4 ms·

I feel bad for people who lives in cities without a car. It's sad life. You're stuck in a tiny bubble defined by a handful of transit stops. This is true in New

I feel bad for people who lives in cities without a car. It's sad life. You're stuck in a tiny bubble defined by a handful of transit stops. This is true in New York, London, and Paris all the same. Public transit is slow and shitty in every city in the world. If you compare travel time by foot to subway the subway merely cut it by 50%. Subways are about as fast as a moving sidewalk. The "better" a city's public transportation the longer the average commute time of workers. Spending two hours a day on the train isn't living. (Nor is spending two hours a day in a car.) I also refuse to accept that dense cities are cheaper than the alternative. Everything in a city costs 10x and takes longer. London's water pipes leak about 25% of their water. Replacing these pipes is effectively impossible. I'm hoping remote works kills the dense mega-city and lets people spread out a bit more.

thatfrenchguy 5y ago
You must live in the suburbs. Even in slow transit San Francisco, taking the bus is always faster, never mind Paris.that’s not counting we’ll never meet our climate goals with suburbs.
- forrestthewoods 5y ago
  > that’s not counting we’ll never meet our climate goals with suburbs. Nonsense. It's perfectly possible for us to achieve clean energy and clean transport.
  - ryukafalz 5y ago
    “RMI analysis indicates that the United States must reduce VMT by 20 percent before the end of the decade to limit warming to 1.5°C—and this remains true even under ambitious EV adoption scenarios.” https://rmi.org/our-driving-habits-must-be-part-of-the-climate-conversation https://rmi.org/our-driving-habits-must-be-part-of-the-clima...
    - forrestthewoods 5y ago
      Nonsense. The source article is discussing, without sharing their supporting evidence, the transition to EVs. If 100% of vehicle miles were driven by EVs charged with clean energy there would be no need to reduce mileage. We're talking about city design for the next hundred years. Not the transition to EVs over the next 5 to 20 years. Clean energy and clean transportation is possible. Some might even say it's inevitable. Once achieved there is no existential requirement to reduce vehicle miles.
thanatos519 5y ago
Public transit is not slow and shitty in The Netherlands.
- wozniacki 5y ago
  You mean on days other than those days when no trains run whatsoever?[1] [1] Due to failure in the IT system, it is not possible to run any trains today (ns.nl) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30901009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30901009
rad_gruchalski 5y ago
Have you ever driven in London? Have you used public transport in London? Moving around is much more efficient using public transport. The underground + a couple of buses take you around everywhere faster than a car.
wardedVibe 5y ago
You know you can just rent a car, right? If you don't use it 5 days out of 7, it's much, much cheaper to rent one.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Renting a car (in the US) can cost $40/day.[a] That’s how much gas costs me in a week or so. It’s not cheaper to rent. [a]: Don’t forget the $150-300 deposit (that takes a week to disappear). And also being pressured to pay for their $15/day insurance. Rental companies are expensive
  - wardedVibe 5y ago
    The cost of a car isn't just gas, you have to amortize the cost of the car depreciating, the maintenance, registration, etc. For a quick example, https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/auto-loans/total-cost-owning-car https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/auto-loans/total-co... has a monthly cost of 690 using average (used) values and 0 dollars for gas. So you can drive 17 days a month and still come out ahead renting. There are services like zipcar, or [hourcar](https://hourcar.org/individual/ https://hourcar.org/individual/) that make renting significantly more convenient, though the costs are marginally higher if all of your trips are full day. I've done this calculation multiple times in my life, and because I mostly get around via bike (perks of living in college towns which have to invest in non-car infrastructure), its never been worth buying a car.
    - jjav 5y ago
      I spent $4205 on car expenses last year, not including fuel (since I'd pay fuel separately on a rental car as well). That's for two cars (spouse & I), so I'll say $2100 per car. The cheapest rental car I could find (searched kayak.com) is $72/day. So, renting could only be cheaper if I used a car less than 2100/72 = 29 days per year. But that's not counting cost or inconvenience/time of getting and returning that rental car. The few times I'd had to rent a car I've had to get an Uber ride to get to the rental place and then back home, so that adds another $20 or so to the rental.
wasmitnetzen 5y ago
What are you talking about? I live in Stockholm, it's Saturday, 23:00, and I can be in the next city over, Uppsala, 70km away, at 0:04, using public transport. I takes 28 minutes to a random spot I just picked on the other end of the city, 10km away. Stockholm has 100 subway stations alone, and probably over 1000 bus stops. I have no idea why you should say that is "a handful". I can also bike everywhere, of course. Usually way faster than the car over medium distances.
- Firmwarrior 5y ago
  When I was living in Tokyo, it was theoretically possible to get from where I lived to the center of the most popular downtown hangout spot in 20 minutes by train. In reality, though, you had to tack on between 5 and 30 minutes of random delays depending on the train schedules and what time it was. If you're sitting in your living room, and decide "I want to go to $place, it's a 45 minute trip if I leave now and a 20 minute trip if I leave in an hour" I think you could make an argument either way. Within downtown Tokyo, you can often beat the train by just walking briskly from point to point, and almost always beat it by riding a bike. Maybe the guy above you is focusing entirely on those worst case walking/schedule-based delays and you're focusing entirely on the best case.

thatfrenchguy 5y ago

You must live in the suburbs. Even in slow transit San Francisco, taking the bus is always faster, never mind Paris.that’s not counting we’ll never meet our climate goals with suburbs.

forrestthewoods 5y ago
> that’s not counting we’ll never meet our climate goals with suburbs. Nonsense. It's perfectly possible for us to achieve clean energy and clean transport.
- ryukafalz 5y ago
  “RMI analysis indicates that the United States must reduce VMT by 20 percent before the end of the decade to limit warming to 1.5°C—and this remains true even under ambitious EV adoption scenarios.” https://rmi.org/our-driving-habits-must-be-part-of-the-climate-conversation https://rmi.org/our-driving-habits-must-be-part-of-the-clima...
  - forrestthewoods 5y ago
    Nonsense. The source article is discussing, without sharing their supporting evidence, the transition to EVs. If 100% of vehicle miles were driven by EVs charged with clean energy there would be no need to reduce mileage. We're talking about city design for the next hundred years. Not the transition to EVs over the next 5 to 20 years. Clean energy and clean transportation is possible. Some might even say it's inevitable. Once achieved there is no existential requirement to reduce vehicle miles.

thanatos519 5y ago

Public transit is not slow and shitty in The Netherlands.

wozniacki 5y ago
You mean on days other than those days when no trains run whatsoever?[1] [1] Due to failure in the IT system, it is not possible to run any trains today (ns.nl) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30901009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30901009

rad_gruchalski 5y ago

Have you ever driven in London? Have you used public transport in London? Moving around is much more efficient using public transport. The underground + a couple of buses take you around everywhere faster than a car.

wardedVibe 5y ago

You know you can just rent a car, right? If you don't use it 5 days out of 7, it's much, much cheaper to rent one.

colejohnson66 5y ago
Renting a car (in the US) can cost $40/day.[a] That’s how much gas costs me in a week or so. It’s not cheaper to rent. [a]: Don’t forget the $150-300 deposit (that takes a week to disappear). And also being pressured to pay for their $15/day insurance. Rental companies are expensive
- wardedVibe 5y ago
  The cost of a car isn't just gas, you have to amortize the cost of the car depreciating, the maintenance, registration, etc. For a quick example, https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/auto-loans/total-cost-owning-car https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/auto-loans/total-co... has a monthly cost of 690 using average (used) values and 0 dollars for gas. So you can drive 17 days a month and still come out ahead renting. There are services like zipcar, or [hourcar](https://hourcar.org/individual/ https://hourcar.org/individual/) that make renting significantly more convenient, though the costs are marginally higher if all of your trips are full day. I've done this calculation multiple times in my life, and because I mostly get around via bike (perks of living in college towns which have to invest in non-car infrastructure), its never been worth buying a car.
  - jjav 5y ago
    I spent $4205 on car expenses last year, not including fuel (since I'd pay fuel separately on a rental car as well). That's for two cars (spouse & I), so I'll say $2100 per car. The cheapest rental car I could find (searched kayak.com) is $72/day. So, renting could only be cheaper if I used a car less than 2100/72 = 29 days per year. But that's not counting cost or inconvenience/time of getting and returning that rental car. The few times I'd had to rent a car I've had to get an Uber ride to get to the rental place and then back home, so that adds another $20 or so to the rental.

wasmitnetzen 5y ago

What are you talking about? I live in Stockholm, it's Saturday, 23:00, and I can be in the next city over, Uppsala, 70km away, at 0:04, using public transport. I takes 28 minutes to a random spot I just picked on the other end of the city, 10km away. Stockholm has 100 subway stations alone, and probably over 1000 bus stops. I have no idea why you should say that is "a handful". I can also bike everywhere, of course. Usually way faster than the car over medium distances.

Firmwarrior 5y ago
When I was living in Tokyo, it was theoretically possible to get from where I lived to the center of the most popular downtown hangout spot in 20 minutes by train. In reality, though, you had to tack on between 5 and 30 minutes of random delays depending on the train schedules and what time it was. If you're sitting in your living room, and decide "I want to go to $place, it's a 45 minute trip if I leave now and a 20 minute trip if I leave in an hour" I think you could make an argument either way. Within downtown Tokyo, you can often beat the train by just walking briskly from point to point, and almost always beat it by riding a bike. Maybe the guy above you is focusing entirely on those worst case walking/schedule-based delays and you're focusing entirely on the best case.