Smart-growth advocates say we must reduce the growth of driving to meet greenhouse-reduction targets, because otherwise driving growth will exceed the per-mile reductions in emissions that result from technological improvements. This argument is refuted by four MIT researchers in a new book on highway and air transportation.
The flaw in the reasoning of the smart-growth advocates is that they look no further than the fuel-economy (CAFE) standards set by the Energy Independence& Security Act of 2007, which required automakers to sell cars averaging 35 mpg by 2020. The MIT researchers go far beyond that, considering alternative engines, vehicle designs, materials, and fuels. They also look at the bigger picture, asking what is the cost-effective share of emission-reduction targets that should be met by passenger transportation. (They don’t say much about freight.)
