Issues Investigation - Should the government consider taxing drivers per kilometre they drive as a

With a declining or no use of cars can result in the reduction of pollution quite tremendously. They can by reducing the greenhouse effect. As the author reports in the article, “In German Suburb Life Goes On Without Care” by Elisabeth Rosenthal, “Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe… and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States.” Therefore, with cars being a leading factor of greenhouse gas emissions, reducing their usage would have a positive effect on the environment. After days of near-record pollution,

The U.S government has been actively involved in overseeing emission standards for years. This corresponds with the statement made by the U.S Department of transportation that, “Transportation is the largest end-use sector emitting CO2”, and also the statement released by the NRCAN in which, “Fuel usage & carbon dioxide emissions have grown steadily over the past two decades.” These factors are only to be associated with your average four door sedan and/or light truck. These do not include your 18 wheelers, heavy trucks, or the gas guzzling vans that emit more carbon dioxide into the air and are also on the road more today than ever have been before. Cars are readily and easily obtainable more so now than ever have been. This creates more fuel to be burned up in which produces more toxins to be constantly released into the atmosphere. In fact, according to Scientific American “cars relate as much as 30 gallons of GHG, while only driving 3 miles.” These miles can be correlated with something just as simple as your average work commute. According to the United States Census Bureau, “Nearly 600,000 full-time workers had "megacommutes" of at least 90 minutes and 50 miles.” Those workers alone would each be releasing up to 500 gallons of GHG. These can be considered some of the bigger factors that the greenhouse gasses have taken a toll on.

In my opinion, all pollution standards should be tightened but over a period of time. I agree totally that pollution is out of hand at the current time, however it is a problem that has built up for many years and can’t be solved all at once. I feel that it is somewhat unfair to those companies who depend on their current status. By implementing procedures and regulations that are to occur over a period of time, it allows many companies to adjust gradually. I also feel that this policy of carbon trading should be eliminated. Although it does generate income for industries that currently comply, it allows many others to evade responsibility. I also feel that such things as public transportation and carpooling should be stressed. It provides an alternative that will drastically

Although many countries have developed technological solutions, such as low-sulphur fuels, three-way catalytic converters, and unleaded petroleum, Moriarty and Honnery argue otherwise. Moriarty and Honnery claim that finding a technological solution for automobile pollution is not possible. Instead, the human population will have to find alternative transportation solutions. They state that the public will have to make sociological alterations, such as walking or cycling to places, or in some cases, using more energy-efficient public transportation modes, as they will benefit the atmosphere more than technological fixes

This document specifically highlights how the Gold Coast City Council is tackling the city’s issue of traffic congestion by improving the existing structure of the roads and public transport. Hopefully this will decrease the number vehicles on the road which will reduce the amount of carbon emissions into the atmosphere (City of Gold Coast, 2013).

As western society has been aggressively expanding, the consumption of materials has followed suit. This leads to a negative effect on the environment. To curb the decay of the planet, it is important for humans to have a handle on how much we consume. One consequence of consumption is the emissions produced by our vehicles. It is crucial to develop a government policy that most effectively controls and reduces the amount of these emissions we give off. While the government has introduced many subsidization policies, the most efficient policy the government could enact is to raise the taxes on gas.

a It has declined. The state now owns less of the country’s housing stock. b That the state thinks there is less market failure in the housing market now than in 1979. use. Figure 1 shows that drivers do not initially pay for the negative externalities (external costs) they generate. A tax equivalent to the marginal external cost would push price up to PX. Road use would be reduced from Q to QX, the socially optimum level. In practice, it is difficult to estimate external costs. d Congestion and other negative externalities caused by car use will increase. Road use by cars is likely to continue to increase in the absence of

In recent years, major cities across the globe have developed innovative new methods of transportation that could revolutionize the way humans travel and ultimately replace automobiles throughout the industrialized world. Many supporters of this movement believe restricting the use of cars will have a positive impact on society as a whole. Some people believe that taking away automobiles is preposterous given the gravity of which citizens depend on them; although true, replacing cars would have significant benefits throughout society that would outweigh this consequence and ultimately create a new global social order. Restricting cars in cities and encouraging alternate methods of transportation would reduce humans’ carbon footprint, make cities

In this lab report three vehicles are compared based on total fuel consumption, CO2 emissions, and the approximate number of trees required to offset these emissions for a trip from Halifax to Vancouver. The three vehicles are a Bluesky model E-1010 aircraft, a generic four- passenger sedan car, and a generic 7- passenger van. The objective of this lab is to determine which vehicle has the most positive impact on the environment.

Climate change and transportation play a big role and it is important to be concerned for our future generations. The use of gasoline cars is a major producer in carbon dioxide emissions, although they are not entirely responsible for it—they play a role in it. Other form of transportations like buses and taxis also contribute to carbon dioxide emissions. The total amount of carbon dioxide emissions from an average car is seventy six percent which comes from usage of a vehicle containing gasoline. Efficiency has increased by twenty percent in regards to electric motors, especially when it comes to their wheels using no power when the car is at rest. Car ownership will increase and with this, improvements in technology could be a vital

I am here to talk to you about better way of lifestyle that changes the whole future of our planet regarding pollution and global warming.

The automobile has had a tremendous impact on society and the environment since its development in the beginning of the 20th century. Today, there are over 500 million motor vehicles on the earth. The automobile's efficiency, style, and performance have changed over the years, but there is one thing that has not - the pollution the automobile generates. Because of the pollution, people find themselves asking whether this technology has helped our society or hurt it. Should the consequences of the automobile be cause to eliminate it? Or should science develop technology to eliminate the pollution caused by the car?

Transportation is the number one thing we consumers do that harms the environment. Transportation causes the highest amount of environmental damage overall - nearly half of the toxic air pollution and more than a quarter of the greenhouse gases traceable to household consumption. Over time, however, sales of trucks, vans and SUV's went from 16% market share to over 50%. One big auto manufacturer even shelved their work of the last three years, spent updating their most popular selling economy car, so they could spend the money getting SUVs to market faster.

Other pollutant from cars was lead; it is highly toxic metal. Lead has been phased out of gasoline, but there, are other sources of it. It includes paints, production of lead batteries, water pipes, and a few heir dye products. Car exhausts can also produce nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, which are also, product of burning fuels. Factories and power plants produce same pollutants as cars do, but they produce them in bigger mnozstve and the produce some more such as sulfur dioxide, which is made during production of paper, burning coal in power plants, or smelting of metal. Burning other fuels like wood, or natural gas can make all of these pollutants too.

Being lazy is a great thing because so much time is saved. Time may be saved, but in exchange, the environment gets destroyed instead. Driving a car to work may be faster, but it also destroys the environment so much faster. Biking to the store serves the same purpose and it saves the environment greatly. Cars are a huge contributor to global warming. Cars and trucks combined are responsible for one-fifth of all US emissions. They release about 24 pounds of carbon dioxide and other global warming gases for every gallon of gas used (Union of Concerned Scientists). About five pounds of those gases come from production, extraction, and delivery of gasoline. More than 19 pounds are released per gallon from a car's tailpipe (Union of Concerned Scientists). 1.2 billion cubic yards of polluted air is from manufacture. Painting and coating cars produces 40 million pounds of air releases and 24 million pounds of hazardous waste a year. A car's lifetime produces 1.3 billion cubic yard of polluted air and scatters 40 pounds of worn tire particles, brake debris, and worn road surface into the atmosphere (Bike to Work Day). Pollutants released a year add up to over 12,140 lbs for cars and 17,000 for light trucks. Some of those pollutants are carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides (Bike to Work Day). By choosing to bike or walk instead of drive, the amount of gases and waste contributing to global warming, drops drastically. Choosing to drive instead of taking a greener form of transportation is a great threat to the environment.