Experts on climate change say that urban areas are being falsely accused as being responsible for about twice the amount of greenhouse gases than actually emitted. It is said that about 30% of greenhouse gas emissions comes from deforestation, agriculture and consumption in other rural and urban areas which are not as big as cities.
It is also said that emissions should not be allotted to the sources but to the places where those industry specific products are used. Accordingly, emissions from power stations will not be allotted to them, but to the households that use the electricity and emissions from industries will be allotted to consumers who use products from those industries.
In essence, it is said that most wealthy people living outside cities, are responsible for the increasing greenhouse gases because they have bigger houses, more property and more consumption. Cities in fact, should be looked upon as solutions to greenhouse gas emissions, since they are more organized in structure and function. Activities like cycling, walking etc happen more in cities and thus can be promoted.
Well said, but playing the blame game has never helped, and instead of throwing around emission points, wouldn’t it be easier to just own up and individually cut down on per person emissions. In that case, we could probably justify which areas contribute more to global warming, be it urban or rural and then seek a solution. Yes, cities can provide some solutions, but in this day and age, where every action is linked with the consumption of resources and increase in emissions and ultimately judged as contribution to global warming, even matters like taking out the trash matter. Enough has been said, and preached. Solutions lie in practicing.
Source: ENN