It wasn’t that long that the sycophants in the media, along with elected Democrats, were calling Biden’s infrastructure bill “historic” and super duper awesome. Times change because there’s a big cult around
How Billions in Infrastructure Funding Could Worsen Global Warming
The highways in Colorado, one of the nation’s fastest-growing states, are frequently clogged with suburban workers driving into Denver, skiers heading high into the Rocky Mountains and trucks rumbling across the Interstates.
A Western frontier state with an affinity for the open road and Subaru Outbacks, Colorado’s traditional answer to traffic congestion could be summed up in two words: more asphalt.
But widening highways and paving new roads often just spurs people to drive more, research shows. And as concerns grow about how tailpipe emissions are heating the planet, Colorado is among a handful of car-dominated states that are rethinking road building.
In December, Colorado adopted a first-of-its-kind climate change regulation that will push transportation planners to redirect funding away from highway expansions and toward projects that cut vehicle pollution, such as buses and bike lanes.
Nothing like riding a bike a long distance with your tools or skis in cold, winter weather, right? But, hey, this is what you cultists voted for, don’t complain.
The new $1 trillion infrastructure law invests billions in climate-friendly programs like electric car chargers and public transit. But it also gives states $273 billion for highways over five years, with few strings attached. One analysis from the Georgetown Climate Center found that this money could significantly increase emissions if states keep adding highway lanes.
Well, that’s a bummer, eh?
Already, there are signs that even states with ambitious climate goals like Washington, Illinois and Nevada hope to use federal funds to expand roadways, such as adding lanes to a congested section of the Eisenhower Freeway near Chicago. In 2019, states spent one-third of their highway dollars on new road capacity, roughly $19.3 billion, with the rest spent on repairs.
“This is a major blind spot for politicians who say they care about climate change,” said Kevin DeGood, director of infrastructure policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank. “Everyone gets that oil pipelines are carbon infrastructure. But new highways are carbon infrastructure, too. Both lock in place 40 to 50 years of emissions.”
That’s horrible! How dare politicians listen to citizens who want less congested roads!
Of course it will make it worse. Everything that will be supplied for “infrastructure” will likely be made in communist China which is exempt from global “green” policies. And the Western capitalist countries make damn sure that communist China STAY’s exempt from global “green” policies.
I would imagine it’s going to take a more than a few boatloads of steel from…somewhere.
Hooray we’re green but we import everything from the world’s largest polluter. We won, new ice ag…global wa…climate change!! We won!!
“Communist” is there some new definition of thst word I am unaware of?
Karl Marx defined it as when the workers own the means of production
Do you think that the Chinese workers actually own the factories they work in?
Hairy: “Do you think that the Chinese workers actually own the factories they work in?”
Yes. That is their economic structure. That’s why everything is “The People’s” this or “The People’s” that. Or haven’t you noticed their official name is “The People’s Republic of China”. Do you actually believe they are a republic?
Really Hairy? You’re gonna be that obtuse?
Let’s go Brandon, Hairy thinks you are “actually” the president.