Re:Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto in...
by Jommi on Thursday December 24, 2020 @11:58AM
(#25529159)
We are not talking about your lifestyle. We are discussing effect of urban sprawl on the population and on the world. I was just so surprised that somebody on this forum could be able to miss the point so entirely, and be so ready to fight for whats clearly an indefensible position.
Walking More driving means your natural walking related to commute and errands goes to 0. There is a reason american states have a huge obesity problem compared to lots of european countries.
Cars Are you seriously comparing the carbon footprints of a personal car compared to the metro?
More driving means more green house gases. This is not about what vehicle you use, it's about the fact that urban sprawl requires a vehicle for even the most basic errands. This is unsustainable.
Not to mention do realize people can live in cities where they walk to work, walk to the grocery store, walk to gym, and walk to a restaurant?
Re:Jaywalking decriminalization, 100 years after the auto in...
by RobRivera on Friday December 25, 2020 @10:40PM
(#25541204)
>be so ready to fight for whats clearly an indefensible position
I really fail to see this as a reasonable expectation of dialogue and exchange of ideas if you're so cemented in your views.
More driving does not exclude a healthy walking routine.
More driving != equal more net green house gases. Yes the ICE generates greenhouse gases, but check out the carbon footprint of a battery supply chain for an EV sometime, or that of the MTA, MBTA, logistical supply chain of supplying the ENTIRE nyc 5 boroughs.
Bottom line, I'm willing to engage a deepdive discussion with critical eyes, not endure a superficial antisuburbia smear campaign while being namecalled.