able to install a abatement unit that reduced >4,000 MT CO2e yearly for ~$150K. We are doing many more of these, but the cost is way better on a per lb level than this waste of money.
If we are going to get serious about emissions reduction, stop the feel good measures and focus on where it will make the most impact.
- avianlyric 4y agoHas it occurred to you that e-bikes provide greater benefits than just CO2 reduction? They also reduce congestion by removing car journeys, they reduce amount of road infrastructure that needs to be built, they reduce the cost of maintaining road infrastructure (e-bike cause effectively zero damage to roads), they reduce healthcare costs by improving rider fitness. In short, for a government getting people on e-bikes can result in huge savings for relatively small investments. I believe for most developed nations you would expect every $1 spent on improving active travel to produce at least $2 of savings over a ten year period.
- lotsoweiners 4y agoSure but do they actually?
- avianlyric 4y agoDo they actually what? Provide other benefits? Then yes, there’s huge body of evidence out there that shows active travel of any kind significantly improves people individual lives, and also the community they live within. I don’t really understand why anyone would struggle to believe the a fitter, healthier population would be a good thing.
- dghlsakjg 4y agoYes
- lm28469 4y agoAnd less pollution in cities, and more physical activities (lack of it is directly causing the leading cause of deaths in the US), &c.