When people say that cities are the real polluters, I kinda want to laugh at them
Also, I fucking hate corn
The reason that cities produce so much less carbon despite having so many people is because there is less driving and more centralized power, the least carbon emitting places are cities with clean energy and an urban tree canopy as well as decent public transiy
What sources did you use @amtrak-official
the study and maps are very interesting but in general, the idea of taxing carbon emissions per household seems bizarre? I mean it sounds great when you think of taxing Taylor Swift for her private jets, but for like 90% of people their emissions are due to house appliances and cars and such and, how much can people actually choose to reduce emissions? like sure a person in rural corn country can choose to have a smaller car but they can't choose to not have a car the way someone in a city can. and the costs of heating your house are much bigger if you live in a house in the middle of nowhere than if you live in an apartment building in the heat bubble of a city.
Good thing I am using this study as a source for why we need better urban design and planning in the united states instead of as an argument for a Carbon Tax
So I was a little skeptical of this at first because the reddest part of my state has very little rural population and is 100% powered by hydro power, so I read through the methodology on how this was figured out-
Based on what's written both in the brief and in the full publication linked within, they essentially analyzed averages by region (or, at best, state), used an algorithm to correlate them with various demographic characteristics, and then used those characteristics (which ARE available at the census tract level) to predict the weighted carbon output per census tract.
While I'm thus still a little skeptical of the resolution of the numbers themselves, especially since the 100% hydro-powered region that initially brought it into question for me remains a dark orange-red on the map for electricity specifically (darker still than the rest of the state, which remains mostly Coal and Natural Gas powered):
I do think that the methodology makes for a rather good predictor for at least the potential for inefficiency, if not a fairly good general picture. If nothing else, it does show a compelling case for cities being, on average, the most efficient parts of the country.
Hmm, this is an important caveat to take into account with the data, it is interesting but clearly is not perfect and rather is more a good place to start discussions. Thank you for mentioning this
