A Global Warming Win-Win-Win

A Global Warming Win-Win-Win
Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, August 16, 2022, p. A5
Can women cool global warming?

Homo Sapiens first appeared about 300,000 years ago. We’ve been growing rather than chasing our food since 10,000 B.C. Estimates of the population then are between one and fifteen million persons.

With more food available, villages evolved and population increased dramatically.

Yet, it took until 1803 to reach one billion people. Then 124 years to reach two billion; 33 years to reach three billion; and 15 years to reach four billion.

Need I say more?

Apparently so. Because most of what we’re told about environmental change and daily disasters stops with the phrase “climate change.”

Many are willing to do their part. To borrow from the Great Depression, they “use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without.” They become vegetarians, bicycle or walk to work, turn up the air conditioner thermostat, recycle, compost, and grow some food.

That’s good citizenship in a crisis. But it only offsets a tiny fraction of the problem.

In fact, many of our environmental problems have been created, or at least made worse, by the rapid increase in rate of human population growth. One example: Humans are responsible for a 1,000-fold increase in other species’ natural rates of extinction.

The increase to eight billion of us also multiplies potable water shortages, polluted air, deforestation, wetlands destruction, increased trash and toxic waste, depleted fisheries and finite resources, increased farm, river and ocean pollution and acidification, and the substitution of concrete for agricultural land and open spaces now under sprawling communities and 4 million miles of roads.

Human activity is not only responsible for most of the greenhouse gas CO2 since our industrial age. We have also reduced the forests and soils that could remove and store it. Our country creates the most – and at a rate seven times per person that of China, number two.

Transportation creates the largest share of U.S. emissions.

In 1922 the U.S. population of 110 million was driving 111 vehicles per 1000 people (12 million vehicles). By 2012 the population was 314 million, but the number of cars per 1000 population had gone from 111 to 808 (271 million vehicles).

Say what you will about fuel efficiency and electric vehicles, more people driving 20 times more vehicles produce more CO2.

Exponential population growth is an environmental challenge for the U.S., but especially third world countries.

Fortunately, women will naturally reduce population growth if they are provided the support they deserve: social status, economic opportunity – and education. Women (and men) with secondary education and access to contraceptives have far fewer births. They space more time between pregnancies. Plus, their children also end up with better health, quality of life, and education. [Photo credit: wikimedia commons.]

We ought to be doing this anyway. Saving our planet is a bonus.

After writing this I discovered 21,000 scientists agree: “We are jeopardizing our future … by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many ecological and even societal threats.” Think about it.

Nicholas Johnson lives in Iowa City where he thinks about his great grandchildren. FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com contact mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org

The proposal that I do a population growth column came from my son, Sherman Johnson, who has studied the issue for decades. Many of the sources, below, were his suggestions -- including the potential role of women. Without his urging and assistance this column and its supporting sources would not exist. The photo was suggested by my wife, Mary Vasey.

SOURCES Earliest humans. John Noble Wilford, “When Humans Became Humans,” New York Times, Feb. 26, 2002, https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/26/science/when-humans-became-human.html (“The first human ancestors appeared between five million and seven million years ago, probably when some apelike creatures in Africa began to walk habitually on two legs.”)

Stacy Morford, “When did we become fully human? What fossils and DNA tell us about the evolution of modern intelligence,” The Conversation,

Sept. 9, 2020, https://theconversation.com/when-did-we-become-fully-human-what-fossils-and-dna-tell-us-about-the-evolution-of-modern-intelligence-143717 (“Bones of primitive Homo sapiens first appear 300,000 years ago in Africa, with brains as large or larger than ours. They’re followed by anatomically modern Homo sapiens at least 200,000 years ago, and brain shape became essentially modern by at least 100,000 years ago. At this point, humans had braincases similar in size and shape to ours.”)

“What Does it Mean to be Human? Humans Change the World,” Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History,” https://humanorigins.si.edu/human-characteristics/humans-change-world (“12,000 years ago, ‘The Turning Point,’ Eventually, humans found they could control the growth and breeding of certain plants and animals. This discovery led to farming and herding animals, activities that transformed Earth’s natural landscapes—first locally, then globally.

Human population. “World Population to Hit Milestone With Birth of 7 Billionth Person,” PBS Newshour, Oct. 27, 2011, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/world-population-to-hit-milestone-with-birth-of-7-billionth-person (“First, the figures. It took all of human history up to 1804 for the world's population to reach 1 billion. But the next billion came only 100 years later, in 1927. And after that, the rate of growth accelerated, 3 billion in 1959, 4 billion 1974, 5 billion 1987, 6 billion 1999, and now 7 billion. We're adding a billion population every 12 years.”)

Use it up. “Use It Up, Wear It Out, Make it Do, or Do Without,” Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, https://www.fdrlibrary.org/use-it-up-wear-it-out-make-it-do-or-do-without (“During the Great Depression money was hard to come by and so people were not able to go to the store or order whatever they wanted or needed online. In fact there was no online in those days! People became creative in the way they used, and reused, what they had. 'Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without' became a popular saying.”)

Species extinction x 1000; other examples. Peter Aldhous, “We Are Killing Species at 1000 Times the Natural Rate,” NewScientist, May 29, 2014, https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25645-we-are-killing-species-at-1000-times-the-natural-rate/

Artic ice. Steve Gorman, “Satellite imagery shows Antarctic ice shelf crumbling faster than thought,” Reuters, Aug. 10, 2022, https://Reuters.com/world/satellite-imagery-shows-antarctic-ice-shelf-crumbling-faster-than-thought-2022-08-11/ (“Taken together, thinning and calving have reduced the mass of Antarctica's ice shelves by 12 trillion tons since 1997, double the previous estimate, the analysis concluded. . . . The consequences could be enormous. Antarctica holds 88% of the sea level potential of all the world's ice . . ..”)

California megaflood. Matthew Cappucci, “A ‘megaflood’ in California could drop 100 inches of rain, scientists warn; It hasn’t happened since 1862, but California is due for another one,” Washington Post, Aug. 12, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/08/12/megaflood-california-flood-rain-climate/ (“The idea seems inconceivable — a month-long storm that dumps 30 inches of rain in San Francisco and up to 100 inches of rain and/or melted snow in the mountains. But it has happened before — most recently in 1862 — and if history is any indicator, we’re overdue for another, according to research published Friday in Science Advances that seeks to shed light on the lurking hazard.”)

Four million miles of roads. “Highway Statistics,” Office of Highway Policy Information, Federal Highway Administration, Aug. 23, 2018, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2017/hm16.cfm (“In 2009 there are 4.1 million centerline lane miles and 8.5 million lane miles (an average of 2.1 lanes per centerline).”)

Humans and CO2. “Carbon Dioxide Emissions,” in “Overview of Greenhouse Gases,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 16, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases (“Human activities are altering the carbon cycle–both by adding more CO2 to the atmosphere and by influencing the ability of natural sinks, like forests and soils, to remove and store CO2 from the atmosphere. . . . [H]uman-related emissions are responsible for the increase that has occurred in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution.2”)

U.S. creates most CO2. Andriy Blokhin, “The 5 Countries That Produce the Most Carbon Dioxide (CO2),” Investopedia, July 2, 2022, https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/092915/5-countries-produce-most-carbon-dioxide-co2.asp (“The U.S. is the largest emitter of CO2, with approximately 416,738 metric tons of total carbon dioxide emissions by 2020. The largest sources of CO2 emissions in the U.S. came from transportation . . ..” Note that the second country, China, with roughly four times the U.S. population, generated only a little over half as much (235,527) as the U.S.)

Other reports of who creates “the most.” For example, a small country emitting a small percentage of the global total, with a small population, may nonetheless have a high “per capita” number. Hannah Ritchie, “Where in the world do people emit the most CO2? There are large inequalities in the carbon footprint of people across the world. How do countries across the world compare? Where in the world do people emit the most CO2?” Our World in Data, Oct. 4, 2019, https://ourworldindata.org/per-capita-co2 (“The world’s largest per capita CO2 emitters are the major oil producing countries; this is particularly true for those with relatively low population size. Most are in the Middle East: In 2017 Qatar had the highest emissions at 49 tons per person, followed by Trinidad and Tobago (30t); Kuwait (25t); United Arab Emirates (25t); Brunei (24t); Bahrain (23t) and Saudi Arabia (19t).”)

Largest share from transportation. “Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Overview,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 5, 2022, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions (“The transportation sector generates the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions.”)

Increase in transportation CO2. “Fact #841: October 6, 2014 Vehicles per Thousand People: U.S. vs. Other World Regions,” Vehicle Technology Office, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/fact-841-october-6-2014-vehicles-thousand-people-us-vs-other-world-regions (1922 112 (111.53) vehicles per 1000 people; 2012 808/1000 people (807.99); 111.53/1000 -> 110049 x 111.53 = 12,273,765 vehicles; 808/1000 -> 335,051 x 808 = 270,721,208 (22 x 1922))

“US Population from 1900,” Demographia, http://demographia.com/db-uspop1900.htm (1922 110,049,000, 2012 314,000,000)

“United States Population,” Worldometers, https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/ (U.S. population Aug. 5, 2022, 335,000,000 (335,051,677))

Educating women. Elina Pradhan, “Female Education and Childbearing: A Closer Look at the Data,” World Bank Blogs, Nov. 24, 2015, https://blogs.worldbank.org/health/female-education-and-childbearing-closer-look-data (“In a nutshell, data show that the higher the level of a woman’s educational attainment, the fewer children she is likely to bear.”)

“Overpopulation: Impacts and 6 Solutions for 2022,” MindsetEco, https://mindseteco.co/overpopulation-solutions/ (#1. Support Education for women and girls. Numerous studies . . . have shown that there is a direct and significant link between improved education for women and girls and a lower reproduction rate”. . . “[C]ase studies of improved secondary education for females offer hope for the future. A 1998 study of Niger discovered a 31% decrease in fertility rate among women who had completed secondary school. A comparable 1997 study in Yemen found a 33% decrease”. “Supporting the education of women to at least secondary school level is a definitive impact on reducing birth rates. It also improves the spacing between children and improves the health and quality of life for those children. This has a knock-on effect, where the children of better-educated mothers are also more likely to be educated themselves.”

“#2: Support Initiatives that Provide Education and Access to Family Planning (“Accurate, factual and unbiased education for children, adolescents and adults about reproduction, sexual health and consent are essential to reduce the number of unintentional births that occur each year. Approximately 40% of pregnancies are unintended, which translates to around 85 million unintended pregnancies per year.” “Easy, affordable, and reliable access to contraceptives and birth control is a major factor in preventing unplanned births and is one of the stronger overpopulation solutions.”)

21,000 scientists. Haydn Washington, Ian Lowe, Helen Kopnina, “Why Do Society and Academia Ignore the ‘Scientists Warning to Humanity’ On Population?” Journal of Futures Studies, Sept. 2020, 25(1): 93–106, https://jfsdigital.org/articles-and-essays/vol-25-no-1-september-2020/why-do-society-and-academia-ignore-the-scientists-warning-to-humanity-on-population/ (“The Second World Scientists Warning to Humanity (Ripple et al., 2017) has now been signed by 21,000 scientists. . . . We are jeopardizing our future by not reining in our intense but geographically uneven material consumption and by not perceiving continued rapid population growth as a primary driver behind many ecological and even societal threats.”)

William J. Ripple, Christopher Wolf, Thomas M. Newsome, Mauro Galetti, Mohammed Alamgir, Eileen Crist, Mahmoud I. Mahmoud, William F. Laurance, 15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries, “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice,” Oxford Academic, BioScience, BioScience, Volume 67, Issue 12, December 2017, Pages 1026–1028, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix125, Nov. 13, 2017, https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/67/12/1026/4605229

# # #

A Blog Entry for Your Thoughts

From October 10 through October 17 and Beyond

October 17, 2007, 7:00 a.m.: Here's an "add-item" for this blog entry and its comments on this, the big day of the Lecture Committee's efforts:

I'm searching for comments to this blog entry either confirming, or disputing, the following story:

Do you use plastic products? It's hard not to in this economy, even after you've made an effort to cut back: liquid containers, plastic bags from stores, throw-away dishes and cups. Do you make an effort to recycle those you do use? If so, do you have any idea what happens to your contributions to plastic recycling?

One of my sons passed along the assertion that 80% of our "recycled" plastic is actually sent to China and burned -- something that's permissible under China's lax environmental laws, but would be banned here.

If true, it means we're (1) being lied to by those businesses ostensibly "recycling" our plastic as an environmentally-friendly effort, (2) poisoning the Chinese, (3) throwing away what I've assumed is a potential source of (or substitute for) the petroleum that goes into plastic, and (4) contributing to pollution and global warming in the name of "recycling."

My wife, Mary Vasey, went looking. She couldn't find anything on Snopes.com to confirm or refute this story. What she did find elsewhere was a report from the Independent and Guardian on the Celsias.com Web site -- "Transnational Trash," January 26, 2007 -- that is consistent (though not identical) with regard to practices in Great Britain.

Help me out. "Enquiring minds want to know." Do you know what happens to Americans' "recycled plastic"? And, if so, what is your source?

The Lecture Committee Wants Your Thoughts
For the next week we're going to try an experiment here in collaboration with the UI Lecture Committee -- a group of the finest undergraduates you could ever find at any major university.

The Lecture Committee is putting on a great event October 17 and would like to have a bit of pre-event discussion here in this blog in the form of "comments" attached to this blog entry.

Here's their announcement:

The University Lecture Committee, the Brookings Institution and the UI Office of the Vice President for Research, are hosting a forum on October 17th entitled "Energy and National Security: The Role of Biofuels in America's Policy Debate." Focusing on the future of renewable fuels as well as the role that energy plays in American policy, the event will include prominent thinkers of the Brookings Institution and notable professors from Iowa's Universities. The forum is one of the Brookings Institution's Opportunity '08 series (www.opportunity08.org) centering on major political issues in states with early primaries or caucuses.

What: Energy and National Security: The Role of Biofuels in America's Energy Economy.
When: October 17, 2007 at 7:30 p.m.
Where: Main Lounge, Iowa Memorial Union, Iowa City, Iowa

More information about the forum and panelists can be found at http://lectures.uiowa.edu. Questions? Just email them to: lecture.committee@gmail.com.

The Lecture Committee continues:

The forum will center on two major topics: energy security and alternative energy sources, with a specific focus on biofuels, and the role that energy plays in America’s domestic and foreign policy. Iowa’s agricultural economy and heavy investments in ethanol have made it the crucible of America’s biofuel experiment, stimulating research and discussion on the many possible impacts of biofuels. Furthermore, Iowans, as residents of an early caucus state, have the unique opportunity to engage politicians and get issues that are important to them on presidential candidates’ national agendas. Ethanol is a national issue in large part because of Iowa.

And energy is a national issue in large part because of our economy’s dependence on it. Access to energy has shaped our domestic economic policies as well as our foreign policy for generations. But it is now that the issue of energy is coming to a head. Americans are recognizing that we can no longer ignore the increasing instability and hostility to American policies in the Middle East, the threat of peak oil, and the rise of demand from China and India. Furthermore, the popular upsurge of concern over worldwide oil dependence recognizes not only the impacts on our own lives, but also on the lives of the generations that will follow us. Climate change, political stability, and prosperity are all inextricably linked with energy.

I am familiar with Brookings from my time in Washington. The Institution continues to house some of the best minds in America regarding economic and public policy issues. The individuals from the Brookings Institution who will be involved in these panels are especially knowledgeable on the subject at hand: David Sandalow, Michael O'Hanlon and William Antholis. Each has a paper on the subject available from Brookings' "Opportunity '08" series (www.opportunity08.orgon ) under the section "Our World," subsections "Climate Change," "Energy," and "Nuclear Proliferation."

This is an opportunity to participate in an event before it occurs.

So scroll to the bottom of this blog entry, click on "Post a Comment," and let the Committee, the Brookings experts, and the world hear from you!

# # #

Benefits & Joys of Bicycling

July 15, 2007, 11:45 a.m.

Note: If there is any reason why you might want to know this, within the past 24 hours [from the morning of July 16] someone has kindly translated the following into German.

Bicycling: Introduction

Thirty-six years ago, caught up in the environmental movement of that time and enjoying my 15 minutes of fame, I decided to see if I could contribute to creating a year in which more bicycles than automobiles would be sold in America. (The goal was achieved.)

I had reported somewhere (somewhere I can't now find on the Internet) that the average automobile driver invests 1500 hours a year in their automobile. That includes the driving, visits to the gas pump, mechanic, motor vehicle and driver's licensing agencies -- and the hours it takes to earn the money to pay for the vehicle, gas and oil, repairs, insurance, taxes and licensing. At that time the average driving distance was 7500 miles a year. Thus, I argued you were only making 5 miles an hour with this arrangement -- a speed you could have walked in the same time once in good condition. Clearly, the reduced cost, and increased speed, of bicycling make it the benefit-cost "best buy."

Bicycling is very much in the news these days as well. We had "Bike to Work Week," "Live Earth" caused some reflection about the impact of internal combustion engines (and the pedal power alternative), and next week will be the 35th year that a population of bicyclists (larger than most Iowa towns, including some they pass through) will traverse the State of Iowa from the Missouri to the Mississippi River in an annual event called "RAGBRAI."

All told, I thought it might be interesting to some readers to see for the first time (or re-read) a brief example of what I was writing about bicycling 35 years ago.

The joys of bicycling became a major part of an article I wrote for the Saturday Review of Literature at that time. Nichiolas Johnson, "Test Pattern for Living," Saturday Review, May 29, 1971, p. 12. A year later it had become a book by the same name, Nicholas Johnson, Test Patter for Living (New York: Bantam, 1972) (available in full text from one of my Web sites).

Being the early 1970s and all, the Introduction was sheet music and each page of text (the odd numbered pages) was juxtaposed with a page of quotes (on the even numbered pages) related to the text. The bicycling material from the Saturday Review became Chapter 7, "Antidote to Automobiles." (Should anyone care, the pagination from the book is retained, as immediately below with "# p. 110#.")

Here it is, beginning with the first, even-numbered, page of quotes:

Antidote to Automobiles

# p. 110 #

We might have to slow down a little or perhaps even sit quiet occasionally to develop better taste. One can't think very deeply at 70 miles an hour.
-C. E. Warne


My new pattern requires renting new cars at the airports as needed. I am progressively ceasing to own things, not on a political-schism basis, as for instance Henry George's ideology, but simply on a practical basis. Possession is becoming progressively burdensome and wasteful and therefore obsolete.
-R. Buckminster Fuller


When you drive a car, you drive a reflection of your self. And, in the case of the 1971 MGB, it's a reflection of someone very special.
-MG advertisement in Time

# # #

# p. 111 #

So far, we have approached alternate life styles almost in terms of hedonism: What feels best for you? What will remove the pain of living in a corporate state -- other than the drug life (whether alcohol, tranquilizers, or others) that only brings more ultimate pain? But what we so often discover is that the very products, activities, and attitudes that make you feel better also have significant social advantages: They use less of our nation's precious natural resources, they pollute less, they make less noise, they add to the pleasure of others, they enable each of us to live in a society in which we can grow in individual worth and fulfillment, they are more aesthetically pleasing, they make for better citizenship, and they are even more economical. Take bicycles, for example.

I ride a bicycle -- not because I hate General Motors but haven't the courage to bomb an auto plant. I don't do it as a gesture of great stoicism and personal sacrifice. I am not even engaged, necessarily, in an act of political protest over that company's responsibility for most of the air pollution by tonnage in the United States. It's like finally giving up cigarettes. You just wake up one morning and realize you don't want to start the day with another automobile. Cigarette smoking is not a pleasure, it's a business. In the same way, you finally come to realize that you don't need General Motors, they need you. They need you to drive their cars for them. You are driving for Detroit and paying them to do it. Automobiles are just a part of your life that's over, that's all. No hard feelings. You've just moved on to something else. From now on you just use their buses, taxis, and rental cars when they suit your

# p. 112 #

The most natural form of locomotion, walking has been In use since before the Invention of the wheel and the discovery of fire. Reliable and totally non-polluting, it offers convenience -- no parking, no cost. Invigorating, it promotes health and gives you the chance to think.
-Paul Swatek


Automobiles insulate man not only from the environment but from human contact as well. They permit only most limited types of interaction, usually competitive, aggressive, and destructive. If people are to be brought together again, given a chance to get acquainted with each other and involved in nature, some fundamental solutions must be found to the problems posed by the automobile.
-Edward T. Hall


ANNOUNCER: Sidney spent Sundays shelling at the seashore. Then Sidney started digging the Mustang -- the great original . . .. Now Sidney's making waves all over. Last week he saved three bathing beauties. (And they all could swim better than Sidney!) Only Mustang makes it happen!
-a television commercial

# p. 113 #

convenience. You don't keep one for them that you have to house, feed and water, insure, and care for.

You ride a bicycle because it feels good. The air feels good on your body; even the rain feels good. The blood starts moving around your body, and pretty soon it gets to your head, and, glory be, your head feels good. You start noticing things. You look until you really see. You hear things, and smell smells, you never knew were there. You start whistling nice little original tunes to suit the moment. Words start getting caught in the web of poetry in your mind. And there's a nice feeling, too, in knowing you're doing a fundamental life thing for yourself: transportation. You got a little bit of your life back! And the thing you use is simple, functional, and relatively cheap. You want one that fits you and rides smoothly, but with proper care and a few parts it should last almost forever. Your satisfaction comes from within you, not from the envy or jealousy of others. (Although you are entitled to feel a little smug during rush hours, knowing you are also making better time than most of the people in cars.)

On those occasions when I am not able to cycle through the parks or along the canal -- because the paths are rough with ice or muddy from rain or melting snow -- bicycling enables me to keep closer to the street people: folks waiting for buses or to cross streets, street sweepers, policemen, school "patrols," men unloading trucks. Needless to say, you cannot claim any depth of understanding as a result of such momentary and chance encounters, but by the time I get to the office I do somehow have the sense that I have a much better feeling for the mood of the city that day than if I had come to my office in a chauffeur-driven government limou-

# p. 114 #

On a different speed scale, bicycles could move 2.8 times as many people per amount of space. If a bicycler can make 10 miles an hour, the car would have to exceed 28 mph to rack up more passenger miles on the same system of streets. But the New York City average speed for cars during rush hour is only 8.5 mph, 13 mph on the feeder roads. It's a fact that today in many cities you can make better time aboard a bicycle than in a car.
-Paul Swatek


Make your second car a bicycle.

Consider the advantages that the bicycle has to offer -- low cost, no pollution, and convenient to park.

For under $50 you can get a bicycle fitted with enough trimmings to make it practical for going shopping and carrying a small child. The cheapest car costs about thirty times that.

A bicycle is also inexpensive to operate, maintain, and insure.

Bicycles are quieter than any form of motorized transportation, produce no pollution, and use up no fuel.

A bicycle takes up about 1/30th the parking space of a car.

In city traffic today, the bicycle is often faster than the car or bus.

Bicycles give the rider the sort of healthy exercise that many Americans usually do not get.

Riding a bicycle makes it possible to get a better appreciation of a beautiful day, or a pleasant ride through the park.

. . . The New York Times quoted a 32-year-old millionaire who pedals up Fifth Avenue to social engagements in a dinner jacket as explaining, "It's much easier than fussing with a chauffeur."
-Paul Swatek

# p. 115 #

sine. Although I am willing to brave the traffic and exhaust, I am aware it is dangerous. I think bicycles ought to be accorded a preferred position in the city's transportation system. At the very least, they deserve an even break.

Notice that bicycle riding also has some significant social advantages over the automobile. Cars unnecessarily kill sixty thousand people every year, permanently maim another one hundred and seventy thousand, and injure three and a half million more. The automobile accounts for at least 60 percent of the total air pollution in the United States by tonnage -- as high as 85 percent in some urban areas -- and 91 percent of all carbon-monoxide pollution; it creates about nine hundred pounds of pollution for every person every year. One million acres of land are paved each year; there is now a mile of road for each square mile of land. The concrete used in our Interstate Highway System would build six sidewalks to the moon. Even so, everyone is familiar with the clogged streets and parking problems -- not to mention the unconscionable rates charged by the parking garages. Automobile transportation is the largest single consumer of the resources used in our nation's total annual output of energy. It is an economic drain on consumers -- in no way aided by auto companies that deliberately build bumpers weaker than they were fifty years ago in order to contribute to an unnecessary bumper-repair bill in excess of one billion dollars annually.

The bicycle is a model citizen, by comparison.

The bicycle does not kill or maim; it does not pollute; it does not deplete natural resources; it makes no noise; it takes a great deal less space; and it is very much cheaper. (You can buy a brand new bicycle for

# p. 116 #

Commuting by bicycle? Is this some kind of put-on? It may sound like a joke to motor-minded America, but in the rest of the world nobody is laughing. In countries that are willing to take it seriously, the bicycle [is] transportation. Switzerland, for example, which traditionally places a high value on peace of mind and purity of air, has more bicycles than automobiles. In Amsterdam -- a national capital with roughly the same population and climatic conditions as Washington, D.C. -- 150,000 people ride bikes to work every day. Hundreds of thousands more commute by bicycle in other European cities. The same is true in much of Africa and Asia.
-Thomas R. Reid, III


This year an estimated 10 million bicycles will be sold, compared to a projected 8.6 million new cars.
-Friends of the Earth

# p. 117 #

little more than what it costs to operate an automobile for two weeks.) Although the bicycle makes a direct assault on four great problems that plague the modern city -- traffic, noise, parking, and pollution -- urban planners have overlooked it in their search for solutions to the urban transportation crisis.

It is more than ironic that America can invest so much stock faith and rhetoric in the competitive marketplace of commerce and yet ignore the "marketplace of ideas" (to use a phrase by Mr. Justice Holmes) by tolerating the television monopoly that is used to merchandise Detroit's peculiar dreams of the appropriate automotive life style -- with all that life style's attendant social ills. My own commission, the Federal Communications Commission, has been instrumental in encouraging broadcasters' censoring off the airwaves the messages from ecology groups (like Friends of the Earth) that would cry out against the urban devastation being wrought by Detroit's automobiles. (The FCC decision, fortunately, has been substantially reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals.) In perhaps one of the greatest advertising overkills of all time, we Americans are being grossly oversold an automotive product and life style (bigger, faster, sexier cars) that we neither need nor may really want, and that will surely eventually kill us with its exhaust by-products and lethargy-induced heart attacks, if it does not get us first in a crash. This may serve the corporate profits of the automotive, oil, steel, cement, and road-building industries, but it is shortchanging the American people.

There are other ways to get around.

# # #

It's nice to see such thinking coming back in style a little over a generation later. Now if only we could substitute a system of public financing of elections for our "best legislators money can buy" they, too, could act upon such common sense and solve our multiple problems simultaneously: wars for oil in the Middle East, with their attendant disproportionate share of the federal budget, global warming, heart disease and obesity.

# # #