4 ms·

Eliminating petrol cars from cities would be an objectively good thing for the air quality.

winternett 4y ago
No offense personally, but the alternative to fuel burning cars is only cars with more toxic batteries that will pollute drinking water. There are no honestly viable solutions currently on the market to our environmental crisis in place, it's just marketing to shift profit to another harmful money making industry. Hauling a family of four on a bicycle to the hospital in a crisis in 2 feet of snow (for example) only goes further to highlight the small-mindedness our future is up against.
- azth 4y ago
  What do you think about hydrogen cars?
  - winternett 4y ago
    Don't smoke a cigarette anywhere near them... :/ They have a huge problem with unexpected detonations. One of the best things about vaping has been that I'm pretty sure that there are less unintentional home fires than in past decades, because when they are dropped on a mattress, they usually do not burn... Another aspect that no one really considers.
    - 0des 4y ago
      Hydride cells can be punctured, smoked near, smoked on, it's fine, it's also old technology. Just about any vehicle can be retrofitted for this, and can sequester the hydrogen overnight from the air.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Lariscus 4y ago
  Let me introduce you to the magical concept of public transport.
  - winternett 4y ago
    Public transport was crippled during the pandemic for obvious reasons... Let's not forget that. Also during an earthquake/power outage scenario would likely do the same, and cause far more dramatic loss of life if it was the only option. It's a hard sell to people who want to be free and independent, and in control of their safety and time. Getting rid of cars also means eliminating a huge volume of revenue from federal, state, and local government from related taxes... This means funding for bike lanes, roads, and even public transport, would evaporate. Most of the busses in many major cities were also once electric (at a very high cost to cities), but now (somehow) have mostly gone back to diesel... No one is asking Why... We still have major factories, ships, planes, and many other big business hallmarks that create the majority of pollution in the world (while the same companies try to portray that they are "green"). Conservation efforts are futile unless we start talking about the real issues, and create accountability, not if we leave rules up to profit seeking individuals and companies. It's beyond a hard sell at this point for many people, and contradictory to the concept of a free society. Back when we had mostly horses providing transit, they consumed more energy than cars on an individual basis too, and created health problems with their waste... It's all just shifting the buck somewhere else, and not solving real underlying problems.
    - chickenpotpie 4y ago
      > Public transport was crippled during the pandemic for obvious reasons... Let's not forget that. A once a century event shouldn't define the other 98 years. > Getting rid of cars also means eliminating a huge volume of revenue from federal, state, and local government from related taxes... This means funding for bike lanes, roads, and even public transport, would evaporate. This is not an issue. If people aren't buying cars, they'll have more money that they'll spend on other things or we can just raise taxes because people have more money. > We still have major factories, ships, planes, and many other big business hallmarks that create the majority of pollution in the world (while the same companies try to portray that they are "green"). Conservation efforts are futile unless we start talking about the real issues, and create accountability, not if we leave rules up to profit seeking individuals and companies. We're never gonna solve climate change if we only focus on the biggest issues. It's multifaceted problem.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

No offense personally, but the alternative to fuel burning cars is only cars with more toxic batteries that will pollute drinking water. There are no honestly viable solutions currently on the market to our environmental crisis in place, it's just marketing to shift profit to another harmful money making industry. Hauling a family of four on a bicycle to the hospital in a crisis in 2 feet of snow (for example) only goes further to highlight the small-mindedness our future is up against.

azth 4y ago
What do you think about hydrogen cars?
- winternett 4y ago
  Don't smoke a cigarette anywhere near them... :/ They have a huge problem with unexpected detonations. One of the best things about vaping has been that I'm pretty sure that there are less unintentional home fires than in past decades, because when they are dropped on a mattress, they usually do not burn... Another aspect that no one really considers.
  - 0des 4y ago
    Hydride cells can be punctured, smoked near, smoked on, it's fine, it's also old technology. Just about any vehicle can be retrofitted for this, and can sequester the hydrogen overnight from the air.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Lariscus 4y ago
Let me introduce you to the magical concept of public transport.
- winternett 4y ago
  Public transport was crippled during the pandemic for obvious reasons... Let's not forget that. Also during an earthquake/power outage scenario would likely do the same, and cause far more dramatic loss of life if it was the only option. It's a hard sell to people who want to be free and independent, and in control of their safety and time. Getting rid of cars also means eliminating a huge volume of revenue from federal, state, and local government from related taxes... This means funding for bike lanes, roads, and even public transport, would evaporate. Most of the busses in many major cities were also once electric (at a very high cost to cities), but now (somehow) have mostly gone back to diesel... No one is asking Why... We still have major factories, ships, planes, and many other big business hallmarks that create the majority of pollution in the world (while the same companies try to portray that they are "green"). Conservation efforts are futile unless we start talking about the real issues, and create accountability, not if we leave rules up to profit seeking individuals and companies. It's beyond a hard sell at this point for many people, and contradictory to the concept of a free society. Back when we had mostly horses providing transit, they consumed more energy than cars on an individual basis too, and created health problems with their waste... It's all just shifting the buck somewhere else, and not solving real underlying problems.
  - chickenpotpie 4y ago
    > Public transport was crippled during the pandemic for obvious reasons... Let's not forget that. A once a century event shouldn't define the other 98 years. > Getting rid of cars also means eliminating a huge volume of revenue from federal, state, and local government from related taxes... This means funding for bike lanes, roads, and even public transport, would evaporate. This is not an issue. If people aren't buying cars, they'll have more money that they'll spend on other things or we can just raise taxes because people have more money. > We still have major factories, ships, planes, and many other big business hallmarks that create the majority of pollution in the world (while the same companies try to portray that they are "green"). Conservation efforts are futile unless we start talking about the real issues, and create accountability, not if we leave rules up to profit seeking individuals and companies. We're never gonna solve climate change if we only focus on the biggest issues. It's multifaceted problem.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]