Hacker News Reader

Comment by IfOnlyYouKnew | Hacker News Reader

Remote work also enables low-density and rural living, which is far more carbon-intensive than urban environments. You may just turn someone taking the subway to work into someone taking their SUV to the grocery store, and heating/cooling their far larger house with four walls exposed to the outside.

View on HN

Is that really true. Perhaps comparing like for like but the last figures I saw showed 50% of the population live in cities but 70% of the emissions come from cities.

It is not as clear cut and may be different with first-world economies and developing ones.

In developing ones cities are typically wealthiest more -> CO2 emissions due to higher standard of living.

In first-world cities are more efficient.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/mar/23/city-dwe...

While in principle I agree with you. Home food delivery is becoming a thing, houses can be insulated, and country doesn't have to equal bigger house etc.

I'm thinking European levels of rural, where food delivery is possible, don't know if it would be doable at US rural levels though.

Delivery is just someone producing CO2 coming to you instead of you producing CO2 going to them.

That is true if deliveries are made one at a time, but if a delivery truck is making multiple deliveries at a time and makes an attempt to optimize it's route there would be less CO2 produced.

People can just, you know, not go to the grocery store every day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com