EuroWire May 2019

Transatlantic cable

Fossil fuelled or electric cars – can we ditch them all?

Larger, heavier cars are also a risk for fragile humans. In the USA, pedestrian fatalities have risen by over 50 per cent since 2009. Monbiot attributes much of that increase to the rising popularity of SUVs and light duty trucks as they cause far more damage when they come into contact with human tissue and bones. “Driving an SUV in an urban area is an anti-social act,” he insists. Wars fought over fossil fuel resources have killed and maimed hundreds of millions of people; Monbiot mentions the war in Iraq as just one example. Now the USA is considering military action against Venezuela, a major petroleum exporting country. “Coincidence?” Monbiot asks. “You decide.” Even electric cars can’t escape Monbiot’s scathing analysis: “Already, beautiful places are being wrecked by an electric vehicle resource rush. Lithium mining, for example, is now poisoning rivers and depleting groundwater from Tibet to Bolivia. They still require a vast expenditure of energy and space. They still need tyres, whose manufacture and disposal is a massive environmental blight. “We are told that cars are about freedom of choice. But every aspect of this assault on our lives is assisted by state planning and subsidy. Roads are built to accommodate projected traffic, which then grows to fill the new capacity. Streets are modelled to maximise the flow of cars. Pedestrians and cyclists are squeezed by planners into narrow and often dangerous spaces – the afterthoughts of urban design. The chaos on our roads is a planned chaos. “Transport should be planned, but with entirely different aims: to maximise its social benefits, while minimising harm. This means a wholesale switch towards electric mass transit, safe and separate bike lanes, and broad pavements, accompanied by a steady closure of the conditions that allow cars to rampage through our lives. In some places, and for some purposes, using cars is unavoidable. But for the great majority of journeys they can easily be substituted, as you can see in Amsterdam, Pontevedra and Copenhagen. We could almost eliminate them from our cities. “In this age of multiple emergencies – climate chaos, pollution, social alienation – we should remember that technologies exist to serve us, not to dominate us. It is time to drive the car out of our lives.” A peer-reviewed study launched on 11 th March suggests that US air pollution is disproportionately caused by white consumers, while African-Americans and Hispanics are burdened most by the emissions. The study is the first to quantify what it calls “pollution inequity” and to track it over time. On average, African-Americans are exposed to about 56 per cent more fine particulate matter pollution than is caused by their consumption of goods and services, said the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . Hispanics, on average, bear a burden of 63 per cent Pollution: minorities consume less, but suffer more

Cleantechnica.com contributor Steve Hanley reported an article that recently appeared in The Guardian , from the environment journalist George Monbiot. Monbiot wrote of an epiphany: “I’m struck by the amazing variety of ways in which cars have ruined our lives,” referring to the cancers, asthma attacks and obesity epidemics caused in whole or in part by relying on “pollution spewing” transportation devices. “Let’s abandon this disastrous experiment, recognise that this 19 th century technology is now doing more harm than good, and plan our way out of it. Let’s set a target to cut the use of cars by 90 per cent over the next decade. Yes, the car is still useful – for a few people it’s essential. It would make a good servant. But it has become our master, and it spoils everything it touches. It now presents us with a series of emergencies that demand an emergency response.” Burning fossil fuels to provide transport on demand is doing far more than just contributing to global warming – it kills millions of people every year, with a disproportionate effect on children. According to The Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health: “Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and premature death in the world today. Diseases caused by pollution were responsible for an estimated nine million premature deaths in 2015, 16 per cent of all deaths worldwide – three times more deaths than from AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined, and 15 times more than from all wars and other forms of violence. In the most severely affected countries, pollution-related disease is responsible for more than one death in four.” With respect to the special dangers faced by children, a study published on 23 rd December 2017 by the US National Institute of Health reported: “Fossil fuel combustion by-products are the world’s most significant threat to children’s health and future, and are major contributors to global inequality and environmental injustice.” It goes on to say: “By impairing children’s health, ability to learn, and potential to contribute to society, pollution and climate change cause children to become less resilient and the communities they live in to become less equitable. “The developing foetus and young child are dispro- portionately affected by these exposures because of their immature defence mechanisms and rapid development, especially those in low- and middle-income countries where poverty and lack of resources compound the effects. “No country is spared, however: even high-income countries, [and] especially the low-income communities and communities of colour within them, are experiencing impacts of fossil fuel-related pollution, climate change and resultant widening inequality and environmental injustice. [See “Pollution: minorities consume less, but suffer more” below] “Global paediatric health is at a tipping point, with catastrophic consequences in the absence of bold action.”

36

www.read-eurowire.com

May 2019