“Anti-commuter package”

Bernhard Knierim relies on new technologies in the solution of traffic problems instead of new technologies for prohibiting, increasing and a culture

An interesting phanomen in the opposite sustainability debate is the fact that the pradicate "consistent" not for environmentally friendly products, but for good, which produce less pollutants than ubroad. In his book eating in the tank, the transport expert Bernhard Knierim does not sit down in the technical reorientation "sustainable" Fuels and means of transport means a meaningful key for an ecological redesign. Instead, he plads on a change of mobility behavior.

Mr. Knierim, they call the city of Los Angeles in their book as the "Dread image of a car-oriented city". why? Bernhard Knierim: I have not seen any other city in the world that is so high on car traffic and protruded by this. Los Angeles is from up to sixteen london "Freeways" – which are never free – crossed and people try to structure their lives primarily afterwards that they can handle the stucals possible effectively effectively. Nevertheless, it can happen at midnight that you are in traffic jam. For me, the city is the symbol of how a one-sided orientation on car traffic to the disaster leads – and how hidden you can make a city. After all, however, Los Angeles now sets a change: only a few urge to double the number of traces on the highways again, by making them two-sized now. Instead, the subway lines are gradually expanded. But in a city in which the public transport system has been broken many decades ago and the meanwhile, due to the self-reliably adopted individual transport to the above 1000 square kilometers, is now again to build a really well-usable public transport, is an almost impossible undertaking. Which problems and density are to be expected globally if the traffic-related way previously advanced? Bernhard Knierim: Traffic is at least responsible for a good 20 percent of our emissions from climate-damaging gases, and that we are heading for a massive climate change and hardly have a chance to keep it under the two-degree limit, is meanwhile undisputed. In addition, exhaust gases also the local environment, we further seal in coarse mabe flat, destroy the structure of our city, consume valuable resources and generate enormous lot. Traffic is not only an environmental but also a social problem: With our current model, we often express people from self-determined mobility – namely minors, seniors and disabled people who can not drive themselves or the people who do not want it. In addition, our model of mobilitat is not translated globally, because the resources were not sufficient and collapsed the climate within a short time. So if we only want to live at ancillary sustainable, nothing else remains elevated to us as the way of how we currently organize our traffic to throw passports on board.

"Technology only in limited niches useful"

Your thesis is that biofuels and electric cars create more problems than loose. Why? Bernhard Knierim: Both technologies are not better than fossil fuels for the climate – so gasoline or diesel. For agrocomaterials – the yes usually everything else than bio are – the balance sheet for many productions is even significantly worse, if you include all effects in the calculation. Also many of the other problems remain: environmental pollution (even if they do not happen locally in the case of electric cars, but in the power plants from which the current comes from), flat sealing and the social and health problems, which is especially the individual traffic. But they still create new problems, especially in the area of resource consumption: In the case of agrocomaterials, agricultural flakes become a global resource, which is already in Land grabbing shows. Electric cars are about lithium, cobalt, neodymium, dysprosium and other fabrics that are globally very limited. With both technologies, we control a kind of new colonialism because we would have to yield resources in other countries in a significant extent. Both technologies can be meaningful in certain limited niches, but they are by no means the comprehensive solutions as they are currently praised for everywhere.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: