4 ms·

I'm not sure that mass air transit has a place in a post-oil society were we try to leave at peace with the planet. Not just for the carbon impact, but also for

I'm not sure that mass air transit has a place in a post-oil society were we try to leave at peace with the planet. Not just for the carbon impact, but also for the diversity of our species and cultures. Should every Chinese and Indian visit Venice, even though it destroys the city little by little? Should we send things as futile as watermelons by plane? Of course, the market wills it so some may think that it must happen, yet I feel that the globalisation and massification of everything made the world a less diverse and interesting place overall.

317070 2mo ago
> I'm not sure that mass air transit has a place in a post-oil society were we try to leave at peace with the planet. Me neither, but that doesn't stop me from celebrating possible breakthroughs in decarbonisation.
pudgywalsh 2mo ago
> Should every Chinese and Indian visit Venice, even though it destroys the city little by little? Should we send things as futile as watermelons by plane Who are you to dictate where Chinese and Indians can and cannot visit or enjoy delicious watermelons? If someone wants to eat a watermelon like a dirty slave that is their business and you are not going to deny them that right. This is pure insanity. China and India are the biggest domestic aircraft markets in the world. The manufacturers literally cannot keep up with the demand. If trains were more effective they would have built them already. If California has taught us anything it's that implementation of high speed rail is a joke. I am appalled at the level of delusion and craziness in these responses, it would take a year to respond to them all. Air travel is not going anywhere and we are not setting society back 100 years on account of dubious climate histrionics. Want to save the environment? Ditch smartphones (future e-waste) and all their useless apps (and resource-sucking infra) we could all live without tomorrow. Turns out we were as effective in moving goods and services and leisure travel in 2008 as we are today. We just couldn't post to social media about how uncomfortable the airplane seat was and how the onboard Wi-Fi sucked.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- fc417fc802 2mo ago
  > If trains were more effective Well they're more convenient by virtue of being faster. The well off will inevitably pay for convenience if allowed. > If California has taught us anything it's that implementation of high speed rail is a joke. The only thing California stands as an example of in that regard is political dysfunction. A hypothetical benevolent dictator could have built out high speed rail there on time and on budget. > I am appalled at the level of delusion and craziness in these responses Has it not occurred to you that maybe that's a red flag that perhaps your own views or emotional state are a bit off? > on account of dubious climate histrionics. An empty dismissal of a vague and poorly defined (on your part) concept. How about engaging with a real position instead of name calling a straw man? > Ditch smartphones (future e-waste) And what do you suppose the combined total environmental impact is for those globally compared to other categories?
  - fragmede 2mo ago
    Billionaires tried to build a new city with California Forever but got shot down. It's politically dysfunctional to the max!
  - xp84 2mo ago
    You’ve got the answer with CAHSR. The only form of government that can build high-speed rail well is one like the CPC: a dictatorship which doesn’t need the consent of the governed. If we put them in charge of CAHSR they would have the job done in a couple years, but we would have to allow them to nationalize every single property in their way, by force if necessary, and cities, towns, unions, etc. would have no right to negotiate with them on any matter. All the problems they’ve had IRL are a result of them not being able to do whatever they want. Honestly I respect China a lot and it’s hard not to respect them when it comes to getting infra projects done, be it roads, trains, or whatever. But it’s not a system that has any overlap with the rights in our Constitution. Even Europeans expect more rights from their governments.
Larrikin 2mo ago
Why not stop other Europeans from going as well?
- ArnoVW 2mo ago
  They live closer by? So less miles travelled, and in many cases travelled by train? Depending on how you generate electricity that works out quite differently. Went to Venice by night train 15 years ago, would definitely recommend. Conversely, however, perhaps we should question Europeans massively going to Phuket.
- Saline9515 2mo ago
  I'm not against restricting internal tourism as well, at least the most destructive forms, such as cruises for instance. It's not just a question of CO2 pollution, but of human ecology as well: cities like Venice, Lisbon and Barcelona are being eaten out by tourism. What made them interesting is disappearing due to the local economy being highly disrupted by the massive inflows of tourists around the world.
rangestransform 2mo ago
No, we will not get to a post oil society by self flagellating like Europe, but by making sustainable options so cheap and plentiful that they displace unsustainable options. (Of course there’s some market intervention and government investment necessary to get there) One of these days, electricity will be so cheap that we can carbon capture our way back to 0C net warming and fuel flights for every Indian and Chinese with fuel made from CO2. The developing world will accept nothing less than the abundance route to decarbonization.
- Saline9515 2mo ago
  I don't understand, you want to create a copy of Venice? The issue is not just the pollution from air travel, but also the types of consumption and ways of life that it enables. Besides ressources are not unlimited so even if you have fee energy, you still need to extract aluminium etc from the ground, and pour concrete on land to build airports and oversized infrastructure. Ecology is not just a CO2 optimization game.
  - rangestransform 2mo ago
    The pressing issue for mankind is CO2 in particular and not this abstract notion that we ought to be noble savages

317070 2mo ago

> I'm not sure that mass air transit has a place in a post-oil society were we try to leave at peace with the planet. Me neither, but that doesn't stop me from celebrating possible breakthroughs in decarbonisation.

pudgywalsh 2mo ago

> Should every Chinese and Indian visit Venice, even though it destroys the city little by little? Should we send things as futile as watermelons by plane Who are you to dictate where Chinese and Indians can and cannot visit or enjoy delicious watermelons? If someone wants to eat a watermelon like a dirty slave that is their business and you are not going to deny them that right. This is pure insanity. China and India are the biggest domestic aircraft markets in the world. The manufacturers literally cannot keep up with the demand. If trains were more effective they would have built them already. If California has taught us anything it's that implementation of high speed rail is a joke. I am appalled at the level of delusion and craziness in these responses, it would take a year to respond to them all. Air travel is not going anywhere and we are not setting society back 100 years on account of dubious climate histrionics. Want to save the environment? Ditch smartphones (future e-waste) and all their useless apps (and resource-sucking infra) we could all live without tomorrow. Turns out we were as effective in moving goods and services and leisure travel in 2008 as we are today. We just couldn't post to social media about how uncomfortable the airplane seat was and how the onboard Wi-Fi sucked.

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
fc417fc802 2mo ago
> If trains were more effective Well they're more convenient by virtue of being faster. The well off will inevitably pay for convenience if allowed. > If California has taught us anything it's that implementation of high speed rail is a joke. The only thing California stands as an example of in that regard is political dysfunction. A hypothetical benevolent dictator could have built out high speed rail there on time and on budget. > I am appalled at the level of delusion and craziness in these responses Has it not occurred to you that maybe that's a red flag that perhaps your own views or emotional state are a bit off? > on account of dubious climate histrionics. An empty dismissal of a vague and poorly defined (on your part) concept. How about engaging with a real position instead of name calling a straw man? > Ditch smartphones (future e-waste) And what do you suppose the combined total environmental impact is for those globally compared to other categories?
- fragmede 2mo ago
  Billionaires tried to build a new city with California Forever but got shot down. It's politically dysfunctional to the max!
- xp84 2mo ago
  You’ve got the answer with CAHSR. The only form of government that can build high-speed rail well is one like the CPC: a dictatorship which doesn’t need the consent of the governed. If we put them in charge of CAHSR they would have the job done in a couple years, but we would have to allow them to nationalize every single property in their way, by force if necessary, and cities, towns, unions, etc. would have no right to negotiate with them on any matter. All the problems they’ve had IRL are a result of them not being able to do whatever they want. Honestly I respect China a lot and it’s hard not to respect them when it comes to getting infra projects done, be it roads, trains, or whatever. But it’s not a system that has any overlap with the rights in our Constitution. Even Europeans expect more rights from their governments.

Larrikin 2mo ago

Why not stop other Europeans from going as well?

ArnoVW 2mo ago
They live closer by? So less miles travelled, and in many cases travelled by train? Depending on how you generate electricity that works out quite differently. Went to Venice by night train 15 years ago, would definitely recommend. Conversely, however, perhaps we should question Europeans massively going to Phuket.
Saline9515 2mo ago
I'm not against restricting internal tourism as well, at least the most destructive forms, such as cruises for instance. It's not just a question of CO2 pollution, but of human ecology as well: cities like Venice, Lisbon and Barcelona are being eaten out by tourism. What made them interesting is disappearing due to the local economy being highly disrupted by the massive inflows of tourists around the world.

rangestransform 2mo ago

No, we will not get to a post oil society by self flagellating like Europe, but by making sustainable options so cheap and plentiful that they displace unsustainable options. (Of course there’s some market intervention and government investment necessary to get there) One of these days, electricity will be so cheap that we can carbon capture our way back to 0C net warming and fuel flights for every Indian and Chinese with fuel made from CO2. The developing world will accept nothing less than the abundance route to decarbonization.

Saline9515 2mo ago
I don't understand, you want to create a copy of Venice? The issue is not just the pollution from air travel, but also the types of consumption and ways of life that it enables. Besides ressources are not unlimited so even if you have fee energy, you still need to extract aluminium etc from the ground, and pour concrete on land to build airports and oversized infrastructure. Ecology is not just a CO2 optimization game.
- rangestransform 2mo ago
  The pressing issue for mankind is CO2 in particular and not this abstract notion that we ought to be noble savages