News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by mrtksn on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @07:02PM (#26574181)
Or, you know, implement mass transit systems underground like those in Europe and Asia.

If it's a densely populated place, I don't think that "less polluting cars" is the answer.

This underground train thing doesn't have to be called train as I understand trains are considered communism in the USA. It is actually a sharing economy of connected electric vehicles, atmospheric pressure hyper-loop if you wish. Many of those are autonomous too, like level 5 autonomy without LIDAR. They are often used with a loyalty card(called "Osyter card" in London, for example) and even work with your mobile phone if you prefer not to carry a plastic card!

You can always say that in 2 years it would be pressurised and run at supersonic speeds!

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by aaomidi on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @07:21PM (#26574367)
We essentially need to do both. US cities have unfortunately been designed with cars in mind, and restructuring cities would be even more devastating to the environment.

We need to work with the current conditions, and that means BOTH public transit and better EV/road infrastructure.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by coliveira on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @07:40PM (#26574545)
Exactly, European cities have been designed around public transportation, the way sane cities should be designed. American cities are the result of an experiment where everyone needs to have one or more cars to survive.
Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by mrtksn on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @07:45PM (#26574588)
Actually, the biggest European cities were designed to withstand medieval battles.

All the things attributed to the American car-centric lifestyle were a thing to some degree everywhere. Then people got tired of it and changed it. Probably Europe not having much petrol also helped, which also explains the tendency of the European cars having significantly smaller and efficient engines.

There are plenty of cool videos of European cities that used to be traffic hells that turned into bicycle friendly walkable places. Though admittedly the hell part still exist for those who choose the to drive the cars.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by Qwertious on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @10:04PM (#26575770)
European cities used to be designed to withstand medieval battles. Sadly, they were not designed to withstand carpet bombing due to WW2 and had to spend a massive amount of money on rebuilding over decades.

That said, like you mentioned: that didn't stop them from making traffic hellholes. Designing a city to need cars is a choice.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by andrepd on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @07:52PM (#26574652)
What? European cities are mostly between hundreds and thousands years old. Nearly all of them weren't "designed for public transport".

Cars are a huge problem in Europe as well.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by cmrdporcupine on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @09:35PM (#26575548)
The core of European cities were built around foot and horse travel, and then that template fit for expansion outward, even after the influence of the car.

Take Mainz, Germany; where my father is from; the core of the city is a walkable old city (which my Opa knew every corner of having worked for the city for decades, and he toured me around all over it when I visited...). But then around it are a whole bunch of villages which grew into suburbs, and are connected by freeway. But it seems to me that because each of those villages, towns, and the central city already had a tradition of walkability, the connectivity between the towns, villages, suburbs took that into account when the post-WWII reconstruction happened.

In Mainz I was able to take a streetcar out from the centre of town to a small village in under 45 minutes and go walk in a forest. Here in southern Ontario -- where we have similar density and population to the Frankfurt/Rhine corridor -- such a thing requires a car.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by Robotbeat on Thursday March 25, 2021 @09:08AM (#26579748)
...and Europe uses LOTS of cars, still. As does Japan. I don’t understand why people argue for public transport as a reason not to electrify cars. Like, we HAVE to electrify cars. Is this just more excuses to justify buying a nice new combustion vehicle?
Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by xnx on Thursday March 25, 2021 @10:58AM (#26581085)
New underground transit lines in the US are ridiculously expensive in dollar costs (which means they also have large environmental costs). In terms of lowest emissions per passenger mile, our best bet might be fleets of lightweight self-driving vehicles.
Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by samatman on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @08:05PM (#26574781)
Sure, the London Metro is a fine system. Add half a billion more riders per year, and run trains at night, and you'll be at parity with New York!

The snark is unwarranted, it is unwelcome, and it is against the guidelines for this site.

America is absolutely enormous, sprawling, and suffers from a relatively recent inability to build things, which is very frustrating indeed.

If we were to cram our entire population into, say, Michigan†, I doubt we would have given over our extensive rail network to freight. But, we did, and Los Angeles tram system was bought out in a shady backroom deal, and there were other various and sundry sins. But mostly, we invented jet travel, and trains just don't cover the 4500 kilometers between New York and Los Angeles in an appropriate amount of time.

Admit it: if you were going from London to Istanbul, you could take a train, but you would fly. Well, London to Istanbul and back, that's the distance from New York to Los Angeles. Which you can do by train! But, people don't.

California, that notorious bastion of communism, voted in a high speed train between San Francisco and Los Angeles, and is still waiting for what they paid for. LA has added quite a lot of Metro in the last 30 years, but with a mere 150km of rail, 93 stations, and only a hundred million yearly riders, there's a long way to go. Meanwhile SF can't get the BART to circle around the South Bay for love or money.

† The size of the entire UK, and there are ten states larger.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by mrtksn on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @08:29PM (#26574994)
I don't see why you are so defensive, it's a well-spirited comment IMHO intended to emphasise the problems with a way of thinking that I do not agree with but my apologies if you feel bad.

As the "densely populated area" remark should give it away, I do not claim that USA should build metro lines between cities. What I say that cars in cities are not the solution.

Funny enough, I am in Istanbul since a while. I flew from London to Istanbul, it took me about 8,5 hours I guess. 30 minutes to Heathrow, 2 hours at Heathrow, 5 hours in the plane(did not take off immediately) ,1 hour at Istanbul Airport, 1 hour on a bus to my destination. Definitely better than the train but only because there's no direct line. The trains in Europe are great but expensive. If there was an overnight train to Istanbul from King's Cross at reasonable price I would have taken it.

The mass transit in Istanbul is horrendous but wherever available, the metro is much much better than the Istanbul traffic. Admittedly, the car could be better if you are in an S class Mercedes and being chauffeured.

Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by cromulent on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @09:54PM (#26575703)
The UK invented jet travel.
Re:Pollution from fossil fuel combustion deadlier than previ... by masonic on Thursday March 25, 2021 @04:26AM (#26577638)
Indeed they did... as well as passenger jet in-flight breakups. There's a reason square windows aren't used anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Comet