Among the "thousand little things" that folks are doing to adapt to the I-5 construction is to sit in traffic longer and burn more fossil fuel.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 19, 2007 11:57 AM | Email ThisRelative to what? Relative to those hydrocarbons which would be generated by the genius schemes promoted not long ago to dump the entire contents of Highway 99, permanently, onto the guaranteed gridlock of the surface streets of Seattle.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on August 19, 2007 11:44 AMUsing numbers derived from both the Gore and Transit worshipping loons, let's figure some stuff out. Building both light rail and additional roads/lanes will add some nasty GHGs into the atmo. Both, however, will result in some GHG savings. One of the costs of transit over roads is to make cars less efficient because they stand in traffic for longer periods of time. More lanes may add to the total number of cars, but each car will be more efficient.
My guess is that roads/lanes will leave a smaller total carbon footprint than will light rail.
Posted by: Seabecker on August 19, 2007 12:05 PMI have gone from supporting light rail to totally dismissing it until we fix the roads. Build it and they will come is the equivalent of don't build and they will come anyway. Build more roads now.
Posted by: Jack's Son on August 19, 2007 12:30 PMI have gone from supporting light rail to totally dismissing it until we fix the roads. Build it and they will come is the equivalent of don't build and they will come anyway. Build more roads now.
Posted by: Jack's Son on August 19, 2007 12:31 PM