I know that I have hinted at one time or another here on the blog about the inconsistencies the green movement has as it relates to cars and their “Carbon Footprint.” A new study is out. Read about it here.
It boils down to this: Taking into account everything that goes into mass transit (rail, air, etc) and comparing them to a car, depending on the load levels, the amount of carbon spewed into the atmosphere per passenger mile might just be more in a partially loaded light rail line (like San Francisco’s BART or Boston’s MTA) than in a fully loaded SUV.
The study took into account the building of the light rail or airport infrastructure, the manufacturing of the rail cars or airplanes, ongoing maintenance, the way the electricity used to power the trains was generated, and the load levels.
It then compared those figures to an SUV, sedan, and pickup truck.
The findings don’t surprise me at all. If a politically motivated groups says something, the chances are that exactly the opposite is true. In this case, the results aren’t as straightforward as we have been led to believe. It works like this:
If the trains or planes are fully loaded, then the carbon footprint per passenger mile is a winner for the greens, however if they are less than half full, then the fully loaded SUV takes the prize. Hmmmmm.
If you use a tad of common sense, you can figure this out for yourself. Researchers at UC Davis, not known as a hotbed of anti environmental groups, released the report.
I can see it now. There will be a law passed that says an airplane can’t take off unless it’s full, and a train can’t leave the station without every seat filled.
Don’t shutter your garages and parking lots just yet. The automobile may survive to park another day.
Makes about as much sense as what we have seen the government do related to “global warming” nonsense.
By the way – it snowed in this week in North Dakota (first time in 60 years) Green Bay broke a cold record set in 1943.