Skip to main content

View Diary: A scary but enlighting map that gives me hope on second thoughts (130 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes . .. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NotGeorgeWill

    For one thing, the countryside has always supported the cities.  Now not only does it practice widescale industrial-style farming, utilizing all the tools of modern technology to wring every last ounce of profit out of each acre of soil, but it is also the location for the cities' refuse, the mining and extraction industries, and the power plants which make those city lights gleam.  All of these productive activities, which must support the large populations of the cities, emit both carbon and other pollutants, none of which are created IN the cities, but all of which are necessary so that the cities might live.

    A Thanksgiving dinner is neither the fault nor the fun of the turkey and the pig you eat.

    •  On a per capita basis, some of those things (0+ / 0-)

      are pretty much a wash.  

      For example, a rural and urban person pretty much eats a similar amount of food, so their agricultural footprint will be the same in that regard.

      But when there is a divergence, it is usually in the disfavor of the rural person.  For example, an urbanite can walk over to a neighborhood restaurant, a rural person has get in her pick up truck and drive 17 miles.   An urban person requires 18 feet of copper wire to get his home connected to the grid, a rural person requires 100x as much, and so forth.

      Of course, if you had read the study I posted, you'd already know all this . . .. .

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site