4 ms·

None safer. Unfortunately, these are the most optimized solutions for problems with multiple parameters to tweak (safety, scalability, viability,...). If there

None safer. Unfortunately, these are the most optimized solutions for problems with multiple parameters to tweak (safety, scalability, viability,...). If there were a better way, why wouldn't it be implemented?

smhost 7y ago
profit
- throwGuardian 7y ago
  I know that's a very emotive, convincing bogeyman. But like Obama used to say, "truth has a funny way of catching up" All I'm saying is, the day a Tesla et. al become significantly more affordable than a Honda Civic, with the ability for seamless cross country travel, is the day one can accurately claim no dependency on oil
  - philipps 7y ago
    I’ve seen this argument made before and don’t understand why seamless cross country travel should be the requirement for people traveling in personal cars (like Tesla, Honda, etc). How many people need to seamlessly travel more than a few hundred miles regularly? It might be better to optimize for the majority of use cases, which, I suspect, do not require this.
  - smhost 7y ago
    you're 1) arguing with yourself and 2) pretending like there's no tradeoff between profit and safety.
  - swader999 7y ago
    Didn't the Obama's just purchase beach front in the Hamptons? https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/2018/08/20/obama-marthas-vineyard-vacation-home/ https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/2018/08/20/obama-mar...
    - yardie 7y ago
      And they did it without oil money. So what’s your point?
cartoonworld 7y ago
Instead of building more transnational pipelines, perhaps a spoke pipeline to existing freight networks. If those aren't us to snuff (I suspect) we should probably remediate the deferred maintenance and implement all planned upgrades.
- microcolonel 7y ago
  Not sure rail is a safer way to transport oil.
  - 3pt14159 7y ago
    It's not. We currently do it in Canada for much of our oil and we spill it with so much frequency that it makes much more sense from an environmental perspective to use a pipeline. I'm still anti-oil, but if the oil has to come out of the ground then pipelines are better. Ideally though more investment in batteries, green tech, and nuclear would be favoured by policymakers than our current situation.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - cartoonworld 7y ago
      Thank you. I have never compared the safety records, so my assumption was pretty baseless in retrospect.

smhost 7y ago

profit

throwGuardian 7y ago
I know that's a very emotive, convincing bogeyman. But like Obama used to say, "truth has a funny way of catching up" All I'm saying is, the day a Tesla et. al become significantly more affordable than a Honda Civic, with the ability for seamless cross country travel, is the day one can accurately claim no dependency on oil
- philipps 7y ago
  I’ve seen this argument made before and don’t understand why seamless cross country travel should be the requirement for people traveling in personal cars (like Tesla, Honda, etc). How many people need to seamlessly travel more than a few hundred miles regularly? It might be better to optimize for the majority of use cases, which, I suspect, do not require this.
- smhost 7y ago
  you're 1) arguing with yourself and 2) pretending like there's no tradeoff between profit and safety.
- swader999 7y ago
  Didn't the Obama's just purchase beach front in the Hamptons? https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/2018/08/20/obama-marthas-vineyard-vacation-home/ https://www.bostonmagazine.com/property/2018/08/20/obama-mar...
  - yardie 7y ago
    And they did it without oil money. So what’s your point?

cartoonworld 7y ago

Instead of building more transnational pipelines, perhaps a spoke pipeline to existing freight networks. If those aren't us to snuff (I suspect) we should probably remediate the deferred maintenance and implement all planned upgrades.

microcolonel 7y ago
Not sure rail is a safer way to transport oil.
- 3pt14159 7y ago
  It's not. We currently do it in Canada for much of our oil and we spill it with so much frequency that it makes much more sense from an environmental perspective to use a pipeline. I'm still anti-oil, but if the oil has to come out of the ground then pipelines are better. Ideally though more investment in batteries, green tech, and nuclear would be favoured by policymakers than our current situation.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - cartoonworld 7y ago
    Thank you. I have never compared the safety records, so my assumption was pretty baseless in retrospect.