View Single Post
Old 05-26-17, 09:45 AM
  #64  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1105 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Woulda. Shoulda. Coulda. Some of us did and have. But people are lazy and North America is vast. Anyone who is posting here probably already has a lower carbon footprint than most 'Mericans. We don't need extra flogging just to prove our purity.
Why does every conversation have to turn negative? I'm just pointing out that these ideas have been around for a while. We were at this point 40 years ago, saw solutions, didn't take them and here we are again. I'm sure someone will bring up our current malaise 40 years from now too.


I agree that probably most regular bicycle riders already have made an adjustment that most other people haven't.

As far as carbon footprint goes. It's a term that describes greenhouse gas emissions (CO2) released into the atmosphere. Doesn't relate to the source. To close the loop and be carbon neutral, a wood burning stove user would have to plant as many trees to trap CO2 as they create by burning. Otherwise, it's not neutral.

That's just the way it is. That's why businesses can buy "carbon offsets" to reduce their footprint without reducing their output.
Happy Feet is offline