9 ms·

How about: Cars aren’t the only answer ?

pjmlp 4y ago
Indeed lets go back to keeping horses and only the wealthy ones being able to go around dry in chariots, and servants to transport goods by whatever means they have.
- dotcoma 4y ago
  Servants ARE transporting goods for us. It’s called Doordash, Uber Eats, or Foodora, Glovo, JustEat in Europe etc.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    For proper servants they need to be happy with food and housing, otherwise they are only exploited employees for the salaries they get. Hey that is what happens when people feel like not joining a union and adopt an each for itself strategy.
yunohn 4y ago
Well, you need to replace fossil fuel with electricity/hydrogen for public transport as well. The question is still valid?
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Not only that, for infrastructure reasons public transport outside dense cities is non existent, and paying for taxis for every routes outside the main ones makes it out of budget for many persons. A single taxi ride can pay for quite a few liters of fuel.
- reocha 4y ago
  Public transport is already more efficient from the get go [1], so less work has to be done to meet emmission targets. It is also probably easier to electrify a countries rail/bus network as opposed to a full population's personal vehicles. Steel on steel also releases less dangerous pollutants like car tyres. [2] Public transport also comes with many other benefits over cars (quieter cities, less deaths from collisions, fitter population). For super low population density locations cars will probably remain the only possible solution, but for most of the population we really need to implement a movement away from car dependence. [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984685/transport-and-environment-statistics-2021.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... Page 3 [2] https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-worse-exhaust-emissions https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-...
  - yunohn 4y ago
    There’s a difference between politically defined emission targets and the reality of fossil fuel usage regardless of public transport efficiency.
    - reocha 4y ago
      Yes, but if public transport is more efficient then there are less emmisssions to reduce in the first place.
iasay 4y ago
This is my view. Restructure society around less transport.
- zx8080 4y ago
  Like paid permits to travel to a city nearby and visas for inter-state travelling? Sounds so 2022.
  - iasay 4y ago
    I'm not sure why everyone defaults to dystopia. Just move things around so people don't have to sit in traffic or commute for 4 hours a day.
- libertine 4y ago
  That would only work in big cities.
jeremy_clarkson 4y ago
Also cars, do not have to be today's cars. Like, the market fucked us all over with this SUV craze. It should be first priority to reverse this madness. Nobody needs to drive around in a 5ton tank. Second, inner city driving should be done in even smaller cars. You do not need a full sized car, designed for seating 5, just for commuting or to go shopping.
- escalt 4y ago
  Inner city driving should be restricted to service vehicles only. The inner city should be dense enough that shopping is easily done by foot or by bike, and things further away are covered by a tram or bus line within walking distance
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    The joy of being in a full packed bus with the shopping goods and sweaty people without any kind of air-conditioning.
    - escalt 4y ago
      Shopping would optimally happen by foot or by bike. Somewhat impossible with US zoning laws, but in a decent mixed use neighborhood a grocery store would be a <5 minutes walk from home, with actual sidewalks and no highways in between. And overcrowded buses happen in underfunded bus systems with not enough capacity or on peak times. Consider increasing the frequency or upgrading to a tram line if your buses are always full
      - r00fus 4y ago
        Yes, visiting France, it's amazing to me how local laws have resulted in shopping that's accessible by most via bike/walk/tram (ie, car not needed). I saw dozens of these folks doing that as an activity with their kids on the weekend (of course, French have lots more vacation too so they can afford to combine exercise + commerce). The captured regulatory system in the US benefits corporations first, and people last.
jokoon 4y ago
The solution has always been electric trains. Make transport public, add more public transportation. That's the pill nobody wants to swallow. It's not a technology problem, it's a political one. American auto lobbies destroyed public transport, it's not a secret. Here is france a lot of busses use a LNG/fuel mix. Regional trains have room where you can put a bike. Take a quarter of what is being spent on domestics cars, and allocate it on public transport, instead of subsidizing oil. Unfortunately, making something for the community so it can be collective, is immediately seen as a socialist or communist measure in the US, so it will probably take a revolution. Americans will continue to be one the largest emitter per capita, and will lose the fight on the environment, while countries like china are already building a lot of nuclear power plants.

Indeed lets go back to keeping horses and only the wealthy ones being able to go around dry in chariots, and servants to transport goods by whatever means they have.

dotcoma 4y ago
Servants ARE transporting goods for us. It’s called Doordash, Uber Eats, or Foodora, Glovo, JustEat in Europe etc.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  For proper servants they need to be happy with food and housing, otherwise they are only exploited employees for the salaries they get. Hey that is what happens when people feel like not joining a union and adopt an each for itself strategy.

yunohn 4y ago

Well, you need to replace fossil fuel with electricity/hydrogen for public transport as well. The question is still valid?

pjmlp 4y ago
Not only that, for infrastructure reasons public transport outside dense cities is non existent, and paying for taxis for every routes outside the main ones makes it out of budget for many persons. A single taxi ride can pay for quite a few liters of fuel.
reocha 4y ago
Public transport is already more efficient from the get go [1], so less work has to be done to meet emmission targets. It is also probably easier to electrify a countries rail/bus network as opposed to a full population's personal vehicles. Steel on steel also releases less dangerous pollutants like car tyres. [2] Public transport also comes with many other benefits over cars (quieter cities, less deaths from collisions, fitter population). For super low population density locations cars will probably remain the only possible solution, but for most of the population we really need to implement a movement away from car dependence. [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984685/transport-and-environment-statistics-2021.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... Page 3 [2] https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-worse-exhaust-emissions https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-...
- yunohn 4y ago
  There’s a difference between politically defined emission targets and the reality of fossil fuel usage regardless of public transport efficiency.
  - reocha 4y ago
    Yes, but if public transport is more efficient then there are less emmisssions to reduce in the first place.

iasay 4y ago

This is my view. Restructure society around less transport.

zx8080 4y ago
Like paid permits to travel to a city nearby and visas for inter-state travelling? Sounds so 2022.
- iasay 4y ago
  I'm not sure why everyone defaults to dystopia. Just move things around so people don't have to sit in traffic or commute for 4 hours a day.
libertine 4y ago
That would only work in big cities.

jeremy_clarkson 4y ago

Also cars, do not have to be today's cars. Like, the market fucked us all over with this SUV craze. It should be first priority to reverse this madness. Nobody needs to drive around in a 5ton tank. Second, inner city driving should be done in even smaller cars. You do not need a full sized car, designed for seating 5, just for commuting or to go shopping.

escalt 4y ago
Inner city driving should be restricted to service vehicles only. The inner city should be dense enough that shopping is easily done by foot or by bike, and things further away are covered by a tram or bus line within walking distance
- pjmlp 4y ago
  The joy of being in a full packed bus with the shopping goods and sweaty people without any kind of air-conditioning.
  - escalt 4y ago
    Shopping would optimally happen by foot or by bike. Somewhat impossible with US zoning laws, but in a decent mixed use neighborhood a grocery store would be a <5 minutes walk from home, with actual sidewalks and no highways in between. And overcrowded buses happen in underfunded bus systems with not enough capacity or on peak times. Consider increasing the frequency or upgrading to a tram line if your buses are always full
    - r00fus 4y ago
      Yes, visiting France, it's amazing to me how local laws have resulted in shopping that's accessible by most via bike/walk/tram (ie, car not needed). I saw dozens of these folks doing that as an activity with their kids on the weekend (of course, French have lots more vacation too so they can afford to combine exercise + commerce). The captured regulatory system in the US benefits corporations first, and people last.

jokoon 4y ago

The solution has always been electric trains. Make transport public, add more public transportation. That's the pill nobody wants to swallow. It's not a technology problem, it's a political one. American auto lobbies destroyed public transport, it's not a secret. Here is france a lot of busses use a LNG/fuel mix. Regional trains have room where you can put a bike. Take a quarter of what is being spent on domestics cars, and allocate it on public transport, instead of subsidizing oil. Unfortunately, making something for the community so it can be collective, is immediately seen as a socialist or communist measure in the US, so it will probably take a revolution. Americans will continue to be one the largest emitter per capita, and will lose the fight on the environment, while countries like china are already building a lot of nuclear power plants.