When you have TransLink operating diesel buses on our otherwise zero emission trolley bus routes, how serious is the government in reducing GHG emissions? Shouldn't someone in Victoria be taking a stick to TransLink instead of just making press releases with lofty aims to reduce GHG emissions?

So much for Gordo's "green" promises. Another promise broken. What a bunch of doofs! LIbERalS! They make me laugh!

Nice to see the Carbon Tax working as it should.

What are we paying a carbon tax for?

Of course they are up. Only the little guy pays carbon tax, while all the big emitters are exempt or subsidized to emit more.

I do prefer electrified transit but really, should diesel buses be our focus for reducing emissions? Not at this time. A regular sized bus takes 40 cars off the road- we are already making an emissions savings with diesel buses. Yes, we should be running electric trolleys on trolley routes but TransLink ain't the problem- it is the blacktop gang in Victoria.

Our focus should be to greatly reduce the single occupancy vehicle. Most of the trips in this region are less than 5km, let's make it easier for people to move themselves and their stuff for those 5 km. Walking, cycling, transit (diesel or electric) let's just make it happen- we can petition and rant but the blacktop gang just won't listen, time to get out and start doing it in our communities and force government to catch up.

Walking/cycling school bus for kids; neighbourhood car sharing; personal car-free days; plant a garden and eliminate a couple trips to the grocer, etc. There are many means and methods, go do it and invite a neighbour.

Raise the carbon tax! How are we going to cut down our carbon emissions and stimulate investments in clean energy infrastructure if we don't raise the cost of fossil fuels?

Sure, 50% of us work within 5 km of work and most people are just too darn lazy or worried about messing up their hair to walk or cycle. They spend hours in the beauty salon on their hair and don't worry about their fat asses.

Now, lets think about that bus taking 40 cars off the road as you suggest. How many transit users who make less than it costs to buy a car are able to buy a car? How many have $10,000 at the end of the year to finance, insure and operate a car? I would say possibly 20% of people on the bus, and the rest on the bus are too destitute paying $1,000 to $5,000 per month on their mortgage or rent here. If pigs had wings, they could fly and if all people on transit could drive, you’d be right but you are wrong. You've been reading too much TransLink propaganda.

You have to consider all the hours that the bus is operating empty of partially full to compare it to cars, as well. If you do, according the 2009 TransLink Annual Report, the bus might carry 20 people on average continuously on a very busy route.

So if you do consider this, the bus is only removing the people who could buy a car for the 20 people who are continuously on the bus: (20)(20%) = 4 cars. But wait again, many people car pool and you have to divide this number by 1.5 to arrive at real number of cars which is now 3 cars. Because a diesel bus consumes as much fuel as 10 cars, that eco-smoking and painfully loud diesel bus which causes cancer and asthma, unlike a car, just put 7 cars on the road plus a host of toxins which the cars never would have put in the air. Think before you spout off because you obviously don't know much and contribute to the wealth of ignorance in our society.

What's that song: "It's a been a while ... everything that I can remember is f'kd up as I remember ... just make this go away .. it's been a while since the candle lit" ... have a good day and hope you learned something EVO.

signed,
chemical engineer

In the first paragraph, I meant to say: "Sure, 50% of us live within 5 km of work ... ". In any case, you likely don't get the calculations and logic.

Dear Chemical Engineer,

You should have signed your comment "arrogant cranky bitch with low self-esteem " or somesuch since you are more interested in insulting me and taking space to show us how clever you are than sharing information in a genuine attempt to correct my thinking.

To answer your question, I am saying that electric transit is preferable, however, campaigning against diesel buses that are already on the road is wrong headed since it is the SOV that is the major source of global warming emissions on our roads. That is far different than supporting the purchase and deployment of more diesel buses.

You go on about people buying cars, using made up percentages no less. In my example I wasn't saying that a regular bus would prevent 40 cars from being purchased. I wish that were true. I was saying that a loaded bus equals 40 fewer people driving a car at that time. By shifting more trips from car to transit we will reduce CO2 emissions because those 40 cars are still sitting in the driveway. Sure, not all buses are full all of the time but I am confident that we are making an emissions savings, even with diesel buses, over the lifetime of that bus. As more people shift from cars to transit then those savings will increase. You're the engineer though so you can do the math for us.

To convince people to give up purchasing cars, more than an electric trolley bus service will be required. A diversity of travel options is key.