[sustran] Dying Trees - Re: Debate on costs of CO2 reduction from vehicles (fwd)

[Gerry Hawkes]

A factor that I have not seen mentioned is the extremely adverse
effects that motor vehicle emissions are having on trees and
other plant life.  I have been studying and observing the toxic
effects of air pollution on trees for the past 30 years while
serving as a forestry consultant both locally and in various
countries around the world.  I became so alarmed by the damage
and the potential for widespread ecological disaster that I am
now devoting all my time and resources to developing new products
that encourage less polluting forms of transportation ( please
see http://www.biketrack.com/pollution.htm for details on the
some of the damage).

Yes, I think tree planting is a wonderful thing to do, but unless
we control toxic emissions from motor vehicles and other sources,
the trees will weaken and die which they are already doing in
great numbers (please see a review of "The Dying Of The Trees" at
http://www.ecobooks.com/dying.htm ).  Dying and dead trees do not
make good carbon sinks, in fact they will release massive amounts
of CO2 as they decay and burn.

The cost of NOT  controlling greenhouse gases and associated
toxic emissions is immeasurable since we are threatening the
basic life support systems of the Earth.  To quibble about the
various economic costs of reducing CO2 emissions seems about like
haggling over which fire hose is a better bargain when the only
home you have is already on fire.

Gerry Hawkes
Eco Systems, Inc. & Bike Track, Inc.
Woodstock, Vermont 05091

ghawkes at sover.net

www.biketrack.com




-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Barter <tkpb at barter.pc.my>
To: sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
<sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org>
Date: Thursday, October 15, 1998 10:45 PM
Subject: [sustran] Debate on costs of CO2 reduction from vehicles
(fwd)


>An interesting exchange just seen on the utsg list:
>
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 12:44:52 +0200 (MET DST)
>>Subject: STRATEGY TO REDUCE CO2
>>From: Richard DARBERA <darbera at descartes.enpc.fr>
>>To: utsg at mailbase.ac.uk
>>Sender: utsg-request at mailbase.ac.uk
>>
>>I am looking for two sources quoted in a statement from the AIT
and the
>>FIA: A GLOBAL STRATEGY TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS FROM PASSENGER
CARS AND
>>IMPROVE FUEL EFFICIENCY available at the Canadian Automobile
Association'
>>Website
>>
>>"For example, the UK government claims that its promise to
increase motor
>>fuel taxes by 6% annually in real terms is part of its
commitment to the
>>climate change convention. However, research by the AA*** shows
that this
>>policy is costing £2,000 for each ton of carbon taken from the
atmosphere..
>>And yet work done by the Institute of Ecology and Resource
Management at
>>the Edinburgh University*** shows that the same effect could
have been
>>achieved through tree planting (carbon sequestration) schemes
at just £0.50
>>for each ton of carbon removed. This clearly shows that
increasing the cost
>>of motor fuel to achieve CO2 stabilization is the most
expensive, and one
>>which has no economic literacy. Taxation on vehicle ownership
and use
>>should be reviewed so that it supports transport, economic,
environmental
>>and social policies."
>>
>>** Could anyone give me the full references of the original
papers from
>>Edinburgh University and the AA, and tell me where I could get
them.
>>
>>Comments on these statements are also very much welcome!
>>
>>Thank you.
>>
>>Richard Darbéra
>>CNRS - LATTS
>>Ecole Nationale des Ponts & Chaussées
>>Cité Descartes - Champs-sur-Marne
>>77455 Marne-la-Vallée Cedex 2
>>France
>>Telephone 33.1.6415.3834
>>Fax 33.1.6415.3847
>>e-mail darbera at enpc.fr
>
>
>THEN A RESPONSE FROM TODD LITMAN
>
>>Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:54:34 -0700
>>Subject: Re: STRATEGY TO REDUCE CO2
>>From: Todd Litman <litman at islandnet.com>
>>To: Richard DARBERA <darbera at descartes.enpc.fr>
>>Cc: utsg at mailbase.ac.uk
>>Sender: utsg-request at mailbase.ac.uk
>>
>>I would like to see the Edinburgh University paper too. The
>>automobile/petroleum industries have sponsored a number of
papers claiming
>>very high costs of CO2 reduction, but these typically:
>>
>>1. Ignore potential economically beneficial use of the revenue
(i.e., a
>>reduction in taxes on labor or business activity).
>>
>>2. Assume that there will be no new energy efficiency
technologies or
>>policies resulting from these new price incentives.
>>
>>3. Ignore additional benefits associated with reduced fuel
consumption
>>(such as reduced local air emissions), and transportation
demand management
>>benefits (such as reduced traffic congestion, road and parking
facility
>>costs, accident reductions, etc.)
>>
>>For a good recent technical analysis of the economic impacts of
increased
>>fuel taxes see Dr. Douglas Norland and Kim Ninassi, "Price It
Right; Energy
>>Pricing and Fundamental Tax Reform," Alliance to Save Energy
(Washington
>>DC; www.ase.org), 1998. A good popular book on the subject is
Alan Durning
>>and Yoram Bauman, "Tax Shift," Northwest Environment Watch
(Seattle;
>>www.northwestwatch.org), 1998. For a discussion of economically
efficient
>>strategies for reducing vehicle emissions see our papers
"Win-Win
>>Transportation Demand Management Strategies" and "Socially
Optimal
>>Transport Prices and Markets," Victoria Transport Policy
Institute
>>(Victoria; www.islandnet.com/~litman), 1998.
>>
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Todd Litman, Director
>>Victoria Transport Policy Institute
>>"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
>>1250 Rudlin Street
>>Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada
>>Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560
>>E-mail:      litman at islandnet.com
>>Website:     www.islandnet.com/~litman