 | NY's Wind Potential - The Power Is Off Shore | The Oil Drum: Local | PlaNYC & Congestion Pricing Gaining Wide Support |  |
User login
Personnel
Classic posts
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
PONYC Archives
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Dan,
Thanks for giving this report and beyondoilnyc.org more exposure.
The report states that "[t]ransporation accounts for most fuel use." I wonder if you can reconile that statement with the PlaNYC Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions issued in April that, surprisingly, found buildings to have more responsible for GHG emissions that transportation. According to PlanNYC, 79% of GHG emissions are associated with the consumption of energy in buildings.
I realize that comparing GHG emissions to fuel input is somewhat apples to oranges, but do you see any conflict with the findings of your report and the PlanNYC report viz. where a crisis caused by escalating fuel prices will be felt most acutely in NYC and where the focus on mitigation should be placed?
SeaCliff, as you point out, greenhouse gas emissions and fuel input are apples and oranges. I don't have the information to enable a comparison of total fuel of all types used in NYC transportation versus that used in buildings. Happily, I don't think we need to measure which sector uses more fuel. We are dependent on fuel for both, and the central point is that disruption in fuel imports or prices will impact both sectors, perhaps severely.
Oil Drum readers can speculate about potential price shocks, and how a city like New York can mitigate them, but for preparations to get underway, those discussions have to take place among municipal stakeholders, in government, business and civic organizations. Getting the questioning process started locally and building participation in it is more important than precise answers, at least at first. Any one person's speculations about impacts and mitigations is comparatively unimportant.
I'm a big supporter of the PlaNYC 2030 initiative. It's an excellent framework, certainly not complete, and seems to have been composed without awareness of fuel depletion. The political difficulty of bridging that gap is daunting, but at least those who want to try can position themselves as boosters of the initiative, helping the City do the right thing.
Dan,
Your central point is well-made and both sectors will feel the pinch. The transportation sector perhaps more acutely, but the building energy sector will catch up in short order. I'm glad that PlaNYC did the greenhouse gas study, because it should ensure that both sectors get the necessary attention. It's one thing to pay higher prices to get to and from work (and for goods that are shipped). It's another thing when you can't afford to heat or cool your apartment, or your employer can't afford the utilities for its leased or owned space. Planning now for these potential price hikes is crucial.