石羊河文献出处：Moriarty P, Honnery D. The prospects for global green car mobility[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2008, 16(16): 1717-1726.
原文
17年属什么生肖
The prospects for global green car mobility
Patrick Moriarty, Damon Honnery
水面筋Abstract
The quest for green car mobility faces two major challenges: air pollution from exhaust emissions and global climate change from greenhou gas emissions. Vehicle air pollution emissions are being successfully tackled in many countries by technical solutions such as low-sulphur fuels, unleaded petrol and three-way catalytic converters. Many rearchers advocate a similar approach for overcoming transport's climate change impacts. This study argues that finding a technical solution for this problem is not possible. Instead, the world will have to move to an alternative surface transport system involving far lower levels of mot
江心洲>露娜月下无限连招口诀
orid travel.
防患未然的意思Keywords：Green mobility; Fuel efficiency; Alternative fuels; Global climate change; air pollution我家的故事作文
1. Introduction
Provision of environmentally sustainable (or green) private transport throughout the world faces two main challenges. The first is urban and even regional air pollution, particularly in the rapidly growing cities of the industrialising world. The cond is global climate change, caud mainly by rising concentrations of greenhou gas (GHGs) in the atmosphere. The two barriers to green car mobility differ in veral important ways. First, road traffic air pollution problems are more localid, becau of the short atmospheric lifetimes of most vehicle pollutants and . Thus regional solutions are often not only possible, but also esntial – Australian cities, for example, can (and must) solve their air pollution problems themlves. Matters are very different for global climate change. Except possibly for geo-engineering measures such as placing large quantities o
f sulphate aerosols in the lower stratosphere or erecting huge reflecting mirrors in space, one country cannot solve this problem alone. Climate change is a global problem. Nevertheless, it is possible for some countries to ‘freeload’ if the majority of nations that are important GHG emitter。
Second, there is agreement that air pollution, especially in urban areas, is potentially a rious health hazard, and that road transport can contribute greatly to urban pollutant level. For the reasons, governments in many countries are already taking effective action on air pollution. But until recently, climate change was not recognized as a major problem by some key policy makers, and all countries have yet to take effective action on reducing emissions.
Third, vehicular air pollutant problems, at least in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, are already showing themlves amenable to various technical solutions, such as low-sulphur fuels, unleaded petrol, and three-way catalytic converters. Some rearchers have argued explicitly that global trans
port emissions can be reduced to very low levels with a combination of two key technical solutions – large improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency and a switch to alternative transport fuels, such as liquid biofuels and hydrogen derived from renewable energy. A much larger group implicitly support this position by projecting large future increas in car numbers and travel and even a globally interconnected highway system.
Further, governments throughout the world have endord the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (which came into effect in 1994), but at the same time are expanding their road networks, encouraging their car industry, and planning for future car traffic expansion. Overall, the majority of both rearchers and policy makers appear to consider that climate change pos no threat to global car mobility. Nevertheless, other rearchers argue in general that technology cannot solve the rious environment/resource problems the world faces global warming in particular. Also, the authors themlves have earlier questioned whether the current global transport system can continue on its prent cour. This paper attempts to resolve the competing claims.
胸最大Transport, of cour, is not the only source of either air pollution or global climate change. All energy-using ctors, and even land-u changes, can contribute to the two problems. It is thus important that any attempts to reduce transport's emissions do not compromi similar efforts in other ctors of the economy. It is also possible that emission reduction policies in one country could adverly affect reduction efforts elwhere.
The aim of this paper is to show that private car travel cannot form the basis for a sustainable global system of surface pasnger travel. To simplify the analysis, only GHG emissions will be analyd. We argue that the risk of global climate change requires effective reductions in the next two decades or so, whereas technical solutions to drastically cut car travel's greenhou gas emissions are only possible in a much longer time frame, and, in some cas, possibly not even then. Overall, the world will have to rely on alternative modes (various forms of public transport, walking and cycling), and, for much of the industrialid world, much-reduced levels of personal travel as well. Of cour, it is quite possible that the limited time frame available is also much too short for t
ravel reductions and modal shifts of the magnitude propod here. The conclusions of this paper have relevance for freight and air transport, and also for other ctors of the economy faced with the need for deep cuts in GHG emissions.
