Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Pollution. Climate Change vs. locality.

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Pollution. Climate Change vs. locality.

Old 08-19-02, 11:58 AM
  #1  
山馬鹿
Thread Starter
 
Spire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 1,407

Bikes: Nakagawa

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Pollution. Climate Change vs. locality.

The thread about climate change and pollution has brought up many interesting and key points. However, there is another point about pollution that I wish to bring up (but as a different thread because it is a bit off topic).

The first thread talked about cars and climate change. However I maintain that cars are not the main culprit in global warming (assuming that it exists), but industries are. Reducing car emissions, size, and fuel usage would most likely have the immediate effect of local pollution in cities (read : less smog!) while the change made by -- more efficient -- cars would be smaller on a global scale. However, if we look at industries (including power generation) we can see that that is where the majority of the pollution comes from and many of them are not located near major cities.

Bottom line : cars should be reduced/banned/more efficient to reduce pollution in cities because there is clear proof that city pollution is mainly caused by vehicules.
__________________
Become King of the Square! https://kingofthesquares.com
Plan or Find your next ride on Sporra!

Spire is offline  
Old 08-22-02, 10:31 AM
  #2  
Sumanitu taka owaci
 
LittleBigMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally posted by Spire
Bottom line : cars should be reduced/banned/more efficient to reduce pollution in cities because there is clear proof that city pollution is mainly caused by vehicules.
I guess the problem is that you don't have a minority group you can blame it on. The smokers in my department have to go outside to smoke. That's not just because second-hand smoke is dangerous, it's because there are enough non-smokers who don't want smoke around them that they won out over the smokers.

Unless we think pollution affects us enough individually to cause us to take responsibility, we'll keep tanning the inside of our lungs with car exhaust.
__________________
No worries
LittleBigMan is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.