AstroGeek wrote:
Cars constitute a massive amount of our CO2 emissions.
No, they don't, and they're a drop in the bucket compared to the CO2 emissions from electricity generation, heating, heavy transportation, and industry.
AstroGeek wrote:
Putting in place requirements on fuel efficiency could go some way to mitigate that.
Please elaborate how doing that will make fuel efficient technologies more affordable for the average person who lives from paycheck to paycheck and can't afford a new vehicle.
AstroGeek wrote:
Don't get me started on other things like aircraft, trucks, and buses. My stances on them would not be well liked by any of the freedom-loving Americans on here.
Uh huh...
AstroGeek wrote:
Let's just say I'd envision high speed rail in certain areas,
Powered by electricity generated by
what source? You also realize that Maglevs aren't optimal for short distance or low speed travel, right?
AstroGeek wrote:
and regulation of what modes of transit could be used where.
There are already existing practical and economic incentives for not using a big honkin' SUV as your mode of personal transportation in metropolitan areas.
AstroGeek wrote:
I never said I'd be a popular person if I was in power. Or even one who does a particularly good job.
At least you're humble enough to admit that.
AstroGeek wrote:
Also, buses do emit less CO2 per passenger mile than cars, so I'm actually fine with them (for the time being).
Perhaps, but they emit something most passenger vehicles don't: Diesel Particulate Matter
Also, the negative health effects from exposure to high concentrations of DPM are well-documented.