[Vision2020] Critical Mass, A Public Menace! Inconvenient Truth -- What WE gonna do

[Ted Moffett]

Sunil-et. al.

You so completely missed the point of one of my questions, a point critical
to the whole discussion on the value of promoting cycling, I will abuse the
list with a brief response that places me way over the daily post limit.

Sunil wrote:

As for 95, I think extra lanes will make the drive safer.  If it leads to
economic expansion, I don't object to that.
-------

My question on this matter could not have more unambiguous.  I queried,
paraphrased, will the expansion of the Moscow/Pullman Hwy. and Hwy. 95
result in increasing amounts of traffic and fossil fuel use?  The
primary focus of this entire discussion on Critical Mass is how to reduce
fossil fuel use, at least from my perspective.  If you don't think global
warming from increasing levels of human sourced CO2 is a problem, just say
so.  But when increasing levels of fossil fuel use are associated with
development, please address the issue, don't ignore it.

I think there is no debate that these highway expansions will increase local
fossil fuel use.  It just remains to decide if this contribution to global
warming is justified.  Or we could back up and discuss if human sourced CO2
emissions are contributing to damaging climate change from global warming,
though it appears a number of Vision2020 subscribers recognize the
overwhelming scientific evidence that human CO2 emissions, a large amount of
which come from cars and light trucks, are inducing potentially catastrophic
climate change.

Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060826/4d56aa37/attachment.htm