• HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    Cars fulfill a very self-indulgent narrative. ‘I get to decide where and when I travel’, makes people feel “free” snd “important” even when millions of them are silently coming to the same decisions-- like going downtown at 09:00 on weekdsys-- that allow huge efficiency plays.

    Notice how many ads feature fantasies of open roads and trips to faraway attractions, not the real world of “I need to sit in rush hour traffic from 6:30 on to get to the Work Factory”

    Maybe public transit needs to focus its message on the freedom from drudgery it offers-- you don’t have to be staring at the driver in front of you, scanning the traffic reports

    • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 年前

      Exactly! This is why I love micromobility and quality public transit so much. With micromobility like electric scooters or bikes, I can zip past traffic in the protected cycle lanes in my city. With the frequent metro service in my city, I know I can show up to the metro station at basically any time and know it’ll be a max 5-minute wait for the next train. And when I’m on the train, I can just chill and scroll on my phone or read a book instead of stressing about traffic. The freedom to think about something that isn’t traffic.

    • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 年前

      Exactly! This is why I love micromobility and quality public transit so much. With micromobility like electric scooters or bikes, I can zip past traffic in the protected cycle lanes in my city. With the frequent metro service in my city, I know I can show up to the metro station at basically any time and know it’ll be a max 5-minute wait for the next train. And when I’m on the train, I can just chill and scroll on my phone or read a book instead of stressing about traffic. The freedom to think about something that isn’t traffic.

    • branch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 年前

      I’d say it is more about convince convenience. You decide when you leave and you leave from your door. You don’t risk being late to work because you missed the train by 1 minute (baring queues, but you get the point).

      • Ysysel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 年前

        Really depends where you live. In my town I also decide when I leave, and I don’t risk being late because I missed the train by one minute. I’ll just take the next one. More risk of being late because of car traffic.

        The problem when people compare cars to public transport is that they compare the current state of public transport in their area. We need to compare what would happen if we were spending as much billions as we do on cars.

        • Danatronic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 年前

          Yeah, if the train comes every five minutes, that’s going to be way more consistent than traffic over time.

  • psud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 年前

    Because many of us live in places where you must use a car, there are no alternatives

    In such places electric public transport is nothing but a pipe dream

  • matlag@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 年前

    The worrying thing here is the assumption that we can choose…

    The world has 2 billions individual cars. Lithium extraction rate may not be sufficient to make 2 billions cars by 2030… and that’s assuming we don’t need lithium for computers, smartphones, but also not for batteries for the grid (because no solar cell works at night and wind farms are not on demand erther), and… not for electric trucks! Then comes the question of the other metals: copper, nickel, cobalt, …

    Trains will not work everywhere for everyone, but not deploying them now and fast will be a severe issue for North America when resources will get scarce.

    We need a smart mix of trains, buses, subways, tramways, shared vehicles, bikes, everything but one individual car per person. That era will come to an end because we’re closer to the bottom of our planet’s natural resources stock than the beginning.

    There’s not even a real option of keeping gas cars a little while more, as cheap oil is also coming to an end.

    The difference between accepting this and “choosing” individual cars is how ready countries will be when resources will get scarce. It may get ugly…

    • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 年前

      Yeah, unfortunately what people aren’t getting is that continuing car dependency – electric cars or not – is fundamentally not an option. Sure we’ll probably have electric firetrucks and tractors, but having 1 ton of lithium batteries and 2 to 3 tons of steel per person – plus mind-boggling amounts of asphalt roads and parking lots – was never going to be a sustainable option, be it environmentally, economically, or socially.

      We as a society keep shoving forwards as if switching to a better transit mix is a choice. It’s not. Car dependency can never last.

  • dangblingus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 年前

    Because North Americans were tricked by the oil and car companies in the 50s to think that car ownership was part of being human, and now we’re addicted to sitting in traffic, breathing fumes, and killing pedestrians in the name of muh freedom.

    • torpak@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 年前

      cars are stuck to roads and much less efficient everywhere many people need to go. cars are basically useful where only few people live or work.

        • BraBraBra@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 年前

          If you can’t conveniently travel by train, that is a failure of the design of your city, not trains. If the destination a train took you to was walkable you wouldn’t need a car, because the train could cover the large distances, and you could simply walk from the train to your necessary locations.

            • BraBraBra@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 年前

              Sure, if we can build the infrastructure for cars there, why not trains too. You’re quite closed minded. But also, why can’t you just bike in a village? I mentioned cities because that’s where trains tend to be, genius.

              There’s trams, there’s bikes, there’s buses, etc. etc. etc.

    • BoscoBear@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 年前

      And trains aren’t stuck to roads. And planes aren’t stuck to roads. And ships aren’t stuck to roads.

  • BodePlotHole@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    I dunno what country you are from, but here in the US of A, the monopolies that own all the train infrastructure make sure to keep trains as public transportation as cost prohibitive as possible.

  • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    Electric cars don’t solve a lot of the root problems of cars. They still require massive amounts of energy to move thousands of pounds of steel. They also still rely on sprawling roads and parking lots.

    • Resonosity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 年前

      Absolutely. And the benefit trains have over cars is that you can reduce the amount of other stuff per person needed to get people moving.

      For a local train of mine that seats 93 people with empty weight of 54 metric tons, that comes out to ~0.58 tons/person.

      My sedan weighs in at about 1.5 metric tons empty, and since I’m the only one that uses it, my weight footprint is ~1.5 tons/person.

      Forget about fuel economy too. Trains don’t have traffic (most of the time) to deal with, meaning they can accelerate to coasting speeds and spend most of the ride at best-efficiency. Cars are subject to traffic conditions, meaning efficiency can be as-designed by the manufacturer, or it can be much, much worse on a per trip basis if you contribute to the daily rush hours on freeways.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 年前

        There is also much less friction on rails compared to rubber on roadways. If demand increases the length of the train can be increased or more trains added. This helps prevent the cycle of needing more lanes (rail lines in this case).

    • eltimablo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 年前

      Electric motors are between 95 and 98% efficient, while ICEs are in the 80’s on a good day.

      • Skasi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 年前

        You are aware that electric trains also use electric motors, just like electric cars do, right? And you are aware that electric cars rely on an electric battery while electric trains rely primarily on overhead electric power lines, are you?

        That means cars require one extra component and an extra conversation of energy which trains don’t need. Every conversation of energy reduces efficiency of the final outcome. The more conversations, the less efficiency.

        Trains use: power lines -> electric motor
        Cars use: power lines -> electric battery -> electric motor

        Furthermore, bigger machines can be built to be more efficient than smaller ones. So bigger motors can use (electric) fuel more efficiently than smaller motors.

  • EthicalAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    Trains aren’t 100% the answer, but cars should be the last answer. Still we should electrify cars.

    • voxel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 年前

      yeah, electricity should just be used everywhere.
      most other energy types can be easily and efficiently converted to it, and it makes it easy to increase efficiency.
      (power production and consumption are separated in electrical cars, so by making your power stations more efficient you make all of the cars that use them greener)

        • 18107@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 年前

          EV’s are so much more efficient that even running from electricity produced by coal, they are significantly better than ICE (internal combustion engine) cars. Just the electricity used to refine enough fuel to drive 100mi would be enough to drive an average EV more than 60mi. (This detail gets conveniently left out when comparing ICE cars to EVs).

          We still need to decarbonise the grid, and as that happens, all electric cars (regardless of age) will become less polluting too. Having an unclean grid is not an excuse to keep using ICE vehicles.

  • BodePlotHole@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    I dunno what country you are from, but here in the US of A, the monopolies that own all the train infrastructure make sure to keep trains as public transportation as cost prohibitive as possible.

  • 6mementomori@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    because in lots of countries there is effectively no public transport culture existing, and car companies take advantage of that. it’s really just about car culture and taking advantage of people in my opinion

  • nexguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 年前

    Cars can pick me up 10 feet from my front door(my car). No train tracks within 5 miles of me. I would love if their were tracks closer.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 年前

    I am all for more public transportation in this country, but it wouldn’t help me personally. I live outside of city limits- the closest bus line is two miles away. My work is even further outside city limits, a 10-minute drive south of me down a four-lane highway, past farm fields and into an industrial park.

    There’s just no way public transportation is going to help me there. And even if I didn’t have to do it down a highway, there’s no way I’m riding a bike there in the middle of winter.

    So do please make public transport more available and expansive. Just know that it still won’t be a universal solution. Individual transport is needed by some of us.

    I plan to get an electric (not a Tesla) for my next car. I currently drive a hybrid.

    • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 年前

      “More public transport wouldn’t help me, because there’s no transit access here” seems tautological but ok.

      Countries with similar layouts but working public transit would simply build a train line into your industrial park and place bus stops a reasonable distance away from where you live.

        • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 年前

          You tell me; your community was likely first built by having a train line drawn out to it in the frontier era, and later had the tracks scuttled due to obsolescence and overt state support for the motor vehicle alternative.

          Rural rail has been done and is still done in pretty much every country that’s not the USA. If you’re a farmer, there’s a lot of rationale to having rail built out to whatever market terminal you sell your product at. It’s not unheard of for farmers to build out small private rail lines across the farm to transport goods, equipment, themselves, etc.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 年前

            I don’t know a country as spread out as the U.S. that has practical rail in all rural areas. Certainly not Canada or China or India.

            • spiphy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 年前

              The U.S. The U.S. was that country. The country was built by train.

              Oh, and 80% of the population lives in cities!

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 年前

                And that 80% of the population should have robust public transit.

                Then there’s the rest of us who don’t live in cities. The train never went out to farmer’s fields in the hopes of picking up people here and there who happened to live between them. That’s nonsense.

      • spiphy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 年前

        They were redesigned for cars. Mistakes of the past can be fixed.