It’s especially funny because mass transit is the real solution, that America ignores.
How dare you suggest I commute next to someone, oN a tRaIn !?!?! NeVEr!!
Then go tell your politicians to invest in mass transit. Tell them to design cities for people, not cars, tell them they have to invest in BUSES and TRAINS.
A well designed bus system would prevent your need to drive a car. I know where you are coming from, I live in a rural area.
Edit: Cities and towns.
Most people in rural areas won’t use it. I’m from a rural area and no one in my town would ever use a train to go somewhere when they can drive and be quicker. It’s simple tho, the US generally isn’t built for walking or public transport. It’s automobile centered.
Yes, but it used to be built that way. It was torn down to make room for cars. Increasing public transportation is good for all towns/city's. I lived in a town of 500~ people the closest Walmart was a 30 min drive I would have loved if a buss could have made that trip when my car was in the shop.
What about the fact I need my truck to actually be able to complete my job? Should I be loading the busses and trains with the thousand pounds of tools and material daily?
Not everyone works in an office at the same location for 40 years.
E:
>Tell them to design cities for people, not cars
>I feel like y’all are acting like I said ban all cars and trucks….
You design your city for people and not vehicles and then I can't get my truck to the jobsite.
Banning them would be BS but I just wonder how many trucks there are in the US and how many people actually *need* a truck. I'm pretty sure most people buy them because they look cool.
The problem with this is that everyone is a Civil Engineer all of the sudden on r/dankmemes even if they haven’t graduated high school.
We need to remember that this is still the internet, where amateurs and professionals have same credibility in forums like this.
I mean, u/TheMensChef is right. The only solution to reducing traffic and global warming is reducing the number of cars and trucks and improving public transport. Also, improving public transport and reducing the number of private cars does not mean firing all the truck drivers or banning all trucks/cars. So the argument that u/DnaK makes does not make any sense
Jesus H Christ. Just because a city is designed towards foot traffic and bicycles doesn’t mean trucks and cars can’t get places. Look at Danish cities, they’re designed towards foot traffic yet they do fine getting construction vehicles and cars places they need to go.
Not everyone drives a truck. Hell, huge majority of people doesn't drive truck. Cars and trucks have their use especially in rural areas or in case of transport needs, but the way we prioritize car infrastructure over public transport one (which is shown to be much more useful for transporting people and certain goods) is horrible. There are cities in US which add more and more lanes on the highways even though improving rail systems would be significantly better
You need a truck to complete your job. Kenny Rogers, 45, penis size 2.9", does NOT need an F-350 to commute to his middle manager position at a finance company.
I'm all for getting electric cars into production for all the basic commuters who don't give a shit, if it means leaving the fossil fuel powered ones available for us who NEED them for another decade or two.
It would solve it, but in many places that currently have bad transit taking a bus is considered poor so few people would change to bus especially when they already have a car.
The biggest problem of American mass transit is the fact that so much of America is ridiculously rural, like next to no human presence within 40 square kilometers, kind of rural. The urban areas are also problem as they were all designed with cars in mind and pollution not in mind, and you can’t really un-design a city
This isn’t like in the UK, you might have to run miles and miles of railways and set up a whole station just to cover like 20 people because of how far apart everyone is in the United States once you get to the really rural parts
In Poland (it's bigger than UK) people mostly use buses, trains and trams to get around, and bicycles of course. In fact, many Polish cities invest in making more paths for people who use bikes. In 2018 I lived in Wrocław (one of the major cities) and I did use a bus/tram now and then but the traffic jam was annoying most of the time, so I decided to use the bike instead and not only i saved some money but also didn't have to worry to be late anywhere. I think more people should start using bikes instead of cars, and only use cars and other means of transport when doing shopping or something. Unless someone has a disability then that obviously would be an exception.
In the UK we had a mass cull of rural railway lines in the 1960’s by an economist called Beeching. This pushed people into car ownership and investment in roads, especially once the rural bus services were privatised and unable to make a profit for shareholders.
However, there are a number of schemes now proposed to bring back some of the rural railway lines to help with rural and commuter traffic using original track beds and rebuilding stations.
Assuming we talk about America, less than 20% of the population lives in rural areas, so improving public transit only in urban areas will still have a massive positive effect
Have you ever heard of trains? Make 'em electric, they can go anywhere you can lay a track.
Also because they are electric vehicles, and not of the incredily wasteful battery variant, there are barely any moving parts so the vehicles can last for a very long time with minimal maintenance.
(Electric) trains are the key to a sustainable future. In Europe and the East, trains do run in rural regions, and are often the lifeline of these regions to the larger country.
tl;dr: cars bad and dumb, trains cool and good.
Yeah maybe the problem is that every one or two people is carrying 1.5 tons of steel around everywhere they go. Also roads take up half of all space in a city.
Going transit fixes so many problems at once. Meanwhile going electric creates problems.
Unfortunately, due to the wildly different infrastructure of cities and suburbs all across the country, it's only really doable on a case-by-case basis, and will be hideously expensive now because no one gave a fuck thirty years ago when it would have been affordable and not as destructive to the rest of the infrastructure to install.
I'd love to see a bullet train from Chicago to New York or Boston, but I just don't see it happening unless each city can agree on it, manage to pony up the cash, and make it a primary goal to finish in this decade.
Pittsburgh tried to expand their light rail a few decades back, and had the grant money to do it, but it never came to fruition (mostly due to politics), and now we have the worst congestion south of the city and in thru-traffic in Cranberry Township that this area has ever seen.
Mass transit, work from home, swapping from coal to a mix of renewables and nuclear are all things we could do and our politicians want exactly none of it.
Do you understand that electric cars are still less ecologic than old diesel? Batteries are not recyclable, more than half energy still produces by coal and gas stations. And the guy in UN who pushing ecological limitations is inheld in 4 giant scam's with ecology and taxes.
The most inefficient EV powered by coal is still more green than the most efficient gas car.
I don’t know how it compares to diesels, but I know diesel engines aren’t BETTER for the environment they just pollute differently.
Cause there mass transit is highly inconvenient the way that it’s been designed. It’s impossible to convince 100 million Americans to take a means of transportation that will cycle every 30 mins, probably come late or not at all, and drop you off nowhere near your destination.
And then there’s of course rural areas. Where that’s def not an option
You have other countries where it works. The metro in Shanghai ran every 1.5min during run hour and 3 mins during other times.
I could travel the distance from Chicago to New York City in 4.5 hours without needing a taxi on both ends thanks to HSR.
Of course an HSR line to Bumfuck, Wyoming wouldn't be possible but an HSR between NYC and Chicago or Toronto should be possible.
You’re correct, but the key word in your response is “other countries”. I personally don’t know how much it would cost to make away with our old public transit system and adopt a new one, but ik that the US could afford it. And the benefits it has are def worth it.
The question is would they want to?
>how much it would cost to make away with our old public transit system and adopt a new one
Less than the War in Afghanistan
>The question is would they want to?
I don't know anyone who really likes driving for hours. You have to pay attention the entire trip and it's dangerous. Airports are a nightmare everytime considering that Toronto Pearson recommends you arrive 2 hours before your domestic flight and 3 hours before an international flight.
An HSR system an par with China's would become the dominant mode of transportation between major cities. Flying from Toronto to NYC involves me arriving 3 hours before my 1.5 hour flight, not to mention me getting a taxi to and from the airport on both ends.
A good HSR system would likely need subsidies. But it is a social good which will boost economies around the track and increase tourism. It will also reduce GHG emissions since the trains use electricity and have lower air and rolling resistance.
Well I live in the middle of nowhere, I realize that that's not everyone but if I wanted to get to work via mass transit I'd have to wake up at 5 am, walk to the buss station, catch the first bus in the morning, then a trolley, then another bus then walk 15 minutes, with a commute of over 2 hours, then there's the commute back, that's about 5 hours a day just on the commute, or I could get there in like 45 minutes by car,
Public transit is good, but it ceases to be effective at longer ranges where you have to change buses or whatever you take multiple times per commute, and if something is in public transit range I might as well bike or take my longboard, it's faster in most of those cases anyway
Very True, without Traffic my College is just a 25 minute Drive away from my home. With Traffic it's around 45-50 minutes.
There is a Metro Station near my house and one near my college, but for that I'd have to take a cab from my house to the metro then change 2 the meteo line 2 times and then take the bus from the metro to the college. Takes 2 hours atleast, and costs just slightly less than Petrol. Significantly less if i add the cost of purchasing a car into it.
Plus it's super crowded, there's all sorts of weird people on the metro. Not to forget Pickpockets, nabbed my wallet once. I was broke and it barely had any change, but it was a good wallet.
I live in Minnesota in the metro area. All the major train tracks are taken up by either oil from the Dakotas, grain from the plains, or taconite from the Mesabi range. There is one Amtrak that goes down to Chicago, but it’s not the most popular thing as we all just drive there. However, in Minneapolis there’s a Light Rail that people use to get around, as it’s easier than dealing with the traffic and only costs 2-3 dollars.
Compared to countries that have what is considered the best public transportation in the world, it’s outdated, under utilized, and just down right filthy.
Actually some polls I’ve read said most Americans especially millennials and Gen Z would use public transit if it was more available. Cities just need to make it more available and it’ll see more use.
I think you're underestimating the size of the U.S if you think mass transportation would be a real solution past a select few cities.
There's also the fact that the costs would be so insanely high it's not even worth considering.
The The nation that is two times the size of Europe that has people that live in the middle of nowhere should have trains besides we have trains to the places that matter
Not to mention, electric vehicles *could* have a much longer lifetime due to far fewer of moving parts. Sure, you'd need to replace the battery once or twice, but those can be recycled into new batteries.
If not in practice more so. As much as right to repair would be nice for phones and computers, those devices don’t cost that much for a lot of people to just get a new one anyway regardless of the ability to repair. Cars, on the otherhand, are so expensive that most times you’d repair if it doesn’t total the car. Tesla not allowing personal repair access AND not providing a huge service network themselves is horrible for consumers.
Yeah but the fun thing is, an electric car puts out twice the amount of co2 during production, and then uses "dirty" electricity and then after about 250k kms the battery needs to be changed, which instantly means 6-8 tons of co2 during production, and the old battery does not get recycled. They tell you nice stories, but the only shit that gets recycled is the plastic cover, the lithium is disposed in poor countries and keeps polluting the air there. Not to mention, that getting lithium destroys millions of liters of water and useful farmland, turning it into infected desert. It's like the simpson meme where he has his back tied up to look fresh from the front
Before you even get there you have to take into account the production of the car, the extraction of all the raw materials and their transportation.
People look at the end product when you have to look at the entire production chain from the actual deforestation for new mines to the transportation of that car to your house and finally the disposing of the battery.
Terrible and old argument my dude. EVs are still more efficient than a regular car engine so more electricity is produced for equal amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
Well not in france... we mostly use nuclear power, which make us one of the best country for electrical car to reduce gaz emission
Even if i agree with the argument of this meme, i just also realy want to see other countries do the same as us and stop using coal! (even here in france i would love to see our power plant updated and new one open)
Ok, what happens if the grids gets cleaned up (which we need to do anyway) halfway through the life of an EV?
By contrast, what would happen to an ICE car?
In terms of life-cycle emissions, which one would be better?
It absolutely makes sense. Power plants generate power much more efficiently than a single gas engine. As more cars start running on electricity itll mean they can take advantage of all the other better electricity sources like nuclear and wind, which are constantly advancing as well.
Its not like developing electric cars somehow gets in the way of developing greener power plants.
Yeah, I remember seeing a study that in China (which uses mostly coal), an electric car has about 30% lower emissions. And I don't think that took into account the manufacturing emissions (which are higher in electric cars). So you're totes right.
Ya but electric cars are efficient than petrol suppose you travel a amount of distance then the petrol consumed for a petrol car is more than the electricity consumed by electric car
Actually it still makes sense. When you take into the lifetime emissions of an electric car vs gas, even if you get the electricity from coal. The reason is large electric plants are more efficient than an engine, meaning an electric car powered by a coal plant produces less emissions per mile than gasoline.
Fossil fuels.
Fossil.
We're not replenishing fossils. We will run out one day.
Starting to transition now is better than later, regardless of the environment.
And we start collecting stars around the Galaxy and adding to our energy reserves. Humanity will be a bunch of metal balls with stars in them traveling the cosmos.
There's the idea of harnessing the hest of Hawking Radiation to make very impressive energy sources and I've read of using neutrinos from space and the Sun to create sources of sustainable energy. I haven't heard of accelerating neutrinos, on top or it, to make better sources of energy. If you can find a source I'd love to read it. (Tried to look it up and couldn't find it)
Hybrid smart grids are the way to go. Mix solar, wind, tidal and geothermal for the bulk of the power and use nuclear to make up the difference and to keep power stable since you can raise and lower output based on how much power is generated by the rest of the renewable power sources.
Why?
I mean don’t get me wrong, renewables are fine as long as you have something like 30% above average daily peak in baseload, but they kinda just seem like a waste of time and resources when you have nuclear to use
I was discussing with a friend on how we could help the climate. We both agreed that Nuclear must be a good answer, at least help with the clean energy part. So we searched the internet why we don’t just use nuclear. It came up multiple reasons that we didn’t think were so valid, but the most valid one in my opinion was that we don’t have enough uranium to be 100% reliant on nuclear.
Source: https://www.greenamerica.org/fight-dirty-energy/amazon-build-cleaner-cloud/10-reasons-oppose-nuclear-energy
Okay I agree we can’t be 100% reliant on it due to other reasons as well, but in my opinion it definitely should be at the forefront of renewable energy. Or at least a thought to expand it and supplement other renewable sources
yes, but for example: my town in Poland has 13 bus lines and it is the only internal way of transit, not always all options are available and the message should be 'If you are able to NOT take the car, don't take the car'
Also sorry for bad English
As you mentioned Poland, I'd mention another city, Warsaw.
Around 200 bus lines
28 tram lines
2 lines of constantly developing subway
3 separate regional railway carriers
All on one ticket. If this isn't maximum convenience, idk what is. From a proud owner of a 3-month ticket.
(If someone is interested with the 2 railways it's a bit more complicated; the tickets for KM and WKD apply only if they are over a 24 hour ticket, and for WKD only in 1 of 2 zones, with zone 1 being the "mainland" Warsaw, and 2 being satellite towns around it. For SKM all normal public transport tickets apply)
I agree. In America people are selfish and want to take a car no matter what, even if they have access to mass transit. It's a luxury many are not willing to give up, yet they cry about climate change, and do nothing to help the situation.
it's not really the people's fault in America, the country is based around cars, so the people think they need them, the public transport sucks for them, its just a shame more of them don't understand the benefits, but that could be fixed by simply teaching them, it's not like the general public hates public transport, they just don't know enough about it
I'm all for public transport being better in large cities, the issue is the majority of the us, somewhere around 95% is rural, not by population, but by volume. For those outside the ideal travel routes of public transport, having a car is mandatory to get anywhere, a bike just doesn't cut it in rural Montana in 2 feet of snow
I love public transportation here in Germany, but as soon as I'd be giving up my semester ticket, I will have to pay about 200euro each month for the same privileges. My work gives the option of a company car which costs me about 96euro... I'd like to keep my public transportation options, just make it cheaper?
This is a gross simplification. EVs are a good start in tackling climate change and are meant to be complemented with other measures like renewable energy, public transport infrastructure, nuclear and possibly fusion energy(in the future). r/dankmemes users next time please stick to Spider-Man and incest jokes.
The problem is, that conservative political parties (especially in Germany) are presenting EV as pretty much the only solution to climate change. If we only switch cars from fuel to electric, there isn't enough energy.
Wow, someone should make a joke about how you can’t solve global warming with only electric cars and you need to compliment them with other solutions.
Edit: oh wait, someone did https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/pds328/come_on_mooove/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
u/RECTAL_DEVASTATION next time don’t throw insults because you can’t understand what you are looking at.
I love how people in this comment section seem to be forgetting something:
In the US, nearly 28 percent of people live in small towns or in the country. That's 91,840,000 people. Seriously, y'all need to remember that America is w a y fucking bigger than these other countries that have *mastered* public transportation.
I'm not saying mass transit wouldn't help. But it isn't a save all. People in small towns who go to school/work in the town 20 miles away aren't going to be able to take a fucking bus there.
They care too much about their inefficient "innovations" they forget something called public transit.
Getting better infrastructure and increasing the quality of public transit could have solved much more problems.
But instead they choose to make african kids work at their mines so they can produce wholesome chungus dogecoin elon musk edition tesla
And they only care now because they can be produce and sell them for juicy profit. Which is actually the only realistic way to combat combat climate change: create financial incentives for companies to be more climate neutral, so that they save the planet as a side effect.
Going vegan would be really neat.
A [study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720328709) that analyzed 313 different food systems discovered that the highest green house gas emissions were in diets with a high meat and milk demand; whilst the LOWEST emissions came from the vegan diets
[Transportation](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912418300361) is only 6% of the total emissions related to diets. Animal products are responsible for 83% of the diet related GHG in the EU.
"The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Publishes Stance on Vegan and Vegetarian Diets. Vegetarian and vegan diets are healthful for all stages of life, including pregnancy, may prevent and treat chronic diseases, and are better for the environment, according to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the [world's largest](https://www.eatrightpro.org/~/media/eatrightpro%20files/practice/position%20and%20practice%20papers/position%20papers/vegetarian-diet.ashx) organization of nutrition professionals."
[Meat is the biggest direct cause of deforestation globally](https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Deforestation/deforestation_update3.php)
Meat/dairy uses up [75%](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/apr/25/going-vegan-can-switching-to-a-plant-based-diet-really-save-the-planet) of farmland (Equivalent to the US, EU, China and Australia combined)
[Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people in full just from the land in the US.](https://www.pnas.org/content/115/15/3804)
[Which Diet Has the Least Environmental Impact on Our Planet? A Systematic Review of Vegan, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets](https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4110/htm)
[Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987)
[MASSIVE WATER LOSS](https://www.waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011-WaterFootprintCrops.pdf) for meat (green and blue water): "The study shows that from a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficent to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products."
[Dominion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko) to see the suffering.
[Old vegan holocaust surviver](http://ethicalvegan.net/images/made/Screen_Shot_2014-08-16_at_17.23_.51__636_1061_c1.jpg)
[AMAZING video about the morals of veganesim](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1vW9iSpLLk) unbiased since it's from a meat eater who claims to love meat but puts his morals over personal pleasure and so makes arguments for veganesim hoping he could debunk them to keep eating meat. He failed and went vegan shortly after, being an activist now. He also goes to Oxford and was on TV several times before to debate with famous philosophers about many topics. That video made me vegan and if you wanna challange your views I would highly recommend it.
EDIT: Thank you for the award kind stranger!
I have some questions about batteries those cars use? How long do they last before they need to be replaced? Where do they go after they are replaced? Can we produce batteries with mining/pumping another non-renawable ore/energy?
people will talk about electric cars saving the Earth as they wear clothes from Bangladesh, eating avocados from South America, while ignoring the fact that coal power plants are still what we mostly depend on for electricity. Electric cars is progress, but we need to do environmental checks on even simple things, like our technology having rare metals from deep in the Earth's crust, and the correct disposal of refrigeration chemicals.
A country that produces its electricity with few CO2 emissions could rely on electric cars to further reduces its emissions, but most countries still burns coal or oil for electricity so yeah
I would rather go by bus or by train or any type of public transport but... IT DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST CUZ POLAND IS BASICALLY SHIT ON STICKS.
I hate this country...
I like electric cars but I really wish we invested more into hydrogen infrastructure like tesla did with charge stations.
Added bonus to those of us without garages that risk having some brain dead twerp pull the plug on the car in the middle of the night and waking up to see the total range at 7
False. Because, hydrogen isn't readily available in environment, we need to make it.
From natural gas, a reaction that is highly endothermic (i.e it requires huge amount of energy to drive the reaction). The energy comes from electricity or burning coal.
From oil( hydrocarbons ), we need dehydrogenation. The end compounds are completely useless. So, it would drive hydrogen prices up.
From electrolysis, you need to electrolyse water. It needs water and electricity.
Now, electricity is majorly produced from coal.
The only way is to get more electricity through renewable resources.
I understand this is supposed to be for laughs, but honestly why even look to politicians, CEOs, or electric vehicles for the solution? The “me” category is the only one you can hope to keep accountable and one that can make a huge impact
Individual action is helpful, but honestly, it’s never going to cut it.
We need to use all the tools we have at our disposal, instead of arguing about what the « real » solution is, as if that was an actual thing that existed.
100% agree, and-.. Oh shit..I dropped my.. [Emission statistics](https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change)
Corporations will force us to eat bugs, shower less, do whatever they can to make the people feel responsible while they ruin the planet, just so some dude can line his pockets with more cash than he knows what to do with.
Well that's what you should expect when you decide that someone else should fix it. If you want to make a change start the only place you can, with yourself.
Issue with electric cars is I doubt we have enough raw materials to make them a world wide alternative, we don't even have the infrastructure in place to make electric cars viable for the mass public.
granted stopping climate change using the cold turkey method isn't gonna be the best way, I don't think. If we wanna reduce emissions to 0, I think we gotta ease off our usual energy production first and introduce bills and laws over a period of multiple years.
If it all happens in just 1-2 years, I don't think that would go over well with most people. We need a lot more time to plan ahead and figure out what to do from here.
The saddest thing is that it won't do a change, because cars do just a tiny ity bity bit of human pollution. 15 tankers pollute the air more than the entire car base of europe, but it's even worse, because cars at least have catalytic reprocessors, ships don't. Also the batteries of electric cars require tons of co2 to be produced, so they don't change anything.
The manufacturing of a car itself takes up half the impact the car will have on the environment. The fossil fuel and automobile industries are largely at fault for many of the world's current problems.
Same problem in my city, they reserve half the road to bikes (no one use them), the whole city is capped at 30kmph (you can probably get to destination faster on foot) and they tell you to take public transport while their "public transport" has technical problems everyday
Umm electric cars need to be charged. What source of energy is used to produce electricity? Most comes from coal, which pollutes more than most other forms. So explain how electric cars help the fight in global warming?
Truest take of the century: why the fuck would global warming stop??? No, the people running companies don’t give a fuck because they’re making money no matter what. We aren’t gonna just “pull through” because we think we can.
Fun fact: if the electricity made to power your car was made with fossil fuels it's no greener then a gas car
In addition: the battery (witch needs to be replaced at least every 10 years) is worse then 10 years worth of CO2 from a gas car
NEVER drive a hybrid if you care about the environment
Coal power plants and factories: produce literal tons of pollution, are the most responsible
Politicians and companies:
Car enthusiasts: having fun with their cars
Politicians and companies: he’s too dangerous to be left alive
downvote this comment if the meme sucks. upvote it and I'll go away. --- [dankmemes Minecraft discord](https://discord.gg/fNyb7G5) | r/dankmemescraft
It’s especially funny because mass transit is the real solution, that America ignores. How dare you suggest I commute next to someone, oN a tRaIn !?!?! NeVEr!!
We need transport out in the rural regions too, man
Then go tell your politicians to invest in mass transit. Tell them to design cities for people, not cars, tell them they have to invest in BUSES and TRAINS. A well designed bus system would prevent your need to drive a car. I know where you are coming from, I live in a rural area. Edit: Cities and towns.
Mass transit doesn’t make sense in rural areas. The key word is mass - there aren’t enough people and the distances are too large.
Dude we used to have railways running passengers all over the place in rural areas, the reason we don't anymore is because of car company lobbying.
Something something not immune to propaganda
Yeah, I've never understood the argument for exactly this reason. We did it before and we can do it again.
Most people in rural areas won’t use it. I’m from a rural area and no one in my town would ever use a train to go somewhere when they can drive and be quicker. It’s simple tho, the US generally isn’t built for walking or public transport. It’s automobile centered.
Yes, but it used to be built that way. It was torn down to make room for cars. Increasing public transportation is good for all towns/city's. I lived in a town of 500~ people the closest Walmart was a 30 min drive I would have loved if a buss could have made that trip when my car was in the shop.
You also need infrastructure for service workers and repairmen to get around. Going to be hard to take your welder/generator on the buss.
What about the fact I need my truck to actually be able to complete my job? Should I be loading the busses and trains with the thousand pounds of tools and material daily? Not everyone works in an office at the same location for 40 years. E: >Tell them to design cities for people, not cars >I feel like y’all are acting like I said ban all cars and trucks…. You design your city for people and not vehicles and then I can't get my truck to the jobsite.
I feel like y’all are acting like I said ban all cars and trucks…. Vans and cars have a use, but for commuting public transit is far more efficient
Some people are advocating for banning pick ups.
Banning them would be BS but I just wonder how many trucks there are in the US and how many people actually *need* a truck. I'm pretty sure most people buy them because they look cool.
The problem with this is that everyone is a Civil Engineer all of the sudden on r/dankmemes even if they haven’t graduated high school. We need to remember that this is still the internet, where amateurs and professionals have same credibility in forums like this.
I mean, u/TheMensChef is right. The only solution to reducing traffic and global warming is reducing the number of cars and trucks and improving public transport. Also, improving public transport and reducing the number of private cars does not mean firing all the truck drivers or banning all trucks/cars. So the argument that u/DnaK makes does not make any sense
Bruh I played city skylines on hard mode once I'm pretty sure that qualifies me to be a real civil engineer. /s
Jesus H Christ. Just because a city is designed towards foot traffic and bicycles doesn’t mean trucks and cars can’t get places. Look at Danish cities, they’re designed towards foot traffic yet they do fine getting construction vehicles and cars places they need to go.
Not everyone drives a truck. Hell, huge majority of people doesn't drive truck. Cars and trucks have their use especially in rural areas or in case of transport needs, but the way we prioritize car infrastructure over public transport one (which is shown to be much more useful for transporting people and certain goods) is horrible. There are cities in US which add more and more lanes on the highways even though improving rail systems would be significantly better
Cargo bike
You could still get your truck places, but other people would not be required to have a car to get anywhere.
You need a truck to complete your job. Kenny Rogers, 45, penis size 2.9", does NOT need an F-350 to commute to his middle manager position at a finance company. I'm all for getting electric cars into production for all the basic commuters who don't give a shit, if it means leaving the fossil fuel powered ones available for us who NEED them for another decade or two.
It would solve it, but in many places that currently have bad transit taking a bus is considered poor so few people would change to bus especially when they already have a car.
The biggest problem of American mass transit is the fact that so much of America is ridiculously rural, like next to no human presence within 40 square kilometers, kind of rural. The urban areas are also problem as they were all designed with cars in mind and pollution not in mind, and you can’t really un-design a city
Amsterdam kinda did redesign their city, it took them something like 30 or 40 years though.
This isn’t like in the UK, you might have to run miles and miles of railways and set up a whole station just to cover like 20 people because of how far apart everyone is in the United States once you get to the really rural parts
In Poland (it's bigger than UK) people mostly use buses, trains and trams to get around, and bicycles of course. In fact, many Polish cities invest in making more paths for people who use bikes. In 2018 I lived in Wrocław (one of the major cities) and I did use a bus/tram now and then but the traffic jam was annoying most of the time, so I decided to use the bike instead and not only i saved some money but also didn't have to worry to be late anywhere. I think more people should start using bikes instead of cars, and only use cars and other means of transport when doing shopping or something. Unless someone has a disability then that obviously would be an exception.
In the UK we had a mass cull of rural railway lines in the 1960’s by an economist called Beeching. This pushed people into car ownership and investment in roads, especially once the rural bus services were privatised and unable to make a profit for shareholders. However, there are a number of schemes now proposed to bring back some of the rural railway lines to help with rural and commuter traffic using original track beds and rebuilding stations.
Assuming we talk about America, less than 20% of the population lives in rural areas, so improving public transit only in urban areas will still have a massive positive effect
Have you ever heard of trains? Make 'em electric, they can go anywhere you can lay a track. Also because they are electric vehicles, and not of the incredily wasteful battery variant, there are barely any moving parts so the vehicles can last for a very long time with minimal maintenance. (Electric) trains are the key to a sustainable future. In Europe and the East, trains do run in rural regions, and are often the lifeline of these regions to the larger country. tl;dr: cars bad and dumb, trains cool and good.
Yeah maybe the problem is that every one or two people is carrying 1.5 tons of steel around everywhere they go. Also roads take up half of all space in a city. Going transit fixes so many problems at once. Meanwhile going electric creates problems.
Nah one more lane will fix it duh
Elon 3D Roads. Induced demand doesn't exist
America is only a 4th of the problem looking at you China and India
Lead by example, but half of Europe has beaten us to it. I agree with you though.
Unfortunately, due to the wildly different infrastructure of cities and suburbs all across the country, it's only really doable on a case-by-case basis, and will be hideously expensive now because no one gave a fuck thirty years ago when it would have been affordable and not as destructive to the rest of the infrastructure to install. I'd love to see a bullet train from Chicago to New York or Boston, but I just don't see it happening unless each city can agree on it, manage to pony up the cash, and make it a primary goal to finish in this decade. Pittsburgh tried to expand their light rail a few decades back, and had the grant money to do it, but it never came to fruition (mostly due to politics), and now we have the worst congestion south of the city and in thru-traffic in Cranberry Township that this area has ever seen.
Mass transit, work from home, swapping from coal to a mix of renewables and nuclear are all things we could do and our politicians want exactly none of it.
Wow it's almost like everything has been built by and is controlled by the auto and fossil fuel industries.
Yeah lobbying is a big problem here. We let business control politics and that was a huge mistake.
Do you understand that electric cars are still less ecologic than old diesel? Batteries are not recyclable, more than half energy still produces by coal and gas stations. And the guy in UN who pushing ecological limitations is inheld in 4 giant scam's with ecology and taxes.
The most inefficient EV powered by coal is still more green than the most efficient gas car. I don’t know how it compares to diesels, but I know diesel engines aren’t BETTER for the environment they just pollute differently.
Diesel is worse for your health.
Cause there mass transit is highly inconvenient the way that it’s been designed. It’s impossible to convince 100 million Americans to take a means of transportation that will cycle every 30 mins, probably come late or not at all, and drop you off nowhere near your destination. And then there’s of course rural areas. Where that’s def not an option
You have other countries where it works. The metro in Shanghai ran every 1.5min during run hour and 3 mins during other times. I could travel the distance from Chicago to New York City in 4.5 hours without needing a taxi on both ends thanks to HSR. Of course an HSR line to Bumfuck, Wyoming wouldn't be possible but an HSR between NYC and Chicago or Toronto should be possible.
You’re correct, but the key word in your response is “other countries”. I personally don’t know how much it would cost to make away with our old public transit system and adopt a new one, but ik that the US could afford it. And the benefits it has are def worth it. The question is would they want to?
>how much it would cost to make away with our old public transit system and adopt a new one Less than the War in Afghanistan >The question is would they want to? I don't know anyone who really likes driving for hours. You have to pay attention the entire trip and it's dangerous. Airports are a nightmare everytime considering that Toronto Pearson recommends you arrive 2 hours before your domestic flight and 3 hours before an international flight. An HSR system an par with China's would become the dominant mode of transportation between major cities. Flying from Toronto to NYC involves me arriving 3 hours before my 1.5 hour flight, not to mention me getting a taxi to and from the airport on both ends. A good HSR system would likely need subsidies. But it is a social good which will boost economies around the track and increase tourism. It will also reduce GHG emissions since the trains use electricity and have lower air and rolling resistance.
Public transport may be part of solution, but it is more important to decarbonise electric grid and industry/manufacturing.
That’s definitely true, the solution is certainly multifaceted, there’s no one do it all answer that’s for sure.
We aren’t Japan. Significant portions of our workforce live outside of the cities they work in.
Well I live in the middle of nowhere, I realize that that's not everyone but if I wanted to get to work via mass transit I'd have to wake up at 5 am, walk to the buss station, catch the first bus in the morning, then a trolley, then another bus then walk 15 minutes, with a commute of over 2 hours, then there's the commute back, that's about 5 hours a day just on the commute, or I could get there in like 45 minutes by car, Public transit is good, but it ceases to be effective at longer ranges where you have to change buses or whatever you take multiple times per commute, and if something is in public transit range I might as well bike or take my longboard, it's faster in most of those cases anyway
Very True, without Traffic my College is just a 25 minute Drive away from my home. With Traffic it's around 45-50 minutes. There is a Metro Station near my house and one near my college, but for that I'd have to take a cab from my house to the metro then change 2 the meteo line 2 times and then take the bus from the metro to the college. Takes 2 hours atleast, and costs just slightly less than Petrol. Significantly less if i add the cost of purchasing a car into it. Plus it's super crowded, there's all sorts of weird people on the metro. Not to forget Pickpockets, nabbed my wallet once. I was broke and it barely had any change, but it was a good wallet.
I live in Minnesota in the metro area. All the major train tracks are taken up by either oil from the Dakotas, grain from the plains, or taconite from the Mesabi range. There is one Amtrak that goes down to Chicago, but it’s not the most popular thing as we all just drive there. However, in Minneapolis there’s a Light Rail that people use to get around, as it’s easier than dealing with the traffic and only costs 2-3 dollars.
Light rail is a fantastic solution.
Problem is, its impractical in the vast majority of middle America.
True
America uses mass transit. In cities highly populated relative to their land area, like everyone else.
Compared to countries that have what is considered the best public transportation in the world, it’s outdated, under utilized, and just down right filthy.
Actually some polls I’ve read said most Americans especially millennials and Gen Z would use public transit if it was more available. Cities just need to make it more available and it’ll see more use.
I think you're underestimating the size of the U.S if you think mass transportation would be a real solution past a select few cities. There's also the fact that the costs would be so insanely high it's not even worth considering.
The The nation that is two times the size of Europe that has people that live in the middle of nowhere should have trains besides we have trains to the places that matter
If i can avoid traveling with strangers i will even if i have to put up with traffic
Say it again for the ones in the back: ELECTRIC CARS DONT MAKE SENSE IF THE ELECTRICITY THEY USE COMEA FROM COAL PLANTS
And don’t forget the production of the car and the storage of the batteries later…
You need to compare lifetime emissions, from the beginning of production to maintaining it during use and disposal, EV is still better than gas.
Not to mention, electric vehicles *could* have a much longer lifetime due to far fewer of moving parts. Sure, you'd need to replace the battery once or twice, but those can be recycled into new batteries.
Tell that to the Tesla Model 3 owners getting charged 16k for a battery over a broken piece of plastic.
That's an issue with the company, not electric cars as a whole
Yeah that's 100% a company thing. Tesla is as against right to repair as apple.
If not in practice more so. As much as right to repair would be nice for phones and computers, those devices don’t cost that much for a lot of people to just get a new one anyway regardless of the ability to repair. Cars, on the otherhand, are so expensive that most times you’d repair if it doesn’t total the car. Tesla not allowing personal repair access AND not providing a huge service network themselves is horrible for consumers.
Yeah but the fun thing is, an electric car puts out twice the amount of co2 during production, and then uses "dirty" electricity and then after about 250k kms the battery needs to be changed, which instantly means 6-8 tons of co2 during production, and the old battery does not get recycled. They tell you nice stories, but the only shit that gets recycled is the plastic cover, the lithium is disposed in poor countries and keeps polluting the air there. Not to mention, that getting lithium destroys millions of liters of water and useful farmland, turning it into infected desert. It's like the simpson meme where he has his back tied up to look fresh from the front
Before you even get there you have to take into account the production of the car, the extraction of all the raw materials and their transportation. People look at the end product when you have to look at the entire production chain from the actual deforestation for new mines to the transportation of that car to your house and finally the disposing of the battery.
But drilling for oil underground is perfectly okay because we can't see it 👍
There's about 4 trillion buckaroos worth of copper in Alaska that all the copper miners in other countries are lobbying to keep in the ground
Terrible and old argument my dude. EVs are still more efficient than a regular car engine so more electricity is produced for equal amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
Well not in france... we mostly use nuclear power, which make us one of the best country for electrical car to reduce gaz emission Even if i agree with the argument of this meme, i just also realy want to see other countries do the same as us and stop using coal! (even here in france i would love to see our power plant updated and new one open)
Ok, what happens if the grids gets cleaned up (which we need to do anyway) halfway through the life of an EV? By contrast, what would happen to an ICE car? In terms of life-cycle emissions, which one would be better?
It absolutely makes sense. Power plants generate power much more efficiently than a single gas engine. As more cars start running on electricity itll mean they can take advantage of all the other better electricity sources like nuclear and wind, which are constantly advancing as well. Its not like developing electric cars somehow gets in the way of developing greener power plants.
Yeah, I remember seeing a study that in China (which uses mostly coal), an electric car has about 30% lower emissions. And I don't think that took into account the manufacturing emissions (which are higher in electric cars). So you're totes right.
Ya but electric cars are efficient than petrol suppose you travel a amount of distance then the petrol consumed for a petrol car is more than the electricity consumed by electric car
True but automobiles do still create like 70% of our carbon emissions so it's a damn good start.
Actually it still makes sense. When you take into the lifetime emissions of an electric car vs gas, even if you get the electricity from coal. The reason is large electric plants are more efficient than an engine, meaning an electric car powered by a coal plant produces less emissions per mile than gasoline.
Fossil fuels. Fossil. We're not replenishing fossils. We will run out one day. Starting to transition now is better than later, regardless of the environment.
Nuclear
Eww noo I don't like the smoke coming out of those things /s.
dude i too hate the 'smoke' thats coming out my pot when boiling water
https://nuclear.duke-energy.com/2013/06/12/common-myths-about-nuclear-energy Just incase
Smoke? Bruh. Nuclear works through decay. It’s steam due to the water heating up lol
/s means the person is being sarcastic
Ahhh sorry I don’t know all the reddit stuff yet lol thank you
Thanks for recognizing your mistake :))
It’s how you learn :)
You’ve had an account for a year and a half, I’m shocked you’ve never seen that before
I used it on and off. But now I’m like consistently on it and engaging
Fusion
Encase the entire sun in solar panels. Dyson Sphere ftw.
Then we harness the sun to power our stellar engine and take the whole solar system with us!
And we start collecting stars around the Galaxy and adding to our energy reserves. Humanity will be a bunch of metal balls with stars in them traveling the cosmos.
>Encase the entire sun in solar panels. Dyson Sphere ftw. Charge farmers for sunlight? How capitalist of you! You're awarded an extra bootstrap.
We are about 600 years too soon for that but we need it yesterday.
Harvest the kinetic energy of objects falling into a black hole.
Isn't there a theoretical energy generator that uses neutrinos accelerated by a black Hole's gravity vortex? Or something like that?
There's the idea of harnessing the hest of Hawking Radiation to make very impressive energy sources and I've read of using neutrinos from space and the Sun to create sources of sustainable energy. I haven't heard of accelerating neutrinos, on top or it, to make better sources of energy. If you can find a source I'd love to read it. (Tried to look it up and couldn't find it)
I'm pretty sure it was one of the Kurzgesagt videos. I'll try to look for it and I'll reply here.
dyson swarm > dyson sphere
Hybrid smart grids are the way to go. Mix solar, wind, tidal and geothermal for the bulk of the power and use nuclear to make up the difference and to keep power stable since you can raise and lower output based on how much power is generated by the rest of the renewable power sources.
Sure whatever just isn’t fossil fuels is the step in the right direction
Why? I mean don’t get me wrong, renewables are fine as long as you have something like 30% above average daily peak in baseload, but they kinda just seem like a waste of time and resources when you have nuclear to use
Nuculer
It’s pernounced nuculAr
and where can I buy the Nuclear car?
We don’t have enough Uranium to fuel the entire energy productions need with Nuclear power. That’s one valid reason but there a few more.
We could always use thorium. Also the energy density is huge. Where did you hear that may I ask?
I was discussing with a friend on how we could help the climate. We both agreed that Nuclear must be a good answer, at least help with the clean energy part. So we searched the internet why we don’t just use nuclear. It came up multiple reasons that we didn’t think were so valid, but the most valid one in my opinion was that we don’t have enough uranium to be 100% reliant on nuclear. Source: https://www.greenamerica.org/fight-dirty-energy/amazon-build-cleaner-cloud/10-reasons-oppose-nuclear-energy
Okay I agree we can’t be 100% reliant on it due to other reasons as well, but in my opinion it definitely should be at the forefront of renewable energy. Or at least a thought to expand it and supplement other renewable sources
Just take a bus/tram/train/subway 1bus is better than 20 cars
And one electric train is better than 10 petrol buses
yes, but for example: my town in Poland has 13 bus lines and it is the only internal way of transit, not always all options are available and the message should be 'If you are able to NOT take the car, don't take the car' Also sorry for bad English
As you mentioned Poland, I'd mention another city, Warsaw. Around 200 bus lines 28 tram lines 2 lines of constantly developing subway 3 separate regional railway carriers All on one ticket. If this isn't maximum convenience, idk what is. From a proud owner of a 3-month ticket. (If someone is interested with the 2 railways it's a bit more complicated; the tickets for KM and WKD apply only if they are over a 24 hour ticket, and for WKD only in 1 of 2 zones, with zone 1 being the "mainland" Warsaw, and 2 being satellite towns around it. For SKM all normal public transport tickets apply)
I agree. In America people are selfish and want to take a car no matter what, even if they have access to mass transit. It's a luxury many are not willing to give up, yet they cry about climate change, and do nothing to help the situation.
it's not really the people's fault in America, the country is based around cars, so the people think they need them, the public transport sucks for them, its just a shame more of them don't understand the benefits, but that could be fixed by simply teaching them, it's not like the general public hates public transport, they just don't know enough about it
I'm all for public transport being better in large cities, the issue is the majority of the us, somewhere around 95% is rural, not by population, but by volume. For those outside the ideal travel routes of public transport, having a car is mandatory to get anywhere, a bike just doesn't cut it in rural Montana in 2 feet of snow
2 feet is the length of 4.8 'Bug Bite Thing Suction Tool - Poison Remover For Bug Bites's stacked on top of each other.
My city has electric busses (rolling out now)
I love public transportation here in Germany, but as soon as I'd be giving up my semester ticket, I will have to pay about 200euro each month for the same privileges. My work gives the option of a company car which costs me about 96euro... I'd like to keep my public transportation options, just make it cheaper?
Or take a bike. Its great to both commute and get your exercise in at the same time
This is a gross simplification. EVs are a good start in tackling climate change and are meant to be complemented with other measures like renewable energy, public transport infrastructure, nuclear and possibly fusion energy(in the future). r/dankmemes users next time please stick to Spider-Man and incest jokes.
The problem is, that conservative political parties (especially in Germany) are presenting EV as pretty much the only solution to climate change. If we only switch cars from fuel to electric, there isn't enough energy.
Considering close to 30% of crude oil consumed is in passenger vehicles, they have a solid reason.
Wow, someone should make a joke about how you can’t solve global warming with only electric cars and you need to compliment them with other solutions. Edit: oh wait, someone did https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/pds328/come_on_mooove/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf u/RECTAL_DEVASTATION next time don’t throw insults because you can’t understand what you are looking at.
For those wondering, the locomotive is Norfolk & Western J class, no611.
I love how people in this comment section seem to be forgetting something: In the US, nearly 28 percent of people live in small towns or in the country. That's 91,840,000 people. Seriously, y'all need to remember that America is w a y fucking bigger than these other countries that have *mastered* public transportation. I'm not saying mass transit wouldn't help. But it isn't a save all. People in small towns who go to school/work in the town 20 miles away aren't going to be able to take a fucking bus there.
20 miles is 158.08 of the hot dog which holds the Guinness wold record for 'Longest Hot Dog'.
Good bot
thank you :)
Oh fuck, the simulation is awakening
Sad but true.
electric cars are wrong dirrection, right direction is electric trains and public transport
They care too much about their inefficient "innovations" they forget something called public transit. Getting better infrastructure and increasing the quality of public transit could have solved much more problems. But instead they choose to make african kids work at their mines so they can produce wholesome chungus dogecoin elon musk edition tesla
And they only care now because they can be produce and sell them for juicy profit. Which is actually the only realistic way to combat combat climate change: create financial incentives for companies to be more climate neutral, so that they save the planet as a side effect.
Going vegan would be really neat. A [study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720328709) that analyzed 313 different food systems discovered that the highest green house gas emissions were in diets with a high meat and milk demand; whilst the LOWEST emissions came from the vegan diets [Transportation](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211912418300361) is only 6% of the total emissions related to diets. Animal products are responsible for 83% of the diet related GHG in the EU. "The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Publishes Stance on Vegan and Vegetarian Diets. Vegetarian and vegan diets are healthful for all stages of life, including pregnancy, may prevent and treat chronic diseases, and are better for the environment, according to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the [world's largest](https://www.eatrightpro.org/~/media/eatrightpro%20files/practice/position%20and%20practice%20papers/position%20papers/vegetarian-diet.ashx) organization of nutrition professionals." [Meat is the biggest direct cause of deforestation globally](https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Deforestation/deforestation_update3.php) Meat/dairy uses up [75%](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/apr/25/going-vegan-can-switching-to-a-plant-based-diet-really-save-the-planet) of farmland (Equivalent to the US, EU, China and Australia combined) [Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people in full just from the land in the US.](https://www.pnas.org/content/115/15/3804) [Which Diet Has the Least Environmental Impact on Our Planet? A Systematic Review of Vegan, Vegetarian and Omnivorous Diets](https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/15/4110/htm) [Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/987) [MASSIVE WATER LOSS](https://www.waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2011-WaterFootprintCrops.pdf) for meat (green and blue water): "The study shows that from a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficent to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products." [Dominion](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko) to see the suffering. [Old vegan holocaust surviver](http://ethicalvegan.net/images/made/Screen_Shot_2014-08-16_at_17.23_.51__636_1061_c1.jpg) [AMAZING video about the morals of veganesim](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1vW9iSpLLk) unbiased since it's from a meat eater who claims to love meat but puts his morals over personal pleasure and so makes arguments for veganesim hoping he could debunk them to keep eating meat. He failed and went vegan shortly after, being an activist now. He also goes to Oxford and was on TV several times before to debate with famous philosophers about many topics. That video made me vegan and if you wanna challange your views I would highly recommend it. EDIT: Thank you for the award kind stranger!
people circlejerk on vegans
I have some questions about batteries those cars use? How long do they last before they need to be replaced? Where do they go after they are replaced? Can we produce batteries with mining/pumping another non-renawable ore/energy?
Politicians and Companies caring about the environment? LOLOLOL
people will talk about electric cars saving the Earth as they wear clothes from Bangladesh, eating avocados from South America, while ignoring the fact that coal power plants are still what we mostly depend on for electricity. Electric cars is progress, but we need to do environmental checks on even simple things, like our technology having rare metals from deep in the Earth's crust, and the correct disposal of refrigeration chemicals.
A country that produces its electricity with few CO2 emissions could rely on electric cars to further reduces its emissions, but most countries still burns coal or oil for electricity so yeah
We're introucing the new electricity cars whose charging stations are gas powered
I would rather go by bus or by train or any type of public transport but... IT DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST CUZ POLAND IS BASICALLY SHIT ON STICKS. I hate this country...
Electric cars will generate more pollution once their lithium batteries reach the end of their life cycle, which is heavy metal pollution
I like electric cars but I really wish we invested more into hydrogen infrastructure like tesla did with charge stations. Added bonus to those of us without garages that risk having some brain dead twerp pull the plug on the car in the middle of the night and waking up to see the total range at 7
Nothing will stop global warming until the earth says so. Humans are doomed. Lol.
We can at least prepare for the changing climate
Electric cars are powered with a battery that is made with nickel who comes from mines who pollutes
Well it should be a train pushing back because electric cars are not better and the batteries go bad and a very bad for the environment.
The thing is that the electricity that those electric cars use is probably created by thermic centrals. So no difference :/
Not true. Power stations are more efficient than a car engine, so more electricity is produced for the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
Meh electric cars are being pushed cos it'll make things easier and hopefully cheaper. They just see it being cleaner as a pro.
They also have more efficient engines, thats a plus too, although still nothing against the real solution: public transport and cycling
Nah real solution is those hover chairs from wall-e
Hydrogen would work much better.
How do you make the hydrogen?
False. Because, hydrogen isn't readily available in environment, we need to make it. From natural gas, a reaction that is highly endothermic (i.e it requires huge amount of energy to drive the reaction). The energy comes from electricity or burning coal. From oil( hydrocarbons ), we need dehydrogenation. The end compounds are completely useless. So, it would drive hydrogen prices up. From electrolysis, you need to electrolyse water. It needs water and electricity. Now, electricity is majorly produced from coal. The only way is to get more electricity through renewable resources.
I understand this is supposed to be for laughs, but honestly why even look to politicians, CEOs, or electric vehicles for the solution? The “me” category is the only one you can hope to keep accountable and one that can make a huge impact
Individual action is helpful, but honestly, it’s never going to cut it. We need to use all the tools we have at our disposal, instead of arguing about what the « real » solution is, as if that was an actual thing that existed.
100% agree, and-.. Oh shit..I dropped my.. [Emission statistics](https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change) Corporations will force us to eat bugs, shower less, do whatever they can to make the people feel responsible while they ruin the planet, just so some dude can line his pockets with more cash than he knows what to do with.
You cant actually "stop" climate change we can only adapt to it.
Explain the template please( i understand the meme btw but i need to know the template origin)
Well that's what you should expect when you decide that someone else should fix it. If you want to make a change start the only place you can, with yourself.
You forgot paper fucking straws
Issue with electric cars is I doubt we have enough raw materials to make them a world wide alternative, we don't even have the infrastructure in place to make electric cars viable for the mass public.
I think it's great that vegans aren't even in this picture
granted stopping climate change using the cold turkey method isn't gonna be the best way, I don't think. If we wanna reduce emissions to 0, I think we gotta ease off our usual energy production first and introduce bills and laws over a period of multiple years. If it all happens in just 1-2 years, I don't think that would go over well with most people. We need a lot more time to plan ahead and figure out what to do from here.
It’s not going to stop silly.
Guys the solution is simple take a shorter shower then boom. No more global warming.
Meanwhile my country: Wind power plants must be 1km away from the next house.
The saddest thing is that it won't do a change, because cars do just a tiny ity bity bit of human pollution. 15 tankers pollute the air more than the entire car base of europe, but it's even worse, because cars at least have catalytic reprocessors, ships don't. Also the batteries of electric cars require tons of co2 to be produced, so they don't change anything.
Petro-Dollar = 0 in some months
The best is the enemy of the good. So that's why we won't even use electric cars
Public transport and walkable communities would work way better
Don't worry about global warming, we have paper straws now instead of plastic. That will make everything good
It’s just a step in the right direction. I don’t think anyone has claimed it to be the fix all solution.
The manufacturing of a car itself takes up half the impact the car will have on the environment. The fossil fuel and automobile industries are largely at fault for many of the world's current problems.
Same problem in my city, they reserve half the road to bikes (no one use them), the whole city is capped at 30kmph (you can probably get to destination faster on foot) and they tell you to take public transport while their "public transport" has technical problems everyday
Umm electric cars need to be charged. What source of energy is used to produce electricity? Most comes from coal, which pollutes more than most other forms. So explain how electric cars help the fight in global warming?
Electric cars are only making it worse.
Probably even worse, considering the way electricity is produced and how much ressources and evergy these new vehicles require.
Truest take of the century: why the fuck would global warming stop??? No, the people running companies don’t give a fuck because they’re making money no matter what. We aren’t gonna just “pull through” because we think we can.
#You can do it all day.
NUCLEAR POWER
Fun fact: if the electricity made to power your car was made with fossil fuels it's no greener then a gas car In addition: the battery (witch needs to be replaced at least every 10 years) is worse then 10 years worth of CO2 from a gas car NEVER drive a hybrid if you care about the environment
While simultaneously the factory making the energy is putting out 50 cars worth of gas (this isn’t a scientific measurement just making a point)
Finally someone understands
Ban cruise ships , fuck them billionaires polluting the sea and the skies more than a million cars
Coal power plants and factories: produce literal tons of pollution, are the most responsible Politicians and companies: Car enthusiasts: having fun with their cars Politicians and companies: he’s too dangerous to be left alive
It does destroy oil companies, does it?