Infrastructure Needs to be Factored in on Long-Term Transportation Cost/Carbon Emissions Calculations

Tracy White recently left a comment on an old blog post of mine that discussed the per-mile Carbon Dioxide emissions of different modes of travel. She brought up an excellent point that infrastructure costs and resource-use needs to be taken into account in cost-benefit analysis.

She even conveniently linked to an abstract of a research paper that indicated that adding such information to the analysis can significantly add to the lifetime energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). The study's abstract finds... "that total life-cycle energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions contribute an additional 63% for onroad, 155% for rail, and 31% for air systems over vehicle tailpipe operation."

This seems like a a substantial impact... and I'm sure that it is. But the headline numbers touted in the abstract can be misleading. Now, I will admit that I have not taken a look at the full text of the study. Rail's impact on a per mile basis is much lower than that of cars, especially SOVs. It is because rail starts out at such a smaller GHG impact that the increase is so much higher when infrastructure is taken into account.

I'm sure that rail's lifetime environmental impacts are still much lower than that of vehicles, and from the research I have seen that is what people are finding. I'll have to dig into the study a little more when I have the time. Thanks Tracy for bringing up a great point that needs to be considered in these types of issues.

Carbon Footprint Projection from being Carfree

I'm revisiting this topic that I have been meaning to get to at some point Now is a good time since I can't get to discussing my thoughts on transit and urban design in SLC since I'm having computer issues that prevent me from processing the photos I took.

Photo Credit: Sjabbar


As I've stated before, changing transportation behaviors is one of the fastest and most effective ways of reducing a person's carbon emissions and general impact on the environment. Not only does choosing alternative forms of transportation reduce a person's environmental footprint, but it also addresses issues of national security, consumption, health, and community. Of course if every American stopped consuming copious amounts of oil than our investment in our military would be all for nothing and our economy would crash since all the money we send over seas buying oil gets recycled into the US financial system, but thats a different post for a different blog.

Our transportation system is heavily dependent on oil to function - understatement on the year - and according to Matthew Yeoman in his concise and well written book Oil 97% of our transportation needs are powered by oil and half of all oil consumed daily goes towards keeping our cars on the road. Every day Americans consume approximately 19.5 million barrels of oil, thats 8.19 billion gallons of oil and half of that - 9.75 million barrels per day - is used just for transportation. For anyone interested at looking into this more, a good resource is the EIA and, funny as it sounds, the World Fact Book produced by the CIA.

Now, with that little digression finished, back to my original intent with this post. There are a lot of different websites out there offering various carbon emissions and ecological footprint calculators. The non profit I am working for, The National Forest Foundation, even has a calculator that lets you know the amount of carbon offsets you would need to purchase to make up for your emissions.


After testing out several sites, I choose to use My Footprint created by Redefining Progress. No, I wasn't just lazy and go for the one that topped Google search, but it must be up there for a reason, namely that this is probably the most robust and detailed questionnaire regarding eco-footprints on the web. You start out by answering a few simple demographic questions followed by sections that are meant to measure your carbon footprint, the impacts from the food you eat and the house you live in, and finally the consumption of goods that you partake in regularly.


Mainly through giving up my car and trying to live a carfree existence, my carbon emissions have been cut in half, from requiring 60 acres to sustain down to 32, and that is in comparison to the average American, whom requires 91 acres. In terms of non-transportation related activities, the house I live in requires only about 20% of the resources an average American home requires over its lifetime, including construction and lifetime energy use. However, I don't do so well in the food department, coming in just a sliver bellow the average American. Even with those improvements, it would still require 3.3 Earth's to supply everyone in the world with my lifestyle and I'm a relatively low-income college student, I would like to see the results of someone making a few hundred grand with several house. While the carbon emissions calculated at this site are not exclusive to transportation, I can assure you that the majority of the reduction comes from not driving.


For a more focused transportation look into footprints there are several good ones to choose from including Travel Matters and a good one from Berkeley, that bastion of radical liberalism.