ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG!
Help us protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
Join EWG's live chat with Chef Ann Cooper
School lunch: More fruits & veggies, please!
Texas Schools are Drilling for Dollars
Why do blowouts take so long to fix?
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Test Your Knowledge of Cosmetics Safety: 8 Myths Debunked
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« Protecting Alaska? | Main | Lead: Bad for brains, bad for society »
LA's compact carbon footprint, with caveats
On a list of the greenest cities in the U.S., as measured by global warming impact per person, you expect to find Portland, Seattle and San Francisco — all relatively compact, transit- and bike-friendly places. New York City makes the list, with its network of subways and throngs of pedestrians. But the second-greenest city in the country is . . . Los Angeles?
That's right, according to a new study by the prestigious Brookings Institution that ranks the 100 largest U.S. metro areas by their carbon footprints from transportation and residential use. But as Margo Jefferson reports in the LA Times, there are more than a few caveats:
[B]efore the boasting starts, some words of caution: The calculations did not account for the fact that half the city's electricity comes from coal-fired power plants. Instead, Brookings used a state-wide average that included the hydroelectric and nuclear plants in Northern California.Omitted from the data are emissions from industries and commercial buildings, and from local roads apart from federal highways.
The researchers also chose metropolitan statistical areas, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Those areas may allow for a uniform geographical comparison, but in the case of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana area, that omitted commutes from as far as Ventura, San Bernardino or Riverside counties.
"The data is fuzzy," said Andrea Sarzynski, a senior research analyst at Brookings. "We do the best we can."
Other than New York, each of the 10 cities with the heaviest carbon footprints were east of the Mississippi. That's partly because Eastern cities are more reliant on dirty-burning coal for their energy. (Don't be so smug, Westerners: We rank better because our region uses a lot of nuclear power.) The East is also colder in winter and hotter in summer than the West Coast, requiring greater use of heating and air conditioning. That's one reason Honolulu ranks No. 1.
The heaviest carbon footprints in the country, according to the study, belong to Cincinnati (98), Indianapolis (99) and Lexington, KY (100). Washington, DC (great mass transit, but also sprawling suburbs, cold winters and hot summers) is 89th.
Leave a comment