Hanna Isbom: Save the climate - use public transport

  • loading...
  • Rating: 3.6000
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

Rating: 3.6/5 with 5 votes

Published Friday, March 14, 2008 at 14:56
by heisbo Join PES activists (1225 views and 4 comments)

Even though discussion paper 'Save our planet' concentrates mostly on energy policy, I would like discuss also about the influence of the traffic emissions.

Traffic is excluded from Kyoto protocol, but it still produces 20 percent of all CO2 emissions. The European Parliament tried to restrict emissions of private cars, but right wing coalition watered down that decision. What we need to reduce emissions of the traffic is better public transportation and restricting heavily polluting cars. 

It’s quite controversial that when we have just started to realise the power of the climate change, we have also started to fly more than ever. Flying is definitely the most polluting way of traffic and yet it’s still cheaper than ever before. Our goal should be that using train is always cheaper than flying or using private cars, but at the moment we are far, far away from that goal. In Central Europe flying from one big city to another might be cheaper than taking a taxi from airport to the centre. I’m afraid that consumers are not willing to change this. It’s too attempting to fly away for a weekend with less than 50 euros - for the first time in history is travelling possible for everyone. I have to admit that I haven’t been thinking too much of climate change when I have been travelling. In Spain I was planning to take a train from Barcelona to Madrid. It appeared that it costs three times more than a plane ticket. My choice was done.

The problem is that from the subjective point of view choice is often totally opposite to common good. That’s why governments need to take responsibility by guiding people to more environmental choices. That can be done by taxation and prohibitions. We need to put the environment first. We need to invest in public transportation, in international railroads and in better traffic infrastructure. Once again the situation here in Finland is not comparable to other European countries. Imagine that there are only 5 million people living in the area size of Germany. It creates quite a challenge for keeping up the infrastructure and reasonable prices in public transportation. But when it comes to environment, a lack of money isn’t sustainable argument. We need those investments to save our planet. We need it worldwide, but we can start from Europe.

Tags: blogger of the week, climate change, CO2, consumer, environment, transport

Comments

1. public transport - zero Euro by rikkeindenmark Join PES activists on Friday, March 14, 2008 at 15:22

I recently went to a conference in Denmark where we discussed the possibility of free public transport all over Europe. This might be extremely difficult in practice, but think about the consequences - how good wouldn't it be for our environment if all Europeans began to use public transport a lot more? It could also set a good example for other countries (for example the US!). http://www.manifesto2009.pes.org/en/new-social-europe/post/255

2. Hello earthling. by frederic.vareillas Join PES activists on Saturday, March 15, 2008 at 02:07

Congrats !

Dear Hannah, you're so right , you're absolutely right.

Just two questions :

- Do you think our leaders are really aware of the problem ?

- Are we prepared to do it or shall we remain selfish to death ?

Please read "Revenge of Gaïa " by sir James Lovelock from the Royal society and

"Le Bilan noir des énergies vertes" -dernier "Sciences & Vie" numero spécial - France

(Among other readings that the politicians don't want to take into account.)

The depletion shock Krash is coming... and fast.

Good Luck.

Best regards,

Frederic (Paris, Fr)

3. public transport is more than just climate change mitigation! by taipale Join PES activists on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 12:53

Hanna is absolutely right - and our politicians are definitely aware of all the issues. However, while everyone is talking about the ambiguos majority group of voters "in the centre" - not really conservative, not really leftist - it is forgotten that the group "car drivers" may have the absolute majority. This means that it takes a truly brave politician to hurt the sensitive feelings of car driving (mostly) men... Well, the Red Ken in London is a rare case in point.

What I really wanted to add is that the contemporary revolt against the private car should not be just about fossil fuels and CO2 emissions. It is at least as much about a sense of community: do we want to live in societies where the wealthier ones encapsule themselves in the womb-like warmth and hi-fi music of their air-conditioned automobiles, while the poorer ones are doomed to public transport which often lacks any sense of dignity? The private car is a visible societal divider in the same way as the walled and guarded cities of the priviledged are in developing countries (and in some that call themselves developed, too). It adds to the social distance between people also while it allows the fragmentation of our cities into high-rise suburbs of the working class and low-rise 'garden cities' of the few.

 

4. How do we scale up local progressive initiatives into European policy in a flexible way? by noelhatch Join PES activists on Sunday, April 6, 2008 at 21:39

Thanks taipale, we will be spreading your message during our election campaign to re-elect Ken. Indeed what we have in common from a superficial but very real point of view in large cities is that "we are all commuters", whether we use car, bus, metro, cycle or walk. We need a language that speaks to people about the economic and social return.

The new proposals for the congestion charge to be increased for those cars who pollute the most and reduced for those cars who pollute the least gives car drivers great influence over choosing to save money and pollute less or pay more to pollute more. When the congestion charge was introduced, 60% of London citizens were against and yet now London is the only major city in the world in which travel by public transport, cycling and walking has been growing more rapidly than car use.

But this does goes further, the money from the extra congestion charge will go into extra investment for public transport, particularly cycling, with a central London bike hire scheme with 6,000 bikes vailable every 300 metres and free to use for the first half hour and a network of new cycling corridors into central London, similar to that used to great success in Paris.

This shows that at a local level, there is a great opportunity for adapting other progressive city council's initiatives and approaches, particularly on transport and the environment.

I'm no lawyer, but how can we use the principle of subsidiarity to ensure this can be made even easier - i.e. that local initiatives can be scaled up to European policy without constraining flexibility, i.e. enabling policy to be adapted back to local contexts?

P.S. Porsche don't want their drivers to pay the CO2 charge and have decided to sue in the courts to stop it. Instead of trying to stop voters from deciding on this issue, they should produce cars with lower emissions. Stand up here to the polluters by joining Ken in telling Porsche withdraw their legal challenge.

http://compassyouth.blogspot.com/2008/03/red-green-coalition-citizens-united.html

To be able to post comments you need to be logged in. No account yet? Register here! Lost your password?