You can not have it any way you want, you lower consumption and you increase pollution,
less pollution gives more consumption and CO2 and either changes will affect drivability.
Not exact matches
In January, a study linked higher air
pollution with behaviors that are
less «prosocial,» a decline the study describes as
giving less, cooperating and reciprocating
less, and demanding more — which can affect both individual and group decision - making.
For a
given level of carbon abatement, people deciding to reduce their own carbon
pollution will lead to
less disruption to polluting industries and hence
less economic cost.
The theory of prices versus quantities for
pollution control (Weitzman 1974) shows that such uncertainty will invariably lead the policy to under - or overshoot the optimum: imposing a quantitative target will lead to higher or lower marginal abatement costs than expected, while a
given tax rate will lead to greater or
lesser abatement effort than expected.
Wind was by far the most promising, Jacobson said, owing to a better - than 99 percent reduction in carbon and air
pollution emissions; the consumption of
less than 3 square kilometers of land for the turbine footprints to run the entire U.S. vehicle fleet (
given the fleet is composed of battery - electric vehicles); l the savings of about 15,000 lives per year from premature air -
pollution - related deaths from vehicle exhaust in the United States; and virtually no water consumption.