Skip to main content

View Diary: CO2-Getting to Work on the Demand Side (129 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  When you need to reduce carbon em. by 80%, (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Justus, AoT, bear83, Back In Blue, Creosote

    no 5% slice should be ignored.

    There's plenty of business and personal travel for which there are greener alternatives, and there's plenty of travel that is not necessary or only marginally so. Even if you only cut air travel 40-50%, that's a couple of points overall that don't have to come from somewhere else. And let's face it, getting 80% or more -- if we're going to start ignoring contributing factors -- from any one place, including the replacement of carbon based fuels, is going to be monumental at this point.

    Another example: personal carbon emissions  is estimated as 20% of the problem, institutional us at 80%. There are those who argue that personal carbon footprint reduction is a virtue if you want to pursue it, but a waste of time since the institutional use the main culprit. As I argued with air travel: Reducing institutional carbon emissions 80% is going to be hard enough without burdening it with the responsibility for also offsetting lack of an 80% on personal emissions.

    The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

    by Words In Action on Tue Jan 29, 2013 at 09:27:59 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (70)
  • Baltimore (64)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Elections (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (26)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Education (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Science (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Politics (15)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site