Good summary of how Germany got to introduce a (slightly) cheaper nationwide public transport season ticket #Deutschlandticket : more by accident, as a result of a tit-for-that between litigious coalition parties, than as part of some visionary plan
This sort of measures tend to divide transport experts - no clear consensus here! Here a critical take from public transport research, which I think makes some good points
Personally I don't have a firm view on the measure as a whole. But I wouldn't expect a substantial effect in terms of *car use / CO2 reduction*. I am prepared to accept that there might still be *other* good reasons for it though
Maps showing Germany (or German-speaking countries) being exceptional in Europe: an ongoing THREAD
1. The lowest share of homeowners
2. Among the very few places in Europe where men attend university more than women (but careful! It might actually be due to their exceptional, two-track higher education system)
Some people have high climate emissions from transport but who are they?
In my new paper with @mmbuchs & J. Scheiner we looked into this, focusing in particular on those with high emissions from air travel but not car travel (or vice-versa) doi.org/10.1016/j.erss…
THREAD
@mmbuchs My initial motivation for this study was the impression (anecdotal + from some studies) that *some* people have very low emissions from their daily travel (as they don't drive), but then *fly a lot*. And I was curious to understand better who they are
@mmbuchs There has been a lot of attention recently (both in research & media) on "high emitters" and that's great. And we know broadly the factors that are associated with high (transport) emissions: high income, being male, employment, middle adulthood, high education BUT...
[Disclaimer: I haven't read any of the three studies in full - this specific topic isn't something I work on. So I can't / won't get into the details. This thread is about making a point of principle on how science works & how we should debate about it]
Estimating the CO2 impact of measures that might be implemented in the future (but haven't yet) is *damn difficult*. Because well... we don't really know what will happen, we have to make *assumptions* about it.
The Swiss press is reporting about a (I assume non-peer-reviewed) study that claims to prove that cycling is more carbon-intensive than car driving 🤦♂️
Quick debunking THREAD time!
[NB: I didn't read the full study (there is no link to it) - just commenting on what's in the news article at handelszeitung.ch/politik/klima-…]
This paragraph is fascinating as it makes so many odd assumptions in order to make cycling appear more carbon intensive than driving - & even so only barely manages
1. It assumes a fuel efficient car - ironic for Switzerland, which has the least fuel efficient cars in Europe
Wondering how much of this is about traditional media like the Wirschaftswoche being upset about social media giving scientists a chance to engage with the public without having to go through them as gatekeepers