Page 91 of the President’s 2010 budget proposes “a five-year $5 billion high-speed rail state grant program.” It also proposes to increase “funding for public transit to support commuters, improve air quality, and reduce greenhouse gases.”
The Antiplanner is all for improving the environment. But these are not the ways to do it. My research on public transit shows that transit does as much or more harm to the environment than autos. My research on high-speed rail shows that it is not much better — and any environmental benefits are entirely speculative since we have very little high-speed rail in the U.S.
Social anxiety can start in early childhood is necessary A child is cialis discount online constantly undergoing changes in the developmental years. order viagra This is an oral tablet and it contains high soluble fiber. When you go discount viagra pharmacy in the bed a depressive mood, you may not sleep peacefully. Generic Tadalis also increase amerikabulteni.com viagra 50 mg the production of cyclic Guanosine Monophosphate (cGMP).
In other news, pages 47 and 77 of the budget propose to take care of public land wildfire problems by dumping more money on them. Of course, that is what created the problems in the first place.
Your research flies in the face of many other reports stating otherwise. Passenger cars, light trucks and heavy duty vehicles account for 81% of the transportation sectors’s GHG emissions:
http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/420r06003.pdf
From the article:
“Rail is typically the least energy-intensive freight mode. Measured in BTUs per ton-mile, rail used 90 percent less energy than trucks and 80 percent less than ships.27 While the share of freight carried by rail has remained roughly constant, trucks’ share of freight ton-miles increased from 26 percent in 1993 to 32 percent in 2002,28 accounting for most of the overall increase in freight GHG output and intensity.”
Environmental damage also goes beyond energy use and greenhouse gases. Cars attribute a lot to stormwater runoff from oil, brake dust, car washes, etc.:
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=17366
“A 2006 study showed that 40 juvenile rainbow trout died after being exposed to runoff from a charity car wash in the Puget Sound region.”
A simple car wash killed 40 fish alone!
Your research flies in the face of many other reports stating otherwise.
Nah. Not if you get your own facts when everyone else’s facts negate your worldview.
A simple car wash killed 40 fish alone!
Yeah, but how many jobs did those fish create, and did those kids spend their money on gas or other automobile products, huh? Huh? What about the auto-bikini connection, smart guy?
DS
We’re not allowed to consider negative impacts of human activity on other organisms around here. If you do, it means you care more about animals than you do human beings.
Humans should be free to do whatever they want without consider external impacts.
D4P Says:
We’re not allowed to consider negative impacts of human activity on other organisms around here. If you do, it means you care more about animals than you do human beings.
Humans should be free to do whatever they want without consider external impacts.
THWM: Well so much for humans being a sentient species.
Animals like mass transit, particularly coyotes:
http://dogsinthenews.com/issues/0202/articles/020215a.htm
ws,
ROT’s comments were about rail transit and HSR. Your comments were about freight rail. Your arguments are a non sequitur. Freight rail does not move people.
Freight rail does not move people
Hobos are people too…
I thought about including hobos (as a joke) but wasn’t sure that any were riding the rails. You don’t see them on unit coal trains, and I bet they have trouble getting inside shipping containers.