Right is possible if economy is local. Left is actual real life because of capitalism needs bigger markets in in small areas for maximing profits.
You can’t have bigger markets in smaller areas with cars because the cars take up so much space. Public transport gives access while still allowing for density, which provides a much larger market. The only ones losing out are the auto makers and oil companies.
They’re a solution, not the solution indeed.
I’d call them less a solution, more an attempt at harm reduction.
And the only things they’ll properly resolve are tailpipe emissions and idling noise. At least one of which is of no concern when dealing with the externalities of car traffic.
If you really want to solve the environmental impact of transportation, you minimise the need for transportation. Put homes and workplaces close together, offer mass alternatives for the pairs where you really do need motorised mobility solutions, and minimise the number of situations where it’s more convenient to take a car. Ban on-street parking and heavily tax off-street parking. Need to park your car in the city? Hope you can afford to pay an arm and a leg. Oh, you can’t? Looks the Park & Ride at the train station two towns over is the nearest alternative. Don’t worry though, the trains go six times an hour and a day ticket is, like, four quid max.
Quid: you’re British. Great.
You’re smaller in area than Texas. It’s a little easier for you to stay close to everything, you’re never more than 70 miles away from the sea.
Look mate, if you’re going to shove the “tHe stATeS arE ToO bIG, thus wE cANNot SOlvE The transIt ProbleM” rhetoric on us, please find another place to wallow in your lack of trains while assuming car industry rhetoric as undeniable fact.
Also, your claim has been debunked and reclarified so often that I’m not going to begin to explain just how wrong you are.
You guys are all idiots. A bunch of Europeans lucked into an infrastructure that works with twice the people in half the space, and you act like it was an intentional and smarter design decision in anticipation of a climate crisis. You shipped your most insane people off your continent to become Americans, and their shitty Calvinism has made everything that has always been terrible about Northern Europe even worse.
Now you want to act like anyone who thinks what you propose isn’t exactly easy (or democratic) is some kind of corporate fascist. Fuck off, the lot of you.
I don’t think they’re even a solution. They’re just another scam like hydrogen fuel cells were. They exist to keep people from pushing for the real change we actually need… Just like the decade we lost because people bought the hydrogen fuel cell grift last time.
They are a patch, not a solution.
I live in GA outside of Atlanta and rent is already tough. I’ve been to cities with not exactly amazing but serviceable public transportation (various parts of greater NYC and Chicago) and loved them. I’ve tried to use busses elsewhere, though it often meant 3 hours wasted to go to work, with similar time wasted after (hourly buss schedules and multiple transfers).
I have an electric car now, work from home, and try to avoid having to drive much, but there isn’t much more I can afford to do atm. An bike would be nice but even that’ll take money I’m still recovering, and some places I go to even just a couple times a month has no public transportation. I’d love if it did, but I have to use EV for now.
I think when most people decry EVs, we’re not talking about individual EV owners but the system which forces basically everyone to move around by personal vehicle. Sure, they’ll be the occasional person who says, “I bike 28km to and from work at a very physical job where I often work overtime. I have to share the road with traffic. I don’t know why everyone can’t commute by bike,” (this was the gist of a comment I read on reddit years ago). However, most people understand that changes can’t just be personal responsibility.
With the information we have about your life, it sounds like you made a reasonable decision. If you can continue to be mindful about the decisions you make and advocate for a better world when you can, I think you’re doing a great job!
Sorry, chief. We don’t do nuanced thought in this community.
The problem is people got the idea that they need a 3 ton truck to do grocery shopping
The other option to “reduce” cars is replan and rebuild entire cities, districts and even countries around the idea of places being nearby enough to be able to walk or cycle. And cars would still be needed.
This is why mobile electric cars are an easier option. It turns out that there has to be some level of autonomy and ownership, rather than thinking purging cars out of existence will suddenly move us towards full communism, or whatever the idea is. Allowing personal ownership means people have ways to rebuild places to live or migrate for themselves.
The bigger problem is not the smaller cars, but the SUVs and mini trucks everyone loves to have, and multiple car ownership. Pareto frontier is the key to everything, cutting down on emissions and too many cars on roads included.
In Case of Electric-Car Fire, Half of Fire Departments Are Unprepared
the car fires for EV are very much a different thing.
I mean when it burns it burns, it’s a total either way, it just blocks traffic longer than a normal car, with the upside of not leaking burnable liquids that can do damage in larger areas.
You do understand there are things called „apartment blocks“ that have garages in the basement, right?
Honest question. Does anyone here have enough humility to understand there’s a similar checklist of things an automobile solves?
Now it doesn’t mean it’s the right solution but particularly in North America due to lack of XYZ automobiles are king.
It’s very easy to go “hurr durr automobiles bad” but do you understand the multitude of reasons why we use them? All the things that need to be improved or fixed before we entertain the alternatives?
Saying this as a car owner who takes public transit far more than other car owners.
“Does anyone here have enough humility to understand there’s a similar checklist of things an automobile solves?”
Firstly, this feels a very confrontational way of phrasing the question. It carries with it the assumption that you are right and everyone else is wrong, which I don’t feel is a helpful way of approaching a discussion.
Yes, of course people realise that car ownership is the only viable solution for individuals at the current time. You have engaged with a community who are passionate about and engaged in urban planning, so they are going to be more switched onto the challenges than most.
The entire point is that on their own they are not a sustainable solution long-term. They are hugely inefficient energy and space-wise, their infrastructure causes massive damage to the communities they carve through (see this Guardian article for a breakdown of some NA case studies), and they currently cause a huge amount of environmental damage.
So, the question becomes: how can we remove the need for car ownership? There’s a host of ideas, from better high speed rail links to eliminate long-distance trips, to micromobility and demand responsive transport for short-distance, to better constructing our cities to begin with to allow for amenities to be walkable. Are we going to eliminate car use in rural areas? Of course not; there’s no point running a bus service for a village of 10 people and a goat. Can we eliminate 99% of car trips for those in built up areas, improving air quality, walkability, and accessibility? That should absolutely be the goal.
TL;DR: hurr durr fuck cars
Like, I get your overall point, but the whiskey to wine comparison doesn’t quite work lol.
For starters, you’d have to drink a LOT more wine comparatively, which doesn’t translate when going from ICE to electric.
It does, because the batteries for electric cars have a reliance on rare earth metals.
Lol the downvotes are hilarious. We will not solve climate change with electric cars. Public transit in walkable communities with niche uses for cars and trucks are the only way forward.
This is why people hate liberals, and why liberals often migrate over to conservatism: no matter how right you are, there’s always someone happy to crap on you for not being right enough.
Don’t shit on EVs for merely being one of many solutions that all need to be engaged with. It’s not like without EVs, so many people would be rushing to areas of greater density and riding public transit, so your message is not helpful in achieving what you want, and actively angers your allies.
I really have to agree that it’s posts like this that made me give up on left wing politics, in certainly not right wing but I see no hope for the left until fundermental problems are fixed which I don’t believe politics or media is capable of addressing.
Further I am absolutely convinced a large portion of the loudest voices on climate change are so obsessed because they desperately want it to be the big doom that fucks up all the impressive things other people are achieving.
Ah yes conservatism, the famous side of rational thinking and anti-bias thoughts, such as avoiding the perfect solution bias
Your comment having so many upvotes is disgustingThis is a lot like this Bors comic https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/8/8/1786532/-Cartoon-You-made-me-become-a-Nazi
Do honest people really migrate to “climate change is fake and queer people are a threat” because someone was mean to them online? Probably not often.
Do you even know what community you’re commenting in
Fuck cars?
I hate ignorant conservatives, but you mostly can’t do much about them because they listen to no one. But progressive ignorance is something I feel compelled to correct: progressives pretend to care about things other than their own assholes.
Meaningless meme. Because people see problems with your simplistic stance doesn’t make them Trump. There should be a plan to get there from here, and right now, you guys are removed about EVs, which are part of the plan for getting there from here.
This is … why liberals often migrate over to conservatism
Yes, all those actually leftist people who are driven to become fascist 🤡
You’re not an ally.
“Being inefficient” is bit bullshit though.
Why? Cars are more inefficient than nearly every other mode of transport, whether we’re talking energy efficiency, space efficiency or cost efficiency. Only air travel is worse. But those modes make up for that in some circumstances by being fast, convenient and flexible.
Because the infographic isn’t comparing cars to other forms of transit. It’s comparing one type of car to another. Electric cars are incredibly efficient, for what it is.
It’s a meme, it absolutely is comparing both kinds of cars to other modes of transport.
Disagree on inefficient.
Internal combustion engines in standard small size convert 19.65-22.1% of their energy from thermal to kinetic.
The ratio of electron throughput from battery to electric motor can be as LOW as 88% but hovers between 92-98% efficiency.
Even if you had a fuel cell in the back, running electric motors quintuples (5×) the standard energy efficiency owing to the principle of energy quality type preservation in conversion (High to High vs Low to High):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_transformation
So 1 electric car = 4 less carbon liquid fuelled cars worth of pollution.
What you’re actually looking for is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
Jevon’s Paradox states that improved efficiency of something will only increase its use, and in this case, electric cars will in fact, correlate to car use, and increased mineral demands.
This is a problem you cannot solve endemic to humanity.
I think the point is that compared to public transport when transporting a large number of people, they are inefficient.
I think you missed the meaning of inefficency on this matter…
While it is undeniable that electric cars have a better supply-to-engine energy efficency than combustion cars, you can understand that they are equiparated in the meme as “equally bad” if you think outside of the box labelled “rubber wheels on high friction asphalt transporting usually a single individual”.
Compare that with a tram or a train, transporting multiple passengers with the same electric engine but also steel-on-steel friction on the wheels and the difference between an ICE and EV vehicle becomes a mere approximation error; god I can do the math for you if you want, but I bet even a disel bus with a lot of passengers has a better efficency/passenger ratio than an EV.
So 1 electric car = 4 less carbon liquid fuelled cars worth of pollution.
Also I think this is a bit misleading: if I buy an EV this won’t magically destroy 4 (where is this number from?) already existing carbon liquid cars, it merely means you avoided adding 1 other ICE car to the total.
When is it efficient to carry several tons of steel with you to pick up eggs and milk?
If you’re advocating for reduced car use, increased micromobility and public transportation in the community, voting for change, and doing you’re part where you can, good on ya, you’re fighting the good fight. If you’re unilaterally calling for cars to be abolished, saying that anyone that owns a vehicle is the worst, and shitting on electric cars which are substantially better for the planet simply on the basis of “BAHT ITS STILL A CAR” then you’re an embarrassment and damaging the cause. I have zero doubts big oil and gas is doing everything they can to propagate these views on electric cars in communities and view holders like this, so congrats on being in their back pocket.
This community is so self-damaging to their own cause with their extremist hyperbole.
Anyone with 2 brain cells would agree that better city infrastructure, and increased use of public transportation is a good thing, but anyone with 2 brain cells should also be able to recognize that the car will 100%, absolutely, be necessary on some level basically until we’re able to teleport, and that unilaterally calling for bans on cars (which I’m embarrassed to say is a view that is actually a thing in this community) puts you in our less than 2 brain cells bracket unfortunately.
It reminds me of vegans alienating and crapping on vegetarians, or meatless Monday folks who are trying to do their part but might not be ready for the lifestyle change yet. LIke wtf, we’re all on the same side here.
I live in the northernmost million + population city in all of the Americas (Edmonton), and provide in home healthcare services to children with disabilities across the city. I’m not going to bus, bike, or walk in -30-40 C weather in the dead of winter when I have to be at my next visit across the city in 20 minutes. If you think that’s a feasible thing, then you need to reassess your deluded opinions, and put your money where your mouth is and take the train to the hospital rather than an ambulance next time you need to.
To be fair I’m in a minority, weather and profession wise, no doubt. But there’s a HUGE number of people, also simply because the infrastructure hasn’t caught up yet in many places, where this isn’t possible. I feel like most of these, blinders on bonkers people, are those that live European cities with fantastic public transportation (which again, is THE DREAM for real), but somehow think that this London, Paris, Amsterdam-esque fair weathered, public transportation dream is just the norm everywhere and are somehow unaware that the rest of the ruddy world exists outside their little bubble?? (and before I hear anyone saying “oh but it snows sometimes here too in London”; buddy… Visit northern Canada. These places are fair weathered).
So next time you’re about to post some toxic bullshit like this checkbox picture, remember:
- Crap on public infrastructure.
- Crap on politicians not doing enough, and fight like hell for change.
- Don’t crap on people who are just trying to get by in situations different from yours, who need (yes “need”, see my 5th paragraph) to use cars, and don’t crap on electric cars. Crapping on electric cars like calling someone using nicotine gum to quit smoking weak because they didn’t go cold turkey. A step in the right direction is a step in the right direction.
Also feel free to crap on all the people buying SUVs and Megatrucks when they don’t actually need it vs. a car (“I like to be higher up” - my mom), increasing pedestrian deaths, emissions, tire and brake dust, noise, parking space, and accident damage. If for your next vehicle you buy a car, a hybrid, or an electric and you need it, then don’t let anyone in this community tell you you’re not doing the right thing :)
I heard a good saying the other day: “Electric cars are a solution for the car industry.” Give me walkable cities please
I live in Scandinavia, in one of these walkable cities. Everyone has a car. Why? Because relying on public transport or walking/biking everywhere is not practical. It’s just reality.
That’s fair enough. I also own a car, but I try to use alternative means of transport (bus, bike, walk, skateboard) whenever possible. It’s the prioritisation of cars over all other modes of transport where I have the issue. My city is riddled with car filled streets criss-crossing all over. There’s a plan to take one of the most shop focused streets and make it walkable. It would mean that I would be able to get to work almost the whole way on it. I hope it goes through
I’m not disagreeing with you or most people here for being annoyed by everything being build around car usage. I just don’t see it realistically change. You’d have to rebuild most cities from the ground up and invest ungodly amounts of money into several modes of public transport in every city. It just won’t happen.
I’ve had to use public transport to get to a job I loved in a neighbouring city, due to not having a car at that point. Where a drive with the car would have taken me about 20 minutes one way, the bus+train combo I was forced to use was 1,5 hours including waiting times. It was so draining that I quit that job after 6 months.
If this is the choice you need to make, people will take that car every time because you can’t rely on jobs being available within 20 minutes of walking or public transport, most cities aren’t build to offer jobs+housing+shopping within a small radius for all the people living there.
The part about going to your job is totally valid. Some jobs can be worked remotely or partly remotely now, but that doesn’t apply to all professions, so that is something to keep in mind.
In terms of not being able to realistically change the current cities, many of the best walkable cities prioritized cars first and then changed. It took decades, but they eventually achieved it.
There’s this presentation I found after doing some research on the 15-minute cities conspiracy theory, and it was a really interesting talk about how towns and cities can be changed into slower, more accessible ones. It’s an hour long but there’s a 5 minute segment where it discusses cases where cities have changed from car-based to a more walkable one, in this case Amsterdam and Pontevedra (in Spain).
I recommend checking it out. Here’s a link with the timestamp of the start of the section about those cities:
Dr Rodney Tolley: Fast Speed, Slow Cities
In the section before this one, he discusses the cost of other transport modes versus cars. Building and maintaining infrastructure for cars is waaaaay more expensive than for other methods, so cost isn’t an issue. I’ve included the slide below.
My favorite part about this sub is how everyone acts like the entire world is able to just stop having a car and be able to carry on normally about their lives as if cars haven’t been forced into nearly all infrastructure plans globally since this inception. Like it’s every citizens personal choice that nobody built a functioning transit system in the many decades before they were born, or that the place they can afford to live is too far from the place that pays the wages they need to live is too far to bike or bus to.
Like, push for fewer cars and less car centric design, but also stop being a fucking cunty dick about it.
Your comment is completely irrelevant to this post.
Oh I’d love to hear your explanation for why it’s irrelevant, and what crucial oversight I’ve made that you’ve managed to in your extensive 16 hours on Lemmy.
Ur comment is irrelevant to this post, as this post is merely talking about the inefficiencies of electric cars. It has not even mentioned the humans driving these cars. Had that been the case, your comment would’ve been relevant.
This post is an attempt to dispel the myth that electric cars are somehow better than ICE cars. Do you see why your comment is dumb?
Your reading comprehension and understanding of English vocabulary is about on par with your lemmy account age.
Til things like “urban sprawl” are inefficiencies inherent to electric cars, and the lengthy list of these inefficiencies are definitely not drawn parallel to ICE in order to suggest that people should instead drive neither as the underlying theme of the post, particularly given the theme of the sub, which I am able to observe because I’ve been here longer than 16 hours.
