Transit and Global Warming

Friday, December 02, 2011

As the Port Jervis line reopens following significant damage by Tropical Storm Irene, Andrea Bernstein, director of the public radio Transportation Nation project and senior correspondent for WNYC, looks at how the transit system will cope with climate change.


Andrea Bernstein

Comments [10]

Jeffrey from Maplewood, NJ

If public transportation cuts greenhouse gasses compared to cars, etc., and there is a desire to reduce traffic and congestion in NY and other cities, WHY do they keep RAISING transit fares by huge amounts? I would think that LOWERING fares would greatly promote ridership, making the trains/subways more profitable, increasing commuter utilization, and reducing greenhouse gasses.

Dec. 02 2011 10:46 AM
gary from queens

I used to be less certain about the catastrophic warming scenario when my scientist cousin told me that the glaciers were melting.

Then months ago we learned in the news that they are not. to the contrary, in fact.

let's have a debate on THIS. not on what conditions our subways will be in 50 years from now. We may not even be using subways by then!

Dec. 02 2011 10:42 AM
Tom from Scotch Plains, NJ

The difference is a semantic one. Listeners might be tempted to think that now that we had a "100 year storm", the next storm of such severity won't occur for another 100 years. John pointed out that it is a probability EACH year, so we could have another such storm next year, albeit at a 1% chance.

Dec. 02 2011 10:39 AM
John A.

Brian Lehrer vs "100-year" caller. LOL. If a 100 year storm occurs each and every 3 years for 50 years then GIVE UP fighting that point.

Dec. 02 2011 10:37 AM
Station44025 from Park slope

The other thing to keep in mind about "100 year" storms is that they are statistically calculated for a particular location, so over a larger region you can expect many "100 year storms.

Dec. 02 2011 10:35 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

Brian, you are slick but DISHONEST in your attempt to have us accept this as "global warming." There is no proven connection (LOL) between Port Jervis and "climate change". Left wing hysteria.

Get some integrity, pal.

Dec. 02 2011 10:29 AM
gary from queens

Even more damning evidence in the news:

First FOIA request launched after Climategate 2.0 – this one to the US Department of Energy

Posted on November 30, 2011 by Anthony Watts
It appears that the focus of this has to do with the refusal to give up station data in and the DOE’s apparent complicity in that issue as revealed in the CG2 emails in 2009 from Dr. Phil Jones at CRU.

Dec. 02 2011 10:19 AM
gary from queens

More damning evidence in the news:

Climategate 2.0 emails – They’re real and they’re spectacular!

Posted on November 22, 2011 by News Staff
A link to where to download the new file is posted below the fold – This will be a top post for a few days -NEW STORIES APPEAR BELOW THIS ONE -I’ve also reversed the order of the updates to be newest at top for better visibility .

Dec. 02 2011 10:18 AM
gary from queens

more damning evidence:

The Climategate email network infrastructure
Posted on November 30, 2011 by Anthony Watts

Guest Post by David M. Hoffer

Since both ClimateGate 1&2 there has been considerable confusion in regard to how the emails were obtained, how the FOIA requests were managed, and what was or wasn’t possible in that context. There is no simple answer to those questions.

The ClimateGate emails span a period of nearly two decades. During that time period, email systems evolved substantially in terms of technology, implementation, operational procedures, and the job descriptions of those responsible for them. Other technologies such as backup systems, archive, and supporting technologies for legal compliance also changed (as did the laws themselves). Saying exactly what was and wasn’t possible for such simple actions as deleting an email have completely different answers over time, and also based on the technology that was implemented at any given time. With so many moving targets, it is impossible to draw any conclusions to a 100 percent certainty.
This article is written to cover the basics of how email systems and their supporting infrastructure work, and how they have evolved over time. With that as a common background, we can then discuss everything from the simple questions regarding who could delete what (and when), how the emails might have been obtained, and possibly most interesting of all, raise some serious questions about the manner in which the FOIA requests were handled at the CRU.


Dec. 02 2011 10:13 AM
gary from queens

Since the catastrophic scenario is no longer the main consensus, why is Brian wasting our time on this? At least have a debate on the science!

November 27, 2011
Scientists in Revolt against Global Warming
By Karin McQuillan

Global warming became a cause to save life on earth before it had a chance to become good science. The belief that fossil fuel use is an emergency destroying our planet by CO2 emissions took over the media and political arena by storm. The issue was politicized so quickly that the normal scientific process was stunted. We have never had a full, honest national debate on either the science or government policy issues.

Read more:

Dec. 02 2011 10:12 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.