![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
ECOLOGICAL DEBATE
* USA - More trains but less pollution? - Experts debate BNSF planned rail hub’s environmental impact on High Desert air quality
Victorville,CA,USA -The Victorville Daily Press, by Hillary Borrud -Jan 25, 2007: -- ... Trains and heavy duty trucks both currently run on diesel fuel. While trains are more efficient and produce less net air pollution than trucks for the same amount of cargo, some characteristics of rail transport reduce its cleanliness. While the multimodal facility could take some heavy duty trucks off the roads, less obvious inefficiencies of trains could eat away at the reduction in truck pollution... More trains mean increased vehicle congestion at railroad crossings and trains usually spend a lot of time idling, said Annette Kondo, spokeswoman the Coalition for Clean Air...
* Canada - Could your local, trucked-in potatoes spew more C02?
Toronto,Ontario,Canada -Now Toronto, by ADRIA VASIL -25 Jan 2007: -- Q My prof says local food is not that eco-friendly greenhouse-gas-wise, arguing that ships are the least harmful way to transport products. He also says imports help developing nations. Your take?... And ships, well, they're not as earth-friendly as you'd think. While they may only suck up 2 or 3 per cent of the world's fossil fuels, they use the dirtiest, cheapest petrol around (literally bottom-of-the-barrel scrapings from the fuel refining process). One lone cargo ship belches out as much pollution as 2,000 diesel trucks, according to a report by Bluewater Network. Stuff like smog-inducing nitrogen oxides and sulphur. The U.S. shipping sector alone spews 600,000 tons of greenhouse gases a year. (We can, of course, re-evaluate all this if the whole shipping biz jumps on biodiesel options being pilot tested by Environment Canada.)...
posted by Unknown @ 12:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home