Firstly, there's no doubt that housing reform is hugely important for so many reasons, including making achieving climate targets easier.
That said, I'm curious about the calculations suggesting that reducing VMT is the only viable path to do so.
In one's wildest YIMBY dreams, the majority of Americans (and Australians and Canadians) are going to be living in large single-family homes in the suburbs in 2050, and most of these people will be driving cars at roughly the rate they do now. As such, we're going to have to electrify all of this regardless. While it will be cheaper to do so with YIMBY reforms, and society will undoubtedly be much better off if we do YIMBY, why isn't electrifying 9000-pound pickup trucks and 5000-square-foot homes a viable path to a net zero America?
Firstly, there's no doubt that housing reform is hugely important for so many reasons, including making achieving climate targets easier.
That said, I'm curious about the calculations suggesting that reducing VMT is the only viable path to do so.
In one's wildest YIMBY dreams, the majority of Americans (and Australians and Canadians) are going to be living in large single-family homes in the suburbs in 2050, and most of these people will be driving cars at roughly the rate they do now. As such, we're going to have to electrify all of this regardless. While it will be cheaper to do so with YIMBY reforms, and society will undoubtedly be much better off if we do YIMBY, why isn't electrifying 9000-pound pickup trucks and 5000-square-foot homes a viable path to a net zero America?