If last week's report that Americans sitting in traffic now squander 4.2 billion hours in lost time (up 220 million hours from 2004) along with 2.9 billion gallons of wasted fuel isn't sufficiently depressing, consider the emissions produced by this traffic purgatory. Now comes a report from the Urban Land Institute that claims more efficient vehicles and biofuels won't make nearly as much a dent in emissions as will living closer to work. Well, duh, you say. The number of miles Americans drive has risen 23 percent since 1980. This has increased our dependence on foreign oil, our emissions and our national frustration with gridlock. The report, "Growing Cooler: Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change," analyzed scores of academic studies and concluded that compact development--mixing housing and businesses in denser patterns, with walkable neighborhoods--could do more to lower emissions as many of the climate policies now promoted by state and national politicians. But as with so much breezy urban planning, the report fails to take into consideration free-market forces. Americans live further and further away from urban centers because housing is affordable. Gas prices pinch with a 50-mile commute, but you'll save a fortune on your monthly mortgage payments. "Growing Cooler" seems to envision a Maoist workers' collective centered around Pottery Barn and a Visa bill processing center. Unfortunately, this isn't how most American choose to live. City zoning laws and urban development incentives make a pretty pale carrot compared with McMansion you can buy a gas tank away from the office.
Sources: New York Times, San Jose Mercury News, Urban Land Institute
