• AToM.exe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The problem is that citys are built around cars.

    The first question is not how people can reach shops by foot, or with public transit. The first step is always to build streets to stuff and later figure out if you can might fit in a bus route, or maybe a cycling lane.

  • beebarfbadger@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Okay done. Now that I have eliminated this here my contribution to CO2 emissions, what do we do about the 100 companies that cause 70% of global CO2 emissions? Or is that no longer an issue once my car is taken out of circulation?

    • Stumblinbear@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Transportation is a quarter of global emissions, with passenger vehicles making up half of that number and is only getting larger as more people in the world decide they need a car.

      The number you’re looking for is 20 companies making up 30% of emissions. They’re almost exclusively oil companies, with more than half of them being state owned enterprises. Reduce the need for oil and you reduce the amount they pollute.

      So, how do you do that?

      Personal vehicles are the most flexible in terms of emissions. Increasing the usability of public transportation has a direct correlation with the number of vehicles on the road. Sure, people out in the middle of nowhere need a vehicle and nobody is looking to take that from them, but you could HALF the number of people in the US with a car if cities had proper public transport or were as walkable as they were barely 80 years ago.

      The private sector is more difficult. We’d need to rebuild our train infrastructure that has been gutted and raided by our rail companies in order to get trucks off the interstate. Coincidentally, that would get MORE people off the road since you wouldn’t need a car to go between cities.

      Additionally, you seem to be under the impression that we’re incapable of solving multiple problems at the same time. We can make cars unnecessarily (not GET RID of them) while also cutting emissions in other areas.

      Make no mistake, we do need to address other areas, but cars are an easy target that would reduce tons of emissions and increase people’s quality of life as well. Cars are a massive waste of space and a huge ongoing drain on taxpayer dollars for very little benefit when you compare it to the alternatives.

  • lennster@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    We should really be investing more in public transit, it’s way better than electric cars and could be way more convenient if implemented properly

  • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    What purpose does this serve other than alienating the people you’re trying to get on your side?

    You have to have the alternatives in place before you can convince people to make a change.

    Buses already take hours vs. minutes and any road construction that closes stops & routes down adds time and distance to an already long commute.

    If you want people to choose your option, you have to make it an option worth choosing.

  • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I would if I could right now and I’m going to move next year to a place where I can sell my car and forget about it.