• HardlightCereal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of those options emits carbon and drives humanity closer to extinction and one doesn’t. Do you prefer the time saving convenient genocide, or walking?

    • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Mate, so long as we ship plastic across the pacific, cruises still exist, and execs fly private planes, thats a non-starter.

      Further more, those buses would run empty most of the time, causing more emissions than if people just drove. Have you even been to rural America?

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Electric trains still have emissions. Not just power, but maintence as well. Overhead lines go down, pantographs leave metal dust everywhere, hell even just normal rail maintence.

          Theres a reason why all the American passenger lines went bankrupt, and why Amtrak is funded by the government and still struggling.

          And the best part is you’d spend a trillion dollars running lines everywhere, and almost no one would ride it.

          Edit: its costs 75,000 dollars per year per mile to maintain electric track. Its completely unfeasible. http://rockymountainrail.org/documents/RMRABP_CH7_OperatingCosts_03.2010.pdf