4 ms·

Wouldn't per capita emissions in a city be lower? Simply because of transport - we're far more likely to use public transport than folks living in rural areas.

renewiltord 3y ago
Yeah but per-capita emissions were revealed to me to be a trick that corporations have played on us to make us take responsibility for their sins. It was easier to ebike in the city, for sure. But a GMC Sierra makes the hills all right too. And it’s much better here for the environment because I’m not endorsing the capitalist view that everything should be grey concrete.
- drewcoo 3y ago
  > per-capita emissions were revealed to me to be a trick that corporations have played As opposed to individually moving to a rural area "since it’s better for the environment?" To be fair, for Zaphod Beeblebrox "per capita" doesn't mean "individually," but . . .
randomdata 3y ago
But use transport daily. Ironically, at least in the typical North American city, you can’t do anything without a machine to take you over long distances. In the rural area, you maybe travel once a week to stock up but otherwise don’t need transportation at all.
- Whoppertime 3y ago
  The bicycle machine emits nothing and can be used pretty easily in cities.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - randomdata 3y ago
    Emits nothing only if you ignore the engine. Some studies suggest that human CO2 emissions increase eightfold while exercising.
    - lo0dot0 3y ago
      A car is more or less efficient than cycling, depending on the food, car and source of electrical power, and manufacturing CO2 production. The bicycle production emits a less CO2 than the car production, tilting the comparison at the beginning of the lifecycle of both. The GHG emissions associated with food intake required to fuel a kilometre of walking range between 0.05 kgCO2e/km in the least economically developed countries to 0.26 kgCO2e/km in the most economically developed countries. A Tesla model 3 according to WLTP test cycle uses 0.191 kWh / km * 0.434 kgCO2e/kWh = 0.083 kgCO2e / km Sources https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-66170-y https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-66170-y https://www.tesla.com/de_DE/support/european-union-energy-label https://www.tesla.com/de_DE/support/european-union-energy-la... https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/co2-emissionen-pro-kilowattstunde-strom-stiegen-in https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/co2-emissionen-pro-kil...
      - randomdata 3y ago
        The alternative is to stay close to home, not drive a vehicle of any kind. But the North American city, strangely, scatters everything over large distances, making life impractical without a machine to carry you.
    - HenryBemis 3y ago
      (I will reply in 9gag-style) Hi, CO2 and work-out Captain here. I don't know how much CO2 you typically exhale when you do push ups but it is nothing near the exhaust fumes by your 5lt gasoline SUV built in 1990.
      - randomdata 3y ago
        It’s funny how travel has become so ingrained into the urban psyche that it doesn’t occur that not travelling is an option. It’s especially funny as you would think the whole reason people want to live so close to other people is because they don’t want to travel far to engage with other people… Yet it is always about how to get as far away from them as possible, whether by bike or train or whatever it takes.
  - pxeboot 3y ago
    > The bicycle machine emits nothing The tires and some types of brakes still emit micro plastics.
    - maigret 3y ago
      How much? If that's 1% of car (making this up), would this be a real practical issue? By the way this argumentation is great to sabotage any argument to keep the statusquo. When someone argues for a way better solution, tell why it's still not 100% perfect to make people to believe it has the same flaws than the previous state. Repeat until someone finds a 100% perfect solution (hint: there is never such a thing).
      - randomdata 3y ago
        > By the way this argumentation is great to sabotage any argument to keep the statusquo. Exactly. The direction we need to head is obvious: Stop treating cities like wanna rural areas for poor people and turn them into actual cities, where everything is right there and travel isn't necessary – not by car, not by train, not by bike, not by anything. But, indeed, a move from the status quo is uncomfortable, so we get silly things like "But, but, my bike is better than a car!", completely missing the forest for the trees.
      - pxeboot 3y ago
        I am not arguing against biking, just pointing out that with current materials, there is still pollution emitted. As you said, cars are likely exponentially worse. Shoes have the same problem, except for some very expensive artisan brands. They may actually be worse per mile than biking.

renewiltord 3y ago

Yeah but per-capita emissions were revealed to me to be a trick that corporations have played on us to make us take responsibility for their sins. It was easier to ebike in the city, for sure. But a GMC Sierra makes the hills all right too. And it’s much better here for the environment because I’m not endorsing the capitalist view that everything should be grey concrete.

drewcoo 3y ago
> per-capita emissions were revealed to me to be a trick that corporations have played As opposed to individually moving to a rural area "since it’s better for the environment?" To be fair, for Zaphod Beeblebrox "per capita" doesn't mean "individually," but . . .

randomdata 3y ago

But use transport daily. Ironically, at least in the typical North American city, you can’t do anything without a machine to take you over long distances. In the rural area, you maybe travel once a week to stock up but otherwise don’t need transportation at all.

Whoppertime 3y ago
The bicycle machine emits nothing and can be used pretty easily in cities.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- randomdata 3y ago
  Emits nothing only if you ignore the engine. Some studies suggest that human CO2 emissions increase eightfold while exercising.
  - lo0dot0 3y ago
    A car is more or less efficient than cycling, depending on the food, car and source of electrical power, and manufacturing CO2 production. The bicycle production emits a less CO2 than the car production, tilting the comparison at the beginning of the lifecycle of both. The GHG emissions associated with food intake required to fuel a kilometre of walking range between 0.05 kgCO2e/km in the least economically developed countries to 0.26 kgCO2e/km in the most economically developed countries. A Tesla model 3 according to WLTP test cycle uses 0.191 kWh / km * 0.434 kgCO2e/kWh = 0.083 kgCO2e / km Sources https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-66170-y https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-66170-y https://www.tesla.com/de_DE/support/european-union-energy-label https://www.tesla.com/de_DE/support/european-union-energy-la... https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/co2-emissionen-pro-kilowattstunde-strom-stiegen-in https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/co2-emissionen-pro-kil...
    - randomdata 3y ago
      The alternative is to stay close to home, not drive a vehicle of any kind. But the North American city, strangely, scatters everything over large distances, making life impractical without a machine to carry you.
  - HenryBemis 3y ago
    (I will reply in 9gag-style) Hi, CO2 and work-out Captain here. I don't know how much CO2 you typically exhale when you do push ups but it is nothing near the exhaust fumes by your 5lt gasoline SUV built in 1990.
    - randomdata 3y ago
      It’s funny how travel has become so ingrained into the urban psyche that it doesn’t occur that not travelling is an option. It’s especially funny as you would think the whole reason people want to live so close to other people is because they don’t want to travel far to engage with other people… Yet it is always about how to get as far away from them as possible, whether by bike or train or whatever it takes.
- pxeboot 3y ago
  > The bicycle machine emits nothing The tires and some types of brakes still emit micro plastics.
  - maigret 3y ago
    How much? If that's 1% of car (making this up), would this be a real practical issue? By the way this argumentation is great to sabotage any argument to keep the statusquo. When someone argues for a way better solution, tell why it's still not 100% perfect to make people to believe it has the same flaws than the previous state. Repeat until someone finds a 100% perfect solution (hint: there is never such a thing).
    - randomdata 3y ago
      > By the way this argumentation is great to sabotage any argument to keep the statusquo. Exactly. The direction we need to head is obvious: Stop treating cities like wanna rural areas for poor people and turn them into actual cities, where everything is right there and travel isn't necessary – not by car, not by train, not by bike, not by anything. But, indeed, a move from the status quo is uncomfortable, so we get silly things like "But, but, my bike is better than a car!", completely missing the forest for the trees.
    - pxeboot 3y ago
      I am not arguing against biking, just pointing out that with current materials, there is still pollution emitted. As you said, cars are likely exponentially worse. Shoes have the same problem, except for some very expensive artisan brands. They may actually be worse per mile than biking.