Climate Cult Now Considers Suburbs Unsustainable

Even though there have been plenty of reports that cities are actually the worst offenders for the climate crisis (scam), Warmists have never been happy about the suburbs, because they mostly do not control them. Suburbs tend to be run by Republicans and stocked with Republicans, along with Democrats who do not really care about crazy left wing things like ‘climate change’. Plus, this really isn’t about ‘climate change’, it’s about controlling suburbs and turning them Leftist

Report: ‘Unsustainable’ Suburban America Contributes to Climate Change

The iconic American suburban neighborhoods that attract families looking for safe and prosperous areas have been targeted in recent years – first from those who believe zoning is a racist tactic to keep certain people out of the neighborhoods.

And now a report from the left-leaning Brooking Institute is claiming that the “unsustainable” nature of the suburbs means they must be transformed in the name of preventing climate change.

The Brooking Institute report touts President Joe Biden’s “ambitious and necessary” goal to reduce greenhouse gas emission to 50 percent of the amount emitted in 2005 by 2030, with even bigger reductions by 2050.

Brookings, citing a New York Times report, said reaching Biden’s climate change goals with require “systems-level changes across every sector of the economy.”

Strange how in order to get to those climate scam goals everything has to change, eh? It’s almost like this is all about politics, not science. Brookings writes

But there’s a problem. The administration’s high-level strategy skimmed over a central driver of our climate crisis: unsustainable land use practices. Simply put, the United States cannot reach its GHG reduction targets if our urban areas continue to grow as they have in the past. After decades of sprawl, the U.S. has the dubious honor of being a world leader in both building-related energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled per capita. Making matters worse, lower-density development also pollutes our water and requires higher relative emissions during the initial construction.

That leaves the country with no choice: We must prioritize development in the kinds of neighborhoods that permanently reduce total driving and consume less energy. Such human-centered neighborhoods have the added benefit of helping us adapt to climate impacts, improve public health, and promote access to activities. Encouraging their development should be a central part of any national climate resilience strategy.

Oh, so the government, especially the federal government, getting heavily involved in the affairs of the suburbs and rural areas. Surprise?

The report proposes two solutions to force changes in American neighborhoods:

  • Use market principles to send climate-sensitive price signals. Real estate developers, lenders, and households will make more resilient investment decisions if they understand the climate-related costs of their decisions and bear some brunt of the financial impact. For example, charging higher mortgage interest rates or increasing insurance premiums could steer development away from sensitive areas. It also works in reverse, as federal or state incentives could encourage more resilient development patterns, such as conserving land and incorporating greener designs.
  • Use statutory authorities to scale policy adoption. The federal government doesn’t directly control land use, but it has several policy levers to influence it, including flooding and disaster insurance, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s lending rules, the location and quality of transportation investments, and environmental permitting laws. Federal rules—whether done through a carrot or stick approach—can push states, fragmented metropolitan areas, real estate developers, and households to act in predictable, sustainable ways.

See? More control. I’d like an apology from all those who said I was crazy back in the early 2000’s that this was all about politics and not science.

“We need to undo decades of bad habits, returning to traditional people-centered neighborhood designs and incorporating forward-looking building technologies that promote more sustainable and equitable living. It’s a generational lift—and time is running out, the report concludes. “Statements of intent are important signals, and don’t cost politicians much. It’s imperative that our national leaders start naming land use challenges when they discuss our climate future. But we can’t afford to stop there. America needs federal leadership to test ideas and scale solutions. Land use may be local, but our climate future is shared.”

Bad habits? Mind your own f’ing business. Why don’t you start with getting rid of fossil fueled vehicles in your own cities? Seriously, these people are trying to change the suburbs and flip them and control them by any means necessary. Using ‘climate change’ is one way, another is by attempting to eliminate single family housing, as they’re trying to do in Piedmont, California, claiming that single family housing zoning is raaaaacist. These people are really evil in their attempts to control everything.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Climate Cult Now Considers Suburbs Unsustainable”

  1. Dana says:

    The urban elites want people who have chosen different lifestyles to be forced to change. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

    “The iconic American suburban neighborhoods that attract families looking for safe and prosperous areas,” huh? I suppose that Our Betters will not be happy until every American lives in places like the esteemed Mr Dowd’s St Louis, where white folks only have to contend with a 5.89 per 100,000 homicide rate, while the Negroes are slaughtering themselves at a 128.94 per 100,000 clip.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    This article would have made more sense before city people started abandoning cities and moving to suburbs. The causes are COVID teaching people they don’t have to live in cities to work in cities and Democrats turning cities into violent open sewers. Take your pick. Same result. But it seems democratic party activists want human cattle to live in large inexpensive pens while their chicken must roam free range.

  3. Mad Celt says:

    Perhaps these climate change activists will do us the favor of reenacting Jonestown eventually.

  4. Hairy says:

    In 2020 Biden won in the suburbs
    Rural areas continue to bleed populations as people move to cities and metro areas
    It is the young who are doing most of the fleeing
    This has been going on for decades
    Apparently people who prefer to live in non rural areas which have fewer opportunities than urban areas
    Who are the people leaving NYC ? Mostly the wealthy elites causing rents to drop 20 to 25 % in18 months

    • drowningpuppies says:

      As usual Johnnie, retard that he is, like Rimjob, dipshit that he is, doesn’t have the faintest idea about that which he writes.

      For every 100 people escaping NYC 80 are moving in. Do the math.

      Should open up a lot more Section 8 housing.

      #TrustUs
      Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • david7134 says:

      John,
      So Biden won the burbs. That might work on a regular election but we have established that Biden stole the election. So how does your statement have meaning.

      • Zachriel says:

        david7134: we have established that Biden stole the election

        Actually, multiple recounts, audits, and state and federal court cases have upheld the 2020 election results.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10896 access attempts in the last 7 days.