3 ms·
Even more incredible is that our parents and grandparents willingly drove cars that spewed out lead into the atmosphere. They knew lead was a poison. Even the
by Theodores 13y ago
Even more incredible is that our parents and grandparents willingly drove cars that spewed out lead into the atmosphere.
They knew lead was a poison.
Even the Romans knew lead was a poison so it wasn't like asbestos where suddenly a realisation was made.
Yet everyone pretended it did not matter. Everyone did what everyone else did. Nobody thought to avoid driving past schools because they weren't sure about the ethics of covering kids in a cloud of lead (with NO2, CO, O3, PAH's and maybe some invisible micro particles thrown into the mix).
- thrownaway2424 13y agoI don't think it's that people pretended it didn't matter. They intentionally sited the pollution in neighborhoods full of Those Other People. Take, as an example, my town of Oakland, California. Are there freeways all over West Oakland? You bet. Are there freeways in Piedmont? Of course not. Rich people have historically been pretty careful to keep the freeways out of their neighborhoods. Airborne lead doesn't get very far from the freeway before it hits the ground. Your overall point is right, though, that mid-20th-century motorist pretty much behaved like an oblivious jerk for decades.
- downandout 13y ago> "Rich people have historically been pretty careful to keep the freeways out of their neighborhoods." You're saying that had something to do with fear of lead poisoning?
- GFK_of_xmaspast 13y agoThere were and are lots of reasons for not wanting freeways in ones neighborhoods, the exhaust is only one of them.
- watwut 13y agoMore likely with general fear/dislike of air pollution combined with dislike of noise and high traffic itself. Living close to freeway is unpleasant, rich can afford something else, poor can not. Where it is not about about direct money, it is usually rich not poor who make decisions.
- jessaustin 13y agoWhile today it is largely a question of where one chooses, and can afford, to buy or rent, the freeways haven't been here forever. They were built within the last several generations, and always located so that they would destroy the livability of lower-class neighborhoods. The freeway concept is inherently unjust; it doesn't merely reflect the injustice of society.
- theandrewbailey 13y agoOur parents and grandparents were the joyriding dipshits.
- benjiweber 13y agoMany people still drive around cars that spew toxins into the atmosphere. Air pollution from cars kills 50,000 a year in the UK [0]. Apparently closer to 200,000 a year in the US. But it's even worse than that. 1.24 million each year are killed directly by motorists.[1] There are more young people killed directly by motorists than malaria or aids. And yet many people are happy to continue driving around. It's not like this is unavoidable. Electric cars are here, we could move the pollution out of cities. We could design our cities to be safer for walking and cycling. We could invest in public transport and pass on the cost of some of the externalities of cars to motorists. [0] http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/mar/22/air-pollution-deaths http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/mar/22/air-pollu... [1] http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs358/en/ http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs358/en/
- thaumasiotes 13y ago> Air pollution from cars kills 50,000 a year in the UK [0]. Apparently closer to 200,000 a year in the US. So just to be clear... you're complaining that the US has five times the population of the UK but four times the deaths from air pollution?
- sergiosgc 13y agoI don't know how it is where you live, but I pay about 60% tax on gas. This is quite common in Europe. How much more of the externalities do you want to burden drivers with?
- jessaustin 13y agoEnough to make them drive less!