tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post4966405487224950098..comments2008-04-23T20:41:20.400-07:00Comments on VICTORIA TAFT: Light Rail Causes More Pollution Than SUV'sVictoria Tafthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15566635810544426855noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-91893078990101421192008-04-23T20:41:00.000-07:002008-04-23T20:41:00.000-07:00Thanks for the extremely scientific consideration ...Thanks for the extremely scientific consideration of the report, Jake... it's a pleasant switch from simply calling it wrong. One thing I'd point out, however, is that it's fair to combined the efficiency of both highway and urban driving because mass transit overlaps into both of these areas. Both the buses and the MAX follow the route of many highways, something that the subway system of NYC Keith Moorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02424025513314938150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-1500698700018123462008-04-23T18:12:00.000-07:002008-04-23T18:12:00.000-07:00Actually O’Toole’s conclusions are badly flawed be...Actually O’Toole’s conclusions are badly flawed because his figures on cars’ energy efficiency included both urban driving and the much higher-efficiency highway driving (the study doesn’t say so - I had to email him to find out). A valid comparison between transit and cars must be made on urban driving alone. Based on O’Toole’s distorted figures, transit is already more efficient than autos, so Jakehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06912406198051338502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-75645325562639064822008-04-15T17:50:00.000-07:002008-04-15T17:50:00.000-07:00Gosh PT, are we building NEW freeways??? Do tell.....Gosh PT, are we building NEW freeways??? Do tell...Victoria Tafthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15566635810544426855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-45600000423720136962008-04-15T16:59:00.000-07:002008-04-15T16:59:00.000-07:00You didn't read carefully enough; the paper specif...You didn't read carefully enough; the paper specifically states that the CO2 costs of construction outweigh any possible benefits from it. Try again.Keith Moorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02424025513314938150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-48304302055959452352008-04-15T10:45:00.000-07:002008-04-15T10:45:00.000-07:00Give me a break. Randall doesn't even calculate t...Give me a break. Randall doesn't even calculate the CO2 of building all of those freeways or the reduction's in VMT that transit creates pushing the CO2 total down. He lies with numbers, thats his job.Pantograph Trolleypolehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-86993236675379357432008-04-15T07:31:00.000-07:002008-04-15T07:31:00.000-07:00That's a good question, one which, I'm sure, Randa...That's a good question, one which, I'm sure, Randall takes into consideration. And, of course, you know that biofuels--specifically ethanol--require more energy to produce and burn less efficiently, so if Randall didn't take that into consideration when he does it would be even a worse showing for those modes of transportation.Victoria Tafthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15566635810544426855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16945570.post-50427470397042818792008-04-14T14:28:00.000-07:002008-04-14T14:28:00.000-07:00A very good paper, Victoria. But I think a questio...A very good paper, Victoria. But I think a question needs to be asked of this paper before someone genuinely clever (like iknowhowtospell) asks about it: does this paper take into account the effect on greenhouse gas emissions of some buses starting to switch over to biofuels? Granted, current petroleum-fueled mass transit may be more polluting but does the biofuels switchover by some of mass Keith Moorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02424025513314938150noreply@blogger.com