and the Yankees suck.

Uh, guys...in case you didn't notice..one is a city, the other a state...are you letting Rush provide your facts now?

"California has managed to cut its contributions to global warming, too. Carbon dioxide emissions per capita in California have fallen by 30 percent since 1975, while U.S. per capita carbon dioxide emissions have remained essentially level."

It's all in the buildings. If California had half the mass transit of NYC, it wouldn't even be close. At present, California and New York State have almost exactly the same per capita CO2 output.

You know that big open area to the northwest of you? That's called "the rest of New York". And it's actually not that dense or walkable. And it means that New York might do well to consider some of those environmental steps California has been taking.

The post is about NYC vs. California, so he's right (in this instance) to use New York to mean the city.

Actually, we have some congestion pricing here in LA, on the 91 Express Lanes. The only reason we don't have more is because, without a lot of centralization of employment like in New York or London, it wouldn't really be very fair to choose a certain zone where congetion pricing would be imposed. So, the only fair way to do it would be to hit people with road tolls on what are now freeways.

Of course, not only would there be opposition to that (there are a lot of people in this area who have no idea that we pay for our "free"ways with extreme traffic jams), but you simply can't do it because the federal highway system makes it very hard to convert free interstates into toll roads, which is absolutely horrible policy.

But I am sure there will eventually be more high occupancy / toll lanes with congestion pricing.

It's true, NYC's 8 million residents use less gasoline than California's 35 million.

It's also true that Calfornia emitted about 384 million metric tons of CO2 in 2003, while New York (the state, pop. 19 million, not the city) emitted 213 million metric tons (source here, small PDF).

In other words, the average Californian emits about 10 metric tons a year, while the average New Yorker emits about 11 metric tons.

We're anxiously waiting for you punk-a** New Yorkers to catch up.

Check out mateoSF's link to that PDF.

Texas emits more that NY and Cal. COMBINED

It's true, NYC's 8 million residents use less gasoline than California's 35 million.
It was per capita. More to the point, no one was calling out California for poor performance here--another blogger instead put forth the untenable position that the state of California will someday have a better than NYC, and made a point of snidely referring to them as "precious, much vaunted boroughs" as he did so. I don't get why Adler's getting guff for comparing apples to oranges when that was what he was given to respond to. No one's actually managed to disagree with him here.

er, "have a better environmental record"

2W9Oeh My name is Kostya.My nick is Zold . I want to find friends .ICQ 324600825