4 ms·

You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. The reality is the on

You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. The reality is the only thing stopping most trips from being made in a light vehicle is the unchecked externalities from the large ones. And only one long range vehicle is 'needed' per household

Retric 4y ago
Most households don’t always take long trips to the same places especially when you’re talking long trips in terms of small EV batteries. I am all for improving cities, but just as a baseline not everyone lives in cities. Any long term plan needs to consider everyone not just people who live in dense enough areas public transportation is a clear win. Sure, ban cars in the center of cities, just don’t expect that to change how large most people want their car’s battery to be. This article and discussion is doing the thing where you exaggerate a small problem to promote something that’s almost but not quite entirely unrelated to it. If you want people to use small batteries in EV’s electrify roads so people can travel on them without using a battery. If you want to reduce the need for cars do that, but don’t pretend lithium mining somehow requires changing cities. Because arguing from a false premise weakens your argument when people see through it.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. Dense rural environments served by transit exist, and the cause of a lot of travel is getting past all the car infrastructure. Driving is the singularly most destructive and dangerous thing that humans have invented and CO2 is just the worst of its many downsides, the resources and space that go into them and the infrastructure is probably about third on the list after the millions it kills, lithium is just one aspect of that.
  - Retric 4y ago
    Next medical emergency picture staying at home without driving or taking an ambulance for prompt medical care. That’s the world without cars for the vast majority of humanity. Cars have literally saved hundreds of millions of lives. You may pretend I am talking about one person, yet I am describing the vast majority of humanity when I say the car has been one of the greatest inventions of all time. Greatly surpassing computers, telephones, and just about everything else you depend on daily. > Dense rural environments served by transit exist There are no dense rural environments, you may be confused at what this term means but towns are not rural. The term is referring to a lack of density.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Rural just means a low average density and low town population. You could have a single building with 2499 people every 4km with a train stop on the ground floor and it would count as rural. <20% of the US population lives in rural areas, and <20% of those are more than 10 miles from their third nearest food shop. If a region can service three food shops and a hospital it can support regional transit. Personally not wanting to doesn't make it impossible to travel 10 miles by bike or LEV.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      You're pulling out the straw man where stopping the sreets being choked with parked cars and traffic somehow means ambulances can't move through them. > There are no dense rural environments, you may be confused at what this term means but towns are not rural. The term is referring to a lack of density. You can have a region with low density where the services are all concentrated. Your straw man about making it so people can do something OTHER than use a car somehow meaning all cars vanish is also extremely tiresome.
      - Retric 4y ago
        No, I am saying without the invention of cars there are no ambulances or trips to the hospital in the. > You can have a region with low density where the services are all concentrated. We call such things towns.

Retric 4y ago

Most households don’t always take long trips to the same places especially when you’re talking long trips in terms of small EV batteries. I am all for improving cities, but just as a baseline not everyone lives in cities. Any long term plan needs to consider everyone not just people who live in dense enough areas public transportation is a clear win. Sure, ban cars in the center of cities, just don’t expect that to change how large most people want their car’s battery to be. This article and discussion is doing the thing where you exaggerate a small problem to promote something that’s almost but not quite entirely unrelated to it. If you want people to use small batteries in EV’s electrify roads so people can travel on them without using a battery. If you want to reduce the need for cars do that, but don’t pretend lithium mining somehow requires changing cities. Because arguing from a false premise weakens your argument when people see through it.

Schroedingersat 4y ago
You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. Dense rural environments served by transit exist, and the cause of a lot of travel is getting past all the car infrastructure. Driving is the singularly most destructive and dangerous thing that humans have invented and CO2 is just the worst of its many downsides, the resources and space that go into them and the infrastructure is probably about third on the list after the millions it kills, lithium is just one aspect of that.
- Retric 4y ago
  Next medical emergency picture staying at home without driving or taking an ambulance for prompt medical care. That’s the world without cars for the vast majority of humanity. Cars have literally saved hundreds of millions of lives. You may pretend I am talking about one person, yet I am describing the vast majority of humanity when I say the car has been one of the greatest inventions of all time. Greatly surpassing computers, telephones, and just about everything else you depend on daily. > Dense rural environments served by transit exist There are no dense rural environments, you may be confused at what this term means but towns are not rural. The term is referring to a lack of density.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Rural just means a low average density and low town population. You could have a single building with 2499 people every 4km with a train stop on the ground floor and it would count as rural. <20% of the US population lives in rural areas, and <20% of those are more than 10 miles from their third nearest food shop. If a region can service three food shops and a hospital it can support regional transit. Personally not wanting to doesn't make it impossible to travel 10 miles by bike or LEV.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    You're pulling out the straw man where stopping the sreets being choked with parked cars and traffic somehow means ambulances can't move through them. > There are no dense rural environments, you may be confused at what this term means but towns are not rural. The term is referring to a lack of density. You can have a region with low density where the services are all concentrated. Your straw man about making it so people can do something OTHER than use a car somehow meaning all cars vanish is also extremely tiresome.
    - Retric 4y ago
      No, I am saying without the invention of cars there are no ambulances or trips to the hospital in the. > You can have a region with low density where the services are all concentrated. We call such things towns.