• BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It depends how far back you want to go, but it absolutely was true.

      Ignoring that fact, everything is designed around car transportation. You can’t just kill that off in any reasonable amount of time with a different solution. You’re talking no less than 50+ years if that is the main focus, ignoring all of the other much more significant issues. Rails don’t just pop-up. Rural living residents and small townships aren’t just gonna up and leave. Cars are here to stay, the best you can hope for is better public transport, some functional rails, and realistically, more efficient vehicles. Welcome to reality.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Cars will be around for our entire lifetimes. I do think that having a modern rail system in place would be great, to complement cars. In cities it’s easier and makes more sense, but there will never be a train that comes to my house, and if there is, I’m moving, because I sure as shit don’t want to live next to a train. I’d love to be able to jump on a cross Continental, high speed rail to go on affordable trips, but that isn’t possible and won’t be. As long as I can pay roughly the same for a flight to my destination, and get there significantly faster, I will probably never opt for a slower option, and I’m definitely not in the minority by saying that.

          With that said, assuming we spend the next 50 years eliminating cars and moving to rails, it still won’t touch emissions, because cars are not the leader and are continuing to get better and more efficient. So starting now would be convenient and not a bad idea, but it won’t change anything substantial from an emissions standpoint.

          • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            In 2021, transportation accounted for 28% of U.S. CO2 emissions, the largest source by economic sector. Absolutely, we need to address cars to reduce emissions; they’re not getting that much better. Getting rid of them won’t fix the problem, but conversely, fixing the problem requires getting rid of most of them. But why does it have to be rails? What if it was a café near your house? A doctor’s practice? A bookstore? It’s not foreordained that everything has to be so far apart that you need motorized transport (car or train) to get to it. The large majority of car trips Americans take are short distances, not cross-country journeys for which we need high-speed rail or airliners. Do away with single-use zoning, put the places people go every day close to where they live, and we eliminate the need for a huge number of daily car trips. No rails through your front yard needed.

      • HardlightCereal@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        We don’t have 50 years. As Bill Nye said, the planet’s on fucking fire. Emit less carbon, motherfuckers.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          Cars aren’t the main problem. They are a factor, yes, but not the big fish. Good thing EVs are become more mainstream and as technology progresses, they will be the dominant choice. Trying to get rid of all cars is quite frankly fucking stupid.

          • HardlightCereal@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            We need net zero by 2030. We need to turn that 100% of CO2 into 0%. Cars are 12.1%. Cars are our second priory behind manufacturing and construction, and we need to eliminate ALL of the priorities. No half measures.