Project Drawdown has characterized a set of 93 technologies and practices that together can reduce concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It’s a gigantic project with a lot of data and analyses.

In the linked video, the author goes through the measures to find which one is the most cost effective in terms of ratio of rCO2 reduction and economic cost

The maybe surprising result is that building bike infrastructure to shift a not even big percentage of travels from cars to bicycles or ebikes, is very cheap and has a huge effect on emissions.

The premise is that all solutions should be implemented to have a significant effect, but some are easier done than other.

crossposed from: https://feddit.it/post/6913495

  • pufferfisherpowder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    You are indeed delirious it seems! There’s absolutely no way to average 30kph in a city. Not even with an E-Bike capped at 45kph max. Even on flat open ground, no traffic, no traffic lights, stops, whatever, a 30kph average is a approaching a road bike training average. It’s an utterly impossible speed for a normal commuter on a city bike.

    • delirious_owl@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m not delirious. You said 17 was the max speed. Thats not true.

      My point is that city planners shouldn’t see bicycles as a recreational activity for weekends. Lots of us use them to commute and get groceries. We need roads for bikes that are built for reasonable non-leiser transport. They should have space and curves and be paved to safely handle bicycle traffic with max speeds ranging from 30 kph to 60 kph, including 4 lanes with adequate space for safely passing in both directions.

      It sounds like you dont live in a city with hills.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        You said 17 was the max speed.

        No, that was me.

        Also I didn’t mean it’s the max speed, I meant it like a cruising speed. If I’m going to a grocery store I’m not pushing as fast as I can go lol

        Also! If you have saddlebags and cargo the drag is going to make that harder anyway. Commuting adds complications to cycling.

        • delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Sorry for my mistake.

          Also! If you have saddlebags and cargo the drag is going to make that harder anyway. Commuting adds complications to cycling.

          Oh, both extremes are true in cities with hills. A bike with 4 panniers full of 1 weeks worth of groceries goes much faster downhill.

      • pufferfisherpowder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I didn’t say anything, but the post you’re originally referring to is not talking about max speeds either, but ranges. I.e. average speeds. In a hilly city you might well reach 30 or even 60kph downhill. But it’s then even less likely to hit that as an average, at some point you will have to go up that hill again.

        Totally agree on changing the view of city planners though. Even if I’m lucky enough to live in a city where this already very much reality.