Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
Also never forget the tires. We're breathing them.
And there are a lot of cases where we could just stop commuting....
And ceramic brake dust! Yummy 😋
EVs have regenerative breaking, so in theory that should help with brake dust if people aren't using their brakes as much.
In reality though, I doubt some people will make use of RB to actually see any benefits (unless it's configured right in the car), plus tires are still a problem regardless of EV or ICE.
Pretty sure regenerative braking is on by default for every EV. It allows them to claim higher range/efficiency.
The difference is in how aggressively to configure it. More aggressively is more efficient but harder to drive smoothly.
Topping! 😁
But employers are increasingly ordering people back to work and even just the fear of it is measurably impact staff wellbeing.
The push for RTO put on full display how bullshit the push for EVs "for the environment" is. If .gov was actually serious about helping the environment, WFH would be encouraged when possible. It obviously isn't feasible for many (probably most) jobs, but removing the vehicles that you can from the roads is still a step in the right direction.
Many (probably most) jobs are bullshit jobs just to make the economy roll.
If we skipped the middleman, and just fed everyone, we would cost environmental costs by 90%.
Exactly.
Tires are a big issue right now. 6PPD-Q might be an extinction event for salmon.
Some studies have shown work from home may eliminate the commute miles, but those miles are replaced with leisure and errands miles. So ultimately we still need transit to replace a lot of car trips cause be it work, grocceries, or a night out, people need to get places.
We need to pull all strings. I didn't say people don't need to get places. I just stated there are many cases where it's not required. Corona has shown what we could do if we wanted.
In wonder if, in terms of logistics, delivery of groceries and online shopping could be a good thing.
Of course not with instant-services like Flink. Of course not with single-use cardboard boxes and worker exploitation.
More like the good old milkman. People order their groceries, and they are delivered in reusable boxes next day, old boxes picked up. Same with online shopping.
Both is already a thing, but few do it. Maybe it would work much better if a huge percentage of people would do it, e. g. 15 % for grocery delivery. The grocery truck would not have to do more miles than if it would deliver to the current 1 % (guessed), just needs to be bigger and have more stops.
In communities that are not built to live car-less, that might save many individual car trips.
At my place there are two supermarkets within 500m, no need for any driving besides one lorry supplying the markets.
People will come up with any solution so long as it still relies on roads. The parent comment to this thread is all about tire dust and this solution just replaces private tire dust with commercial tire dust. The system you propose would still be more complicated, energy and resource intensive than people just taking transit to the groccery store.
The thing is, we don't have transit. And I'm pretty sure demolishing our cities and rebuilding them in order to enable transit is even more harmful to the environment.
Only in the short term. In our current timeline we destroy our cities to pave new highways. By rebuilding our cities we can reduce sprawl, increase density and make the whole city more effecient while reducing the new land that gets developed.
How many cities are building new highways, not just slightly expanding existing ones?
Corona isn't a perfect example as many places had restricted capacity and hours. There was also a significant precentage of the population minimizing their exposure to the outside world. Yes we should encourage work from home but my point is it won't be reducing car use nearly as much as it seems and even if everyone worked from home we still need alternatives to driving.
It is just one example. I think you and I might misunderstand each other a lot.
If you live in a bicycle friendly place, a lot of car trips can be replaced.
Sure we need bike lanes too, but we still need transit as an option for longer distances/faster travel, for when the weather is awful, and for people unable to bike. You could even bring your bike on the transit, maybe visiting another city and bringing your bike with you on that transit.