Skip to comments.Colorado Is Sure It Can Expand Highways While Also Meeting Climate Goals. History Suggests That’ll Be A Tough Climb
Posted on 06/15/2021 2:58:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Jesus Torres can see a lot from his perch in the cab of a tanker truck.
Cars with blown tires on the side of the pothole-scarred roads. Overturned tankers on exit ramps curved too sharply for large modern trucks to handle. And more often than not, red tail lights snaking into the distance.
“They need to add more lanes to all the highways,” he said on a recent morning on Interstate 270 just after leaving the Phillips 66 terminal in Commerce City.
Far too often, Torres said, accidents on this highway through Colorado’s industrial center will cause long delays that are costly for his employer, Wyoming-based Dixon Bros.
“That means that it's going to take me longer to get to my station and deliver the fuel that my client needs,” Torres said.
Torres’ wish for wider roads is shared by business groups and some lawmakers and local government officials. And they may well see it granted, though only partially as the state works toward another major goal: reducing greenhouse gas emissions 90 percent by 2050.
The Colorado Department of Transportation has plans to rebuild and expand Interstate 270 in the next 10 years. But department officials say they have shifted from expanding highways as quickly as money allows to a “fix it first” approach, mixed with expanding transit and pedestrian infrastructure.
CDOT says it has strategies, including more transit service and tolling, that will offset any possible increase in driving and its associated pollution. But the department will be working against decades of academic research — and a new, Colorado-specific analysis — that suggests that will be difficult to accomplish.
Whether the state succeeds largely comes down to whether it can build new lane miles and not see them filled too.
(Excerpt) Read more at cpr.org ...
Environ-MENTAL-ists versus lane-miles.
Global Warming PING!
But those pesky Union Pension bailouts keep gobbling up all the money. What to do. What to do.
There are thousands of cars and trucks idling on I-70 every weekend for hours. Can’t be good for emissions. There’s also little room to expand highways in the mountains without moving many tons of rock.
This isn’t an easy problem, and that’s just one little part of it. Being 30 years behind on infrastructure doesn’t help either.
People are constantly moving to Colorado. The 6 county Denver metro area is getting major population increases. Eventually, there may be limits to how many more building will be constructed such as to limit population density. Ooops, not a chance. The politicians want more population such as to get more tax money. Ever increasing population is the goal of those in charge.
“Whether the state succeeds largely comes down to whether it can build new lane miles and not see them filled too.”
Hey, C470 along the hogback was awesome for about 2 years. Then it wasn’t. Haven’t seen it in a few years but I bet it’s really bad by now. At least there’s room to add lanes there.
Compared to natural cycles, any smug, virtue-signaling plan of the Climate Cretins is as effective as a chain-link fence to stop mosquitoes (a.k.a. an anti-virus mask).
Yep, that’s what worshipping the pot get ‘em. Damn dope fiends.
No offense to dope fiends, because I am one, I’m just on hiatus until I get past the random testing years of my life.
I don’t know what happened, but my previous post was meant for your #5.
We’re in the process of doing the same thing. FLA, here we come! (Melbourne area)
And Arvada (suburb on the west side of Denver) is looking at building an Amazon distribution center.
How’s that going to work with their little greenie highways?
Just plant a few trees and then widen the highways and call it even.
The local at TV news yesterday said the Arvada site was shot down by City Council and Amazon will not build there...may keep looking for another site.
If a state has natural beauty and is doing well economically, people will move to it.
It’s a double-edged sword and always will be. Want less people? Have a cruddy state.
Modern vehicles emit such clean emissions that a person can’t even gas themselves to death in the garage anymore. They can idle all they want.
I agree, natural beauty such as Colorado any where near the hills, valleys, mountains, bodies of water, will attract the people. I would say though, population density and greedy politicians are a major problem. I say fewer people per square mile. And now I will look for wild mills to tilt. Just like Don Quixote.
Colorado still has some great places to live that will stay great for a while yet. They are nowhere near the Front Range of course. You have to be far enough from there that day trippers won’t come.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.