UN IPCC "solution" is wrong. Dead wrong.

It's simple. We either obey the laws of physics, or we obey the needs of capitalism.

The IPCC took the politically "safe" route of advocating renewables replacing fossil fuels as a solution to greenhouse gas emissions. But as long as capitalism and growth dominate our economics, these renewables will just be consumed in the fire of demand.

To make matters worse, many of them actually create more emissions or just move them somewhere else.

Here is a suggestion for a real solution:

Make cities car-free
Educate all children

This will break the critical mass of the autosprawl system, and encourage falling birth rates.

Fares are for rationing, not revenue. #freeischeaper

carfree france: "the sale of tickets, represent a very small share of funding for public transport, ranging from an average of 15 % for small towns to 23% for the largest cities of France (1).

In other words, the funding of public transport in France is already provided between 77% and 85% by taxpayers and businesses. Worse, in some cities, ticket sales are lower than the costs of collection (2). This means, hold on tight, as ticket sales and subscriptions do not even cover the material and human costs to sell tickets, compost and control users. In other words, in some cases, charges users to be able to simply check they pay ..."

UN IPCC: #publictransit key to fighting #climatechange

The Guardian: "A draft report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), obtained by the Guardian, says smart choices in urban planning and investment in public transport could help significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions, especially in developing countries."

Peaceful free-fare movement in Brazil - #tarifazero #passelivre

Don't Privatize and Reduce Public Transit, Make It Free and Expand It

truth-out/buzzflash : "The bottom line, however, is that the developed world economy built on the automobile (especially in the United States and Canada) cannot continue (in its gas-powered form) without virtually ensuring ecological disaster in the coming years.

What the United States and Canada (where the infamous Toronto Mayor Rob Ford has cut down mass transit projects) should be doing is expanding mass transit at the fastest effective possible rate - and charging nothing (or under a dollar) for use of trains and buses in urban areas.  This may violate the philosophical credo of the neoliberal anti-science forces who are leading the planet into doom, but squashing public transportation with privatzation and higher fares - as well as cutting back on it - is a recipe for a toxic Earth."

#Freetransit conference in Germany draws activists from 7 countries

August 80 : "On 4-5 April in Berlin located near the city of Erkner was held organized by the Foundation. Rosa Luxemburg meeting people and organizations involved in promoting the idea of ​​free public transport on the European continent. It was attended by activists from Estonia, Italy, Germany, Holland, Hungary, Sweden and the Polish - Luke Ługowski (Free Trade Union "August 80") and Simon Martys (Polish Labour Party)."

One word best describes U.S. energy usage - waste

Click here for explanation

Why is there money for subways, but not for buses?

Have you noticed? People fight for years to get one bus, but somehow massive subway projects seems to breeze through the political process. It's because subways send people underground to make room for cars above. Let's get rid of cars--they clearly don't work. There is plenty of room for buses and trams in a city without cars.

Panama's president unveiling subway ahead of vote - El Paso Inc.: Headlines: "The metro will surely alleviate the booming capital's dreadful traffic. But critics say the $2 billion spent on the 9-mile (14-kilometer) rail line would have been better used building a higher-capacity surface transport network and expanded bus system."

Persian Gulf oil states planning to get away from cars

Middle East public transport will be among best | ConstructionWeekOnline.com: ""As new public transportation, particularly metros and light rail, become adopted this enlightenment can only increase, and I firmly believe we're going to see cars lose their prime status as the favoured method of inner-city transportation in an incredibly short timescale," Ziadat said."

Which is it, too crowded? or no one will ride? #freetransit opponents can't decide.

There is no case against free public transit. The numbers are overwhelming. The costs of supporting the auto and sprawl infrastructure are straining municipal budgets and the attraction of reducing cars is compelling.

Opponents of free transit have a herculean task. They have tried to frame it as an experiment. That failed. They have tried to say it is too expensive. That is being debunked -- it is actually cheaper. They have tried to say that it does not attract riders (who came up with that one). Now they say it will cause "crowding." That is essentially saying that we should not have free transit because people want it.