5 ms·
Until cultural pressure of nonacceptance of ecologically irresponsible suburban car-dependent lifestyle begins to outweigh traps of familiar American lifestyle,
by SomeRndName11 3y ago
Until cultural pressure of nonacceptance of ecologically irresponsible suburban car-dependent lifestyle begins to outweigh traps of familiar American lifestyle, the suburbs will be there.
- osigurdson 3y agoWhat if the car has no emissions?
- SomeRndName11 3y agoI wonder how? Powered by dark matter?
- lr4444lr 3y agoIs running wholly separate refrigeration, AC, ovens, and other electric power negligible? Average household size in cities tends to be smaller than the suburbs. The environmental argument always clings to cars, but emissions keep improving. Carbon footprint per person is really what we're talking about here.
- gottorf 3y ago> Carbon footprint per person is really what we're talking about here. On the other hand, increasing energy consumption per person is exactly equal to civilization and rising standards of living, so let's not be too hasty in condemning carbon footprint. Of course, ideally the energy we spend would be generated and stored via other sources; and technology will likely lead us in that direction.
- osigurdson 3y agoPowered by solar or nuclear.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- f1yght 3y agoWe still have to build and maintain roads for cars, which has its own emissions. EVs also weigh more and road damage cubes or ^4 with vehicle weight, so EVs also increase the cost and frequency of road repair. EVs are an improvement, but less cars and not needing to own a car is the better choice.
- hollerith 3y agoBecause it urbanized so late, China had the option to choose the alternative you advocate, but did not to take it: China is full of cars. In contrast, IIUC, landlines are basically not a thing in large parts of China because China adopted the telephone as a mass-market service so late that they had the option of making cellular-telephone network so reliable and so ubiquituous as to eliminate the need to run a wired telephone network to every residence, and IIUC China took that option. The fact that China is full of cars is (because Chinese policy makers are sensible practical people) at least some evidence that the alternative you advocate is not as great as you think it is.
- f1yght 3y agoI'm not sure how another urbanizing country choosing cars is evidence against my belief that denser and more walkable cities are better to live in. Places like the Netherlands are choosing to build dense walkable neighborhoods and in my opinion they seem really pleasant.
- hollerith 3y agoIf China had chosen the path that the Netherlands is taking, would you consider China's choice evidence for your belief? If so, then "the rules" dictate that you consider the fact that China chose the way it actually did as evidence against. To quote from https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jiBFC7DcCrZjGmZnJ/ https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/jiBFC7DcCrZjGmZnJ/ ("Conservation of Expected Evidence"): >So if you claim that “no sabotage” is evidence for the existence of a Japanese-American Fifth Column, you must conversely hold that seeing sabotage would argue against a Fifth Column. If you claim that “a good and proper life” is evidence that a woman is a witch, then an evil and improper life must be evidence that she is not a witch. If you argue that God, to test humanity’s faith, refuses to reveal His existence, then the miracles described in the Bible must argue against the existence of God.
- mjhay 3y agoEven an electric car has big embedded CO2, but CO2 isn't everything. Other environmental impacts - mining and fabrication of the batteries, steel, etc. Then, there's tire dust - one of the biggest sources of toxins and microplastics . Electric vehicles actually generate more tire dust, because they are much heavier than equivalent gas cars. Then, suburban development is an incredibly inefficient use of land. You're trading habitat, farmland, and aquifer recharging for ticky-tack houses on cul-de-sacs. All of those roads also reduce water quality from stormwater runoff, and cost a lot of CO2 (and dollars) to maintain.
- gottorf 3y ago> You're trading habitat, farmland, and aquifer recharging Habitat, sure, but farmland and aquifer recharging? I'd wager most suburbs in the US are cut out of forests, not existing farmland, and I see no reason why rainfall in the suburbs (low-density, with grass lawns) won't reach the aquifer the same way as whatever undeveloped land was there previously. In fact, dense cities will do worse in this regard, since there's more underground infrastructure and stormwater has to run off more.
- osigurdson 3y agoI think some people just don't like cars. That is completely fine, I don't really care about cars much myself. However, the odd thing is they don't want anyone to have a car. First the problem was emissions - which will eventually be fixable with EVs. But now they are too heavy and create too much "tire dust".
- mjhay 3y ago"People claim thing I like is bad, so they must be making it up."
- osigurdson 3y agoPlease define a hypothetical car that would be OK in your estimation. What properties would be required?
- rootusrootus 3y agoSo, never? Appreciation for community and antipathy towards high density anonymous living seems to grow with age, regardless of the generation. Young people are more tolerant of urban living.
- SomeRndName11 3y agoThis is very American way of thinking. My parents love living in their post-Soviet urban neighborhood, cause it is walkable, and every time they leave the apartment they meet their neighbors in the local park. It is total antitheis of "anonymous" living; in fact it is in suburbs you do not know anyone, except your direct cul-de-sac neighbors.