New York state lawmakers have agreed to pass a sweeping climate plan

Re:New York state lawmakers have agreed to pass a sweeping c... by ajross on Tuesday June 18, 2019 @11:21PM (#20220553)

That's a misoptimization. New York City's subway and roads may be terribly inefficient relative to what they could be. They're still vastly more so than the rural transportation in the rest of the state.

Pick the low hanging fruit before trying to squeeze out the last few percent.

And in any case the existence of bad transportation policy isn't a reason not to celebrate a climate bill, so I don't get your point.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New York state lawmakers have agreed to pass a sweeping c... by mikemotherwell on Wednesday June 19, 2019 @04:06AM (#20221614)

Oh, so they lead off with REFRIGERANT MANAGEMENT did they?

https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/materials/refrigerant-man...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:New York state lawmakers have agreed to pass a sweeping c... by ajross on Wednesday June 19, 2019 @12:54PM (#20224965)

Not sure if sarcasm. In fact the whole point of Drawdown is to enumerate all the possible fruit, both high and low hanging, and come up with numbers justifying their picking in parallel. So yeah, refrigerant management is part of the solution, and you can check their numbers for how much it would save and how much it would cost, and that is done deliberately to avoid nonsense like "why are you bothering with air conditioners?!".

In contrast, the upthread comment seemed to be arguing that a blanket bill trying to establish a regulation framework for climate change is insincere because of minutiae about NYC's mismanaged transportation infrastructure.

Going back to your snark: it's the equivalent of "Throw the whole Drawdown plan in the trash because China has too many air conditioners." See the problem with that logic?

[ Parent | on HN ]