- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Where I live there is 0 public transport. I charge my EV with my own solar panels. So I think I am okay.
You are way better than the average car owner but it still takes a lot of energy to build an electric car. For the environment it would be even better if the batteries are used in buses and electric bikes, then more people can transport themselves with less pollution.
Of course, but they’re doing the best they can.
Next step would be attending city/town hall meetings, and slowly advocating for more and more public transit over time.
The dream of coast-to-coast public transit, the likes of which we saw before WWII, is still possible
You’re assuming a city / town.
In the US and for those that live outside of municipal boundaries and that live in unincorporated regions, lots of states have “townships” that are the default local government below county-level. Municipal corporations like towns and cities replace townships.
Still, those townships have local governments that can be engaged with politically.
And then there’s counties in the US which act as the local government overseeing townships, etc.
People’s political activism doesn’t have to start and end in towns/cities.
Do the have a local government capable of building effective municipal transport?
They might be able to put a bus on that takes half a day to cover all the scatted houses, but nobody is going to use it.
A bus network is a good first step, yes.
And why all the pushback against political action? You’re giving off doomer vibes.
Depends if they need a car. My bro is in a city with about 7 public transport options within 200 metres walk and has 2-3 EVs
Lots of money, not a lot of sense.
You shouldn’t live there.
So I take it you are personally funding his new home? How generous of you.
If I had control over the government, sure. I would get him a nice little apartment in a location where he doesn’t have to burden the rest of society with his libertarian fantasies.
Fortunately nothing you say is relevant or should be taken seriously because there’s a .ml after your name. It’s not possible for you to have a meaningful opinion.
Lol different post same thought-terminating bullshit
Lol! You’re so mad that you’re bringing old comments. This is hilarious. You .ml users really are all brain dead. You’re blocked now but please stop helping fascists get into power just because the Russian propaganda machine is telling you to. So fuckin sad honestly
Sure, if ignorance is your preferred tool, I wouldn’t dream of suggesting otherwise.
Working from home is the best. Not everyone can do it, but those who can, should be allowed to. Return to office isn’t for us, it’s for them.
Working from home is the best.
Very difficult to build class solidarity when you’re atomized to the point of not even seeing one another’s real faces.
You don’t have to do that at work. You can do that at the library, bar, farmer’s market, etc. In fact, I’d rather do it with people near where I live, instead of people that share the other end of my commute.
You don’t have to do that at work.
:-/
The place you spend half your waking hours?
You can do that at the library, bar, farmer’s market, etc.
Do you have a job?
Do you have a job?
I don’t currently. Are you hiring computer programmers? I’ve got 20+ applications sent out via Indeed, but I haven’t found one yet.
Even when I was employed, I still visited the library, a few bars, and the saturday farmer’s market. While I don’t think visiting the bar is necessarily a must, you really should participate in your local library and farmer’s market. Connecting to your community is important.
Are you hiring computer programmers?
We are, in fact.
I’ll shoot you a DM.
Holy shit, if my comment turns into this dude scoring a position at your company, I’m sending you a Christmas card.
I get why you’re digging at them, but there was a period in my life I went to the bar after every workday. Now I have a child. But back then, that’s just how I met new people and socialized. Now I… just don’t really meet new people. Maybe I’ll start meeting other parents soon when it’s kindergarten time, but that’s about it.
Bike/Electric scooter + public transport is a peak mobility, but public transport isn’t even built for that :(
Not in South FL. Our trains have designated bike racks on the interior and our busses have bike racks on the front. I take a train to work every day, it’s really nice.
Fr, if the British gov stopped arresting every one who rides an electric scooter then the bus might actually be an attractive option
Well I mean Ireland doesn’t arrest electric scooters but you can’t bring them into transport because, ahem, batteries can explode.
so can a lot of things
I mean from engineering perspective batteries in the board part do get damaged when you damage the board by hitting the floor, and they have increased chances to catch fire when your charge them. And when they do, they fucking destroy everything around. You can’t really stop it either.
Key point: when you charge them. There is no reason to assume that would happen in tram or something.
Trains and buses have banned them anyway so it limits their use as a last mile solution as you typical need them both ends of the public transport
Yes, though not always as accessible.
The problem with electric cars is two fold as far as I understand it:
- The electricity it uses is not sustainable.
- It has lots of tracking etc and in some cases remote control.
While the power source that generated the electricity is not necessarily sustainable, power plants should have more at scale Features to limit the pollutants than a traditional petrol engine.
Or at least the power plants should if one lives in a civilized society…
civilized society
I’m sorry sir but such a thing does not exist, I fear you must have dreamed it.
Tracking is not unique to electric cars, just new cars.
Large power stations are more efficient than small engines.
Many electric car owners also have solar panels.Refining enough fuel to transport an average car 100km uses enough energy to transport an average electric car 50km. That’s just refining, not including searching for or collecting the oil, or transporting the fuel to fuel stations.
It’s so much electricity that most oil refineries have dedicated coal or gas power stations.As long as you are only considering cars, electric cars are superior in almost every way, and are constantly getting better.
A diesel bus is still better than an electric car (although an electric bus would be better still). Trains and trams would be ideal, but require more upfront cost, so are easier for lazy or corrupt politicians to oppose.
Good point about tracking being a newer car problem.
Sadly where I live busses are not accessible to me since:
-
They are infrequent.
-
They do not have a ‘live map’ so make me extremely anxious since I don’t know where I am nor where to stop the bus.
Where I’m from, in the UK, there’s a lot of wind power because it’s cheaper and the labour government of 97-2010 invested in it.
So electricity is greenest and cheapest overnight, so my car knows to charge itself starting when the cheap overnight electricity tariff kicks in. I save about 80% over what I used to party for petrol.
I do not miss going to the petrol station one bit.
Yes Nissan have my car’s location all the while but otherwise they wouldn’t be able to report it to me via the app. And I trust them much more than I trust Google and Google not only knows where I and my phone are all the time, they also know what apps I use for how long and if I accidentally press the button their assistant gets to see a screenshot. Worrying that Nissan know where I parked the car doesn’t compare.
Anyway, it’s just the most fun to drive car I’ve ever driven. So much acceleration! So smooth!
-
I’d say long term, neither of those should be problems
The electricity it uses is not sustainable.
Many EV users also go for solar panels to alleviate energy costs. Also as a country’s electrical grid modernises, it should make use of a greater share of renewables given they’re cheaper than the alternatives now.
It has lots of tracking etc and in some cases remote control.
Slightly less certain, but I’d hope this kind of thing is legislated away at some point. There’s also always customer choice, there will be manufacturers that compete on the privacy angle if enough of us care
The main problem with EVs is it doesn’t solve any of the problems inherent to cars being treated as the main mode of transportation in a given area. Places like that will see EVs as the solution compared to an alternative of investing into better public transit infrastructure.
Infrastructure that is basically inevitable, since we know now that any town/city that eschews anything but car transit will ultimately bankrupt themselves on road maintenance alone.
the wear of the tires constantly pollutes the environment with synthetic material dust (rubber, plastic, etc). much more so, than from buses, because every car has to move more of its weight around per passenger.
I would suggest different downsizes:
- EVs are much heavies, and they wear down the road, and everything else
- tire particles are going to be the next problem after fossil fuels
Solution: trains, more trains, even more trains.
It’s also collectivizing the solution rather than expecting us each to address the problem on an individual level that doesn’t change the status quo one iota.
What about electric public transit? EV buses are becoming quite popular in Korea.
The nearest major city to me has had electric buses since 1940. There are power cables overhead and poles that link the bus to the grid. No need for expensive flammable batteries that need extensive charging.
OK, well, that’s nice in a city. I’d love to see them try and get a tram up the mountain here, though.
Also Germany
As long as they’re being purchased as a replacement for buses that are either at the end of their life or being donated to smaller communities, then sure. This said from the perspective of an American whose city, state and federal governments refuse to fund the public transit that we already have. (╥_╥)
Like ~15 years ago I heard peter singer saying that the emissions from the lifetime use of a car were lower than those from making it, so you should only ever buy a second hand car.
That was before widespread EVs though.
I often wonder how long you have to use a 2nd hand gas car for, before the emissions outstrip those of making a brand new EV.
threeish years apparently, given you run it on green electricity.
Something is screwy with the power generation part of that graphic, or the person who made it is basing it on a country that doesn’t have much wind or solar power.
In the UK there are cheap tariffs for overnight electricity because of all the wind power.
If you’re in America, you’re pretty much fucked for green transport in any case. Canada has some great trolly bus and underground public transport because of all the hydroelectric power. My home city has only been buying electric buses for a long while now.
since it’s in tonnes of CO2 equivalent over the entire life of the vehicle it’s most likely very smoothed out.
Like I say, there’s no way those wind turbines cost anywhere like as much co2 to build and maintain as those oil rigs, oil tankers and oil refineries. Not even close. Not even comparable. This has to be US data from some state with no solar or something. Graph is screwy.
i’m confused. you say “those wind turbines” but we’re talking about loads, not generators. on average, the world has less than 15% of its energy needs met by renewables.
incidentally, the us has the second most intstalled solar capacity of any single country, about 2/3rds that of europe.
wind turbines seem to average at 10kg CO2eq/MWh over their lifetime, but since they are not “plannable” power you always need something else to meet demand. if that something else is a gas peaker plant (490kg CO2eq/MWh), you’re screwed emissions wise.
Edit: Here’s a chart of the total CO2eq for the different regions of the world. using the 2021 EU number of 235g/kWh, 26 tonnes of total charging emissions would require you to fully charge a 2021 polestar 2 standard range 26 000 000g ÷ 235g ÷ 64kWh ≈ 1728 times, which would give the car a lifetime of between four and sixteen years, depending on your driving style (lower end you charge it every day, which is not realistic, higher end you charge once or twice a week). if we use the 2021 world average of 369g, that gives us 1101 full charges, or 3-10 years depending on driving style.
A small point Re the EU average, you’re including a bunch of countries that don’t have as much wind power as the UK, and there’s a world of difference between peak CO2 for peak electricity at teatime and early evening and CO2 for charging the car overnight when the electricity is cheapest exactly because it’s greenest and there’s so much wind power overnight (in the UK).
From your Forbes article:
Good news: amortizing the carbon cost over the decades-long lifespan of the equipment, Bernstein determined that wind power has a carbon footprint 99% less than coal-fired power plants, 98% less than natural gas, and a surprise 75% less than solar.
So I don’t see how the carbon cost of generating that electricity can be so much higher than the carbon cost of petrol which is surely even higher than natural gas which doesn’t require refineries, when it’s actually about 2% as much over the lifetime of the equipment.
Like I said, graph is screwy. Someone in the fossil fuel industry doesn’t want you to think that electric is greener. It’s a lie. It’s FUD. Stop parroting it.
your first paragraph makes no sense. yes the eu includes more countries than the uk. it’s a connected market.
these stats are by polestar and rivian, as it says in the thing. if you have better sources, give them to me.
check my followup post.
I wanted to double-check my numbers so i found a reddit thread asking people how often they charge their cars, and tried to extract info from it using mistral (so take it with a grain of salt. it gave sources but i managed to close the page after screenshotting).
transcript
User: how many times a week do people in this reddit thread charge their cars on average? https://old.reddit.com/r/electriccars/comments/1c0ucpg/ev_owners_how_often_do_you_charge_your_ev_and_how/
Mistral: In the Reddit thread you linked, most EV owners report charging their cars about 2–3 times per week on average. Many users mentioned plugging in their EVs at home whenever convenient, often overnight, rather than waiting for the battery to run low. Some charge daily out of habit, while others charge every few days depending on their driving needs and battery range. The majority have access to home charging, which makes frequent top-ups easy and convenient.
Charging Frequency (from user comments):
- About 30–40% of users charge daily, often overnight at home, regardless of battery level.
- Another 30–40% charge 2–3 times per week, usually when their battery drops below a certain range (e.g., 100 miles or 50%).
- The remaining 20–30% charge less frequently, such as once a week or only when needed for longer trips.
Typical Charging Behavior:
- Many users set their charge limit to 60–80% for daily use to preserve battery health.
- Some Tesla owners (especially with LFP batteries) keep their cars plugged in most of the time, charging to 100% without issue.
- Users with shorter commutes (e.g., <50 miles/day) often charge every 2–3 days, while those with longer commutes or less efficient EVs charge daily.
Range Added per Charge:
- Short Commutes (<50 miles/day): Many users add 50–100 miles per charge, often charging every 2–3 days.
- Moderate Use (50–150 miles/day): Users in this group typically add 100–200 miles per session, charging daily or every other day.
- Longer Trips or Less Frequent Charging: Some users add 150–300 miles, charging once a week or as needed.
Summary Table (Based on Thread Comments)
Miles Added Per Charge Frequency Mentioned Typical Use Case 50–100 miles Common Short commutes, 2–3x/week 100–150 miles Very common Daily commutes, overnight charge 150–300 miles Less common Long trips, weekly charging Inference: Most home chargers add enough range to cover their daily driving, rarely letting the battery drop below 20–30%. The data is sufficient to infer that 50–150 miles per charge is the norm for regular use.
User: how about car models? are there enough mentions of which model people drive that we can figure out the average number of kWhs used per capita from the added range and the size of the battery of the mentioned models?
Mistral: The Reddit thread does mention several specific EV models, and we can use their battery sizes and the reported range added per charge to estimate average kWh used per person. Here’s what we know:
Commonly Mentioned Models & Battery Sizes
From the thread, the most frequently mentioned models include:
- Tesla Model 3 (Standard/Long Range): ~50–82 kWh
- Tesla Model Y (Standard/Long Range): ~60–81 kWh
- Hyundai Kona Electric: ~39–64 kWh
- Chevy Bolt: ~65 kWh
- Ford Mustang Mach-E: ~68–98 kWh
- Nissan Leaf: ~40–62 kWh
Reported Range Added per Charge
- Most users add 50–150 miles per charge.
- A few add 150–250 miles (usually for longer trips or less frequent charging).
Estimating kWh Used per Charge
Using the EPA efficiency ratings (miles per kWh) for these models, we can estimate kWh used per charge:
Model Battery Size (kWh) EPA Efficiency (mi/kWh) Reported Range Added Estimated kWh Used Per Charge Tesla Model 3 (LR) 82 4.1 100–150 miles 24–37 kWh Tesla Model Y (LR) 81 3.8 100–150 miles 26–39 kWh Hyundai Kona 64 3.2 50–100 miles 16–31 kWh Chevy Bolt 65 3.6 50–100 miles 14–28 kWh Ford Mach-E (ER) 98 3.0 100–150 miles 33–50 kWh Nissan Leaf 40–62 3.0 50–100 miles 17–33 kWh Note: Efficiency varies with driving conditions, but these are reasonable averages.
Average kWh Used per Charge (Per Capita)
- For 50–100 miles added: ~15–35 kWh per charge
- For 100–150 miles added: ~25–50 kWh per charge
Most users fall in the 20–40 kWh per charge range, depending on their model and daily needs.
User: using the data on this page https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2025/emissions can we create a table for how much emissions each car would produce while charging in the listed regions? use the 2021 number.
Mistral: Here is a table estimating the CO2 emissions per 100 km for common EV models when charged in different regions, using 2021 CO2 emissions per kWh data from the IEA and typical battery sizes and efficiencies:
CO2 Emissions per 100 km for EVs by Region (2021 Data)
Region CO2 per kWh (g) Tesla Model 3 (15 kWh/100 km) Hyundai Kona (17 kWh/100 km) Chevy Bolt (16 kWh/100 km) Ford Mach-E (18 kWh/100 km) European Union ~250 3.75 kg CO2 4.25 kg CO2 4.00 kg CO2 4.50 kg CO2 United States ~380 5.70 kg CO2 6.46 kg CO2 6.08 kg CO2 6.84 kg CO2 China ~550 8.25 kg CO2 9.35 kg CO2 8.80 kg CO2 9.90 kg CO2 India ~700 10.50 kg CO2 11.90 kg CO2 11.20 kg CO2 12.60 kg CO2 Notes & Assumptions
- CO2 per kWh (2021): EU ~250g, US ~380g, China ~550g, India ~700g.
- Energy use per 100 km: Based on EPA/real-world efficiency for each model.
- Calculation: (CO2 per kWh) × (kWh per 100 km) = kg CO2 per 100 km.
Key Takeaways
- EU and US: Lower emissions due to cleaner electricity grids.
- China and India: Higher emissions due to coal-heavy grids.
- Efficiency matters: More efficient cars (like the Tesla Model 3) emit less CO2 per km, even in high-emission regions.
User: data from polestar and rivian lifecycle analyses in 2021 estimates that over its lifetime, the electricity used by an “average” electric vecicle produces a total of 26 tonnes CO2eq. using the data we now have, can we estimate lower and upper bounds for the age of the mentioned models where they would have “produced” 26tCO2eq in different regions?
Mistral: Let’s use the kWh per charge and CO2 per kWh by region from our earlier tables to estimate how many years it would take for the mentioned EV models to reach 26 tonnes CO2eq from charging alone, based on typical charging habits.
Recap of Key Data
- kWh per charge (typical): 20–40 kWh
- CO2 per kWh (2021):
- EU: 250 g
- US: 380 g
- China: 550 g
- India: 700 g
- Charging frequency: 2–3 times per week (104–156 charges/year)
Calculations
1. CO2 per Charge (kg)
- EU: 20–40 kWh × 0.25 kg = 5–10 kg CO2/charge
- US: 20–40 kWh × 0.38 kg = 7.6–15.2 kg CO2/charge
- China: 20–40 kWh × 0.55 kg = 11–22 kg CO2/charge
- India: 20–40 kWh × 0.70 kg = 14–28 kg CO2/charge
2. Annual CO2 from Charging
- EU: 5–10 kg/charge × 104–156 charges = 520–1,560 kg CO2/year
- US: 7.6–15.2 kg/charge × 104–156 charges = 790–2,371 kg CO2/year
- China: 11–22 kg/charge × 104–156 charges = 1,144–3,432 kg CO2/year
- India: 14–28 kg/charge × 104–156 charges = 1,456–4,368 kg CO2/year
3. Years to Reach 26 Tonnes (26,000 kg) CO2eq
- EU: 26,000 ÷ (520–1,560) = 17–50 years
- US: 26,000 ÷ (790–2,371) = 11–33 years
- China: 26,000 ÷ (1,144–3,432) = 8–23 years
- India: 26,000 ÷ (1,456–4,368) = 6–18 years
Note: These are rough estimates based on charging habits and grid emissions, and do not include manufacturing or other lifecycle emissions.
User: let’s see how they change with different charging frequencies.
Mistral: Here’s how the years to reach 26 tonnes CO2eq change with different charging frequencies (1x, 2x, 3x, and 4x per week), using the same kWh per charge (20–40 kWh) and 2021 grid emissions:
Assumptions
- kWh per charge: 20–40 kWh
- CO2 per kWh (2021): EU 250g, US 380g, China 550g, India 700g
Years to 26 Tonnes CO2eq by Charging Frequency
Region 1x/week ( 52 charges/yr) 2x/week (104 charges/yr) 3x/week (156 charges/yr) 4x/week (208 charges/yr) EU 34–100 years 17–50 years 11–33 years 8–25 years US 22–66 years 11–33 years 7–22 years 5–17 years China 15–45 years 8–23 years 5–15 years 4–11 years India 12–36 years 6–18 years 4–12 years 3–9 years User: what’s the average scrapping age of vehicles in the listed regions?
Mistral: Here’s the average scrapping age of vehicles in the regions you asked about, based on the latest available data:
Average Scrapping Age by Region (2021–2024)
Region Average Scrapping Age Notes European Union ~12–17 years EU average is 12.3 years; some countries (e.g., Greece, Estonia) average 17 years. Newer cars are found in Luxembourg (~7.9 years). United States ~12.6 years As of 2024, the average age of cars and light trucks on the road is 12.6 years, with scrappage rates around 4.5–4.6% per year. China ~10–15 years Most passenger vehicles are scrapped after 10–15 years, though policies are pushing for earlier scrappage of older, more polluting vehicles. India ~15 years The national scrappage policy targets vehicles older than 15 years for mandatory scrapping, with incentives for voluntary scrappage of private cars over 15 years. my takeaway is that, if charged three times a week, which seems to be common, most ev’s get to 26tCO2eq before being scrapped no matter their location.
The graph fails the plausibility check of “does using fossil fuelled car pollute about the same as EVs” and the graph trying to make out that they do. I too can ask AI questions, but I think AIs are full of shit. Here it is anyway, and the fossil fuel cars are getting a free pass for ALL the CO2 emissions during generation, which as per my other comment, are about 50 times higher assuming that oil extraction and refinery isn’t actually better than natural gas:
CO2 Emissions Comparison
Assumptions
Electric Vehicle (EV):
- Average energy consumption: 20 kWh/100 km (or 0.2 kWh/km).
- Carbon intensity during overnight charging: 75 gCO2/kWh. Petrol Engine:
- Average emissions: 150 gCO2/km (this can vary based on vehicle efficiency). Diesel Engine:
- Average emissions: 120 gCO2/km (again, this can vary based on vehicle efficiency).
CO2 Emissions Calculation
Electric Vehicle (EV)
Energy consumption per mile:- 1 km = 0.621371 miles, so 20 kWh/100 km = 20 kWh/62.1371 miles = 0.321 kWh/mile. CO2 emissions per mile:
- 0.321 kWh/mile×75 gCO2/kWh=24.1 gCO2/mile.
Petrol Engine
CO2 emissions per mile:- 150 gCO2/km×0.621371 miles/km=93.2 gCO2/mile.
Diesel Engine
CO2 emissions per mile:- 120 gCO2/km×0.621371 miles/km=74.6 gCO2/mile.
Summary of CO2 Emissions per Mile Vehicle Type CO2 Emissions (gCO2/mile) Electric Vehicle (EV) 24.1 Petrol Engine 93.2 Diesel Engine 74.6
Conclusion Charging an electric vehicle overnight on a greener grid results in approximately 24.1 gCO2 per mile, which is significantly lower than the emissions from petrol engines at 93.2 gCO2 per mile and diesel engines at 74.6 gCO2 per mile. This comparison highlights the environmental advantages of EVs, especially when charged during times of high renewable energy availability. If you have any further questions or need more details, feel free to ask!
Well, there is a good chance the data is distorted for fossil interests. It’s from 2021 too!
2025 vehicles are miles ahead! (Literally).
They have those solid-state batteries that charge in 5 minutes. There is the lightyear prototype that was insanely expensive…but it could run for decades given optimal light, and 40km/h or bellow speed with it’s solar panels.
source is polestar and rivian, as noted in the graphic.
solid-state batteries are not yet viable at vehicle scale.
lightyear went bankrupt in 2023.
Oh, nice…
That’s what I get for forgetting we live in Warhammer 2k
yeah we can’t have nice things
We could always stop doing that.
I’m struggling just to earn enough breathing space to think. I need a lot of time, and I dreamed of self-sufficiency for a while now. Even have my own Lemmy idea related to Solarpunk.
Yeah. I know. But we could, and must always be vigilant against those who would like to suck less.
I got a 2019 used nissan leaf in 2020 (the lessee didn’t like it), but it looked new. My coworkers tripped over themselves to tell me that the production of a vehicle is worse for the planet anyway. Then, when I explained that it was used, they all responded that the electricity was probably dirty anyway. I charged it at the company garage or at my town’s public spots, both of which were solar powered.
You always get FUD about EVs from people who don’t like the idea that they might be responsible for unnecessarily harming the planet and their neighbours through their actions and would far rather believe that you’re just as bad as them. It’s BoTh sIdES but for polluters.
My old petrol car consumes 4.5L/100km. New Hybrid EVs consume 4.5L/100km because it takes a lot to move the heavy hybrid system.
Solution: I use public transport a lot unless I can’t. That’s my hybrid mode of transport.
Public transport is always king but you are also supposed to plug in the hybrid vehicle.
Also they’re blatantly not comparing like for like.
For example, the Toyota Yaris has a petrol-only version that get 4.6 to 5.8L/100km, whereas the (non-plugin) hybrid version of the exact same car gets 3.8L/100km, so all this guff about “it takes a lot to move the heavy hybrid system” is clearly FUD.
My friend’s work is over an hour from his house by public transport—if public transport is working, and it’s a weekday. If it isn’t working well, if it’s late, if it’s a weekend or holiday, then it’s closer to two hours (or more).
It’s 15 minutes max by car.
And he lives in a place with good public transportation.
Until we improve how public transportation runs, so that it really is designed around how people need to get from A to B, cars are going to be the more popular choice.
Yes but that is never going to happen without putting restraints on the auto industry, which puts big money into preventing public transit from being built, and if its already exists, to destroy it.
Car culture is killing us. I get you’re trying to be pragmatic but more is necessary.
I really hate that shit. To suburbs? Sure, that’s acceptable cox public transportation prioritizes high density areas.
To city to another city and public transportation takes double of driving? That’s bad design. Infrastructure that prioritizes cars no matter the population density is not sustainable, whether that’s shown as car traffic or massive deficit to keep roads maintained
No, it’s not good public transportation. Good public transportation is faster and cheaper than a car. That’s terrible public transportation, just because other places are even worse it doesn’t mean that one is good.
Well, ‘good’ by US standards.
Wish we had Japan standards :(
Bikes combined with public transit usually cut down those times massively. And to ask—good, or good by usa standards? Cities in Germany or japan are impressive with how fast you can get places by train.
Also-- people being unwilling to trade a bit of convenience in exchange for a better world is a major part of the problem. I got off my car and started biking for everything, and it was easy. More people could easily do the same. Combined with trains, I can go very far.
You can not ride a bike on our roads. There are no buses or trains.
You can not ride a bike on our roads
What’s stopping you?
The roads are deadly. I’ve lived here almost 20 years and I have seen exactly one person trying to ride on these roads. There are some places with bikes in the ditch on the side of the road with crosses as memorials. You can’t walk the roads either.
If its 15 mins by car it’s likely a gentle 30 mins ride. A small vespa or motorbike has to be better than a car for that sort of distance - we need to avoid thinking car is the only private transport solution
That doesn’t work when the weather in the winter is always below 0c
I know people that cycle all year round and where I live it is decidedly colder and snowier than that all winter.
It does for me (southern uk) but to be fair doesn’t often go beyond - 5 and.im driven by something more powerful than environmentalism - cheapness! :)
Edit: I see you said constant below freezing, yeah fair point, that would tip the balance
Yes, it does. Don’t be a naysayer when you haven’t tried it; it isn’t as daunting as it seems
For him it’s more the heavy rain and lack of safe bike paths… but that’s another discussion.
Holy crap does it ever not.
Speaking from past lived experience trying to get to work in -30c weather in my old city, and the once-every-half-hour bus is either full, late, or broken down. FORGET that noise.
It’s definitely better where I am now l, but vast swaths of cityscape in my country are massively underserved, and I would assert that calling it “daunting” is comically trivializing the daily stress of trying to make a schedule happen in those cases.
Just telling someone to buck up and endure that is extremely condescending; you’ll win so few allies to your cause with this approach (which I, incidentally l, support). You’re basically saying their time is of little to no value, and what they want to accomplish with it doesn’t matter. And time is the only true non-renewable resource in your life, kids.
So, I say thee: nay.
I’m not speaking without doing. I’ve done as cold as it gets in my city, which is admittedly short of -30c, probably closer to -23c. This is about bikes, not buses. (But honestly goes for both!)
People aren’t going to like being told it. But I’m ever of the opinion that people who whine when told they’re wrong are not ever going to be the ones changing in the first place. They merely sit there, in the comfort of the car, justifying their decision by pretending the gas guzzling environment harming and dangerous vehicles are somehow justified by the small amount of lightly discomfortable weather and short bikeable rides.
You’re basically saying their time is of little to no value, and what they want to accomplish with it doesn’t matter
It’s not of little value. It’s the amount saved by driving is not worth it. For them and for others.
Bikes would be even worse imo. Your uphill battle just got much steeper. You’re also not helping anything by making the sweeping generalizations you seem to enjoy making.
I can’t say I have heard it before from countless others (to precisely no avail), but regardless, best of luck in gathering momentum for your cause.
Bikes are not even half as hard as you think they are.
best of luck in gathering momentum for your cause.
Thankfully, there’s already significant momentum, bike lanes and transit are growing stronger.
deleted by creator
Edited: accidental double post.
Something even easier to implement than public transit is treating e-scooters and e-bikes like first class citizens. Governments love to restrict their speed to make them uncompetitive with cars without an easy legal alternative.
As a cyclist, electric motorbikes are already a thing and belong in the traffic lanes. I’m not sharing a cycle path with idiots doing 40mph.
Instead of limiting the bikes’ speed, what’s stopping the government from simply enforcing a speed limit on the bike paths?
Yeah I’ve got an e-bike and there’s no way those motorcycles belong in the bike lane. If the motor can send you that fast, it’s no longer a bicycle…
I was thinking of getting an electric motorcycle at one point but a regular bike is so much cheaper and I don’t really need it.
We recently moved to a very bike friendly city in California, and it’s a night and day difference to where we had moved from in Texas. There are bike lanes, and bike racks EVERYWHERE.
There is also a heavily used e-bike/e-scooter service available as well. Its been a genuine game changer.
Separate lanes and bike racks all over the place means that the e-scooters aren’t ditched all over the sidewalk AND the separate bike lanes do not disrupt traffic so the drivers don’t hate them either. We’ve only used our vehicle for commuting to work since moving here. For everything else, we walk, bike, or scooter. Bought a little collapsible wagon for grocery shopping too!
AND the separate bike lanes do not disrupt traffic so the drivers don’t hate them either.
Oh, they usually still hate them. In there minds, that’s a lane of traffic that got taken away. For those people, I usually like to point out an unused sidewalk and complain that those damned pedestrians are also taking away perfectly good driving space.
Speed while moving is almost never the most important variable in local transport time, waiting is. Just slow down. The same is true for cars.
It’s important for safety. Bike lanes are not common, and I don’t want to be stuck going 15mph on a road where the cars zoom past at 35mph or more.
I doubt speed is an adequate consideration here. Especially considering lack of dedicated protection like helmets and other coverings. Access, usability, price (assuming rental), and dedicated protected lanes for travel are much more important, but harder to manage.
I’m talking about owning your own e-scooter. It’s not hard to gear up for the ride. Protected lanes with limited speeds are an ideal, but the truth is that you need bursts of more speed on most of our sprawling suburbs in the US.
US public transportation is pathetic, but prior to the 1960’s it was quite extensive only to be destroyed by the oil and automobile lobbyists.
And if they’re hadn’t thrashed the railcars, the cities might look wildly different.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy
Thing is, we are where we are now. We can’t just tear down all the cities and start over. We have to deal with what we’ve got.
I mean, Europe hasn’t torn it’s cities down (well not all of them and not for rebuilding purposes anyway) despite managing to utilise good public transport.
Then again guess your point is rather that American cities were built stupidly car centric and that somehow those can’t be replaced with any sort of public transport?
Yes but much less profitable.
Devilish that capitalism has made profitability synonymous with efficiency
Stupid sexy skeletor
Yeah in a world where transit isnt a shit show. In my city transit will take you 2 hours to get home when a car will take 20 minutes
That is exactly why we need better public transit.
Then you better be advocating for better public transit
I live in a small town. The town has a couple vans that old people can call to be driven to the doctor. And like all government services and social safety nets, it’s gonna be gone by the time it’s my turn. If I’m going somewhere, it’s my car, my bike or my feet.
Nothing you do as an individual will ever be as bad as the commercial fishing industry.
Wrong! I could become the president and nuke the world. Boom, worse than industrial fishing.
Hahaha!
Oh, sorry. I meant
MUAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Except the president cant just ‘nuke’ the world. They can give the order, but theres a whole chain of command that actually fires the nukes.
Until he fires and replaces the chain of command with podcasters.
I don’t think now is the time to be arguing for the effectiveness of guardrails.
Cars and eating meat are some of the largest polluters on the planet, and driven entirely by consumers. The commerical fishing industry exists because you buy the fish. Do not mistake that every individual is part of the problem and we all need to work together to improve reality
Depends on population density. Even if there was passenger train service on the existing lines here, a lot of people would need a vehicle to get to the station, and I don’t think public buses / vans could cover all the roads at a reasonable schedule.
But, also, you don’t have to get very dense before public transport is better than individual vehicles for intracity trips.
If public transit was valued by the local government, the city would be built in a way to make that work ok. If cars are valued, the city is built to be driven in.
I agree, by the time you really deserve the term “city” you should provide public transit as a community good and it can be made so that most people want to use it.
I’m in the “city” of Cove, Arkansas. It’s a 15 minute drive to the nearest produce section, and I have to work remotely because there aren’t computer programmer jobs within a reasonable commute.
At low densities, EVs are the way to go. The more dense, the more public transit makes sense.
I do still wish passenger rail service was restored along the line through here to the county seat; there are days it would save me a drive.
I could see some very well-meaning folks in local government being boxed in by citizens on one side that make their luxury SUVs and even more luxurious pickup trucks into major parts of their identities, and then the various layers of government above them driving the standards that make all of our towns samey-looking stroads. I’m in the US if that wasn’t obvious, and the car-centrism runs deep.
I’m a middle aged dude and my house was build multiple decades before I was born. Back then my neighborhood was designed 100% for cars. They even put in drainage ditches that precluded the addition of sidewalks. But several years back the township did paint a walking path down one side of my street.
The new neighborhoods built in the last decade are mostly the same as far as being car-only. They usually have sidewalks and you will see people taking walks or children playing. But it’s only local recreation, to walk the dog or to visit a neighbor. If you need to go to the grocery store, it’s time to hop into the 2-3 ton family vehicle.
I will give my local government and developers credit though, that some recent projects have been to create what look like islands of walkable community. I have look through the businesses and see if they have groceries and the like. From what I’ve seen the neighborhood seems to be densely packed expensive apartments and townhomes that were rapidly built en masse, and then in the center there’s a grassy field and some breweries and restaurants and stuff. So possibly some very American designs going on there.
From what I’ve seen the neighborhood seems to be densely packed expensive apartments and townhomes that were rapidly built en masse, and then in the center there’s a grassy field and some breweries and restaurants and stuff. So possibly some very American designs going on there.
I used to live in one of these kind of complexes. It was even next to a river with a nice little 2 mile trail along it. At first I thought it would be cool to live within a short walk of things. There was a convenience store that was quite nice. However, the owner told me that the complex told them they couldn’t sell nicotine products “to keep homeless out”. That shouldve been a red flag. Then the convenience store closed in favor of a fancy coffee shop. Then a fancy German restaurant with outdoor seating. Suddenly I felt like I lived in an outdoor mall. The site for that apartment complex was previously used for the states death row so I guess it’s still an improvement from that.
eww, yeah I can see that happening and a lot of people liking it too.
Even though our suburban neighborhoods are designed to be pro-car and anti-community, the one nice thing about the single family home and little fenced in yard setup is that I can keep some natural beauty close by.
Even if there was passenger train service on the existing lines here, a lot of people would need a vehicle to get to the station
BIKE. BIKE TO THE TRAIN STATION
It also solves the problem at the other end where I’m 4 miles from my office.
Trains don’t make it easy to get bikes on but that’s easily resolved also
Yup. Here in Chicago we now have bike racks inside the trains so you can bring your bike into the city on the metra, as well as allowed in all trains including the colored lines outside of peak hours
While a lot of people can, some live far away, or have small kids, or the weather doesn’t allow it, or…
There is no one single solution, every bit helps, and often they help each other.
Small kids doesn’t stop you from biking lmfao. It just changes what setup of bike you need to have.
the weather doesn’t allow it, or…
The only weather that would prevent it is a hurricane and you shouldn’t be driving in one of those either.
There’s weather I would prefer a house over a tent. Similarly there’s weather I would drive in that I wouldn’t bike in (even with a raincoat).
If you can’t stand the slightest inconvenience to yourself for a better world, the world will never improve.
Spoken like someone who hasn’t had to deal with kids. Or worked a job with a dress code.
No, it’s spoken like someone who’s been to the numerous countries where they bike with their kids just fine.
worked a job with a dress code
A 5-7 mile commute is doable without being sweaty with the right bike.
Sure, because rain and snow don’t exist.
Raincoats exist man. Rain bubbles exist. It’s a solved problem. Snow just isn’t that hard
I think distance is a pretty good reason not to. Just not wanting to is a fair excuse too, honestly. A car is convenient.
That said, at the point where the weather prohibits going by bicycle, in my experience at least, you generally just don’t go anywhere because it’d be perilous in a car as well. I recall when I visited Kiruna some years ago, other than the cars, most people I saw were getting around on kicksleds and bicycles. Even saw a couple of dog sleds.
As for kids, what I’ve generally seen here are three options; chariots (can usually hold up to two kids), parcel shelf seats (one child), or the kid bikes themselves. I was taught to ride a bicycle at three, and at seven I biked to and from school on my own.
Granted, in the U.S. I can see this not happening on account of everything being so bloody spread out that you need a car, and even if you did put up with the distance, the infrastructure isn’t there; you can’t go on the motorway with a bicycle. Urban planning over in the states is abysmal.
Overall agree. The weather I had in mind was mainly rain, super hard to avoid when biking, a non issue in a car. Wind can be unpleasant as well.
You can not bike the roads where I live. Also, there is no bus station or train station to bike to.
Sounds like a problem that needs solving.
Also, local bus that runs on the train timetable. Brings people to and from the train as well as the shops. Ideal.
I prefer to arrive at work/school/shops not sopping wet, and it sometimes rains.
I, personally, could bike or walk because the station would be particularly close to my residence. But, there are others in the county where to get to the closest station they’d be biking much further than they are currently healthy enough to accomplish.
Bikes are not a good option at this density either.
I prefer to arrive at work/school/shops not sopping wet, and it sometimes rains.
Raincoats! I have a nice yellow raincoat that folds up and inverts into its own pocket, turning into a little square you can tuck away in a bag or something. It’s super convenient.
Okay but what if I’m sopping wet with sweat from the heat and I also smell bad now.
Unless the general stink of the any large concentration of humans will overpower it.
I prefer to arrive at work/school/shops not sopping wet, and it sometimes rains
If only science could devise some sort of way to keep you dry in the rain. One day, perhaps
A car does it pretty well!
Caring about convenience over the environment and health is exactly the problem. They’ll get healthy enough.
This is a very ablist view.
Ablest is when pro environment . Yeah no. It’s easy to create exceptions for the small portion of the population who is fully incapable of biking. Less car dependency will allow those who can’t drive to get around far more safely, actually leading to more mobility for people with issues like legal blindness that prevent them from driving but not prevent them from other multimodal forms of transit
“They’ll get healthy enough” is an albist view, no matter what else you might believe in.
It’s strictly true. It’s not ablest. The overwhelming majority of those who cannot have no serious underlying reason as to why not
We’ve been trying to get a LRT in a 400k population area for decades and can’t make it happen. There’s even an old unused rail line with right of way all the way from the biggest nearby municipality that causes all the traffic problems to downtown.
They still don’t think it’s enough people to warrant the upgrade/conversion costs.
They have been adding bus only lanes between downtown and that area though including in town and on the highway, but they’ve maybe only connected half the highway with bus only. That has been helping, and more frequent busses on it.
That plenty of people! There’s probably only 30k in my entire county.
I think part of the concern is ridership outside work commutes, but I think it’s more if you build it they will come kinda thing.
But something like this doesn’t need to be profitable. It can be a service. Need to get away from the thought that it all has to be profitable.
A universal building exemption would push a lot of things in the right direction
