The analogy is stretched past its breaking point. If an individual ant leaves the spiral, he saves himself. The ants who stay will die, but the ant who leaves is safe and unaffected by those who stay. To apply that to _our_ situation, I can't leave the death spiral and save myself. I have to convince the other ants to leave with me or it does no good. Worse, instead of a few hundred ants in a local spiral, it's _8 billion,_ and most of them I have no way of talking to and they don't even speak my language.
@@rudy9067 But a death spiral isn't the whole colony, or even a meaningful percentage of it. You're just pointing out another way the analogy fails. Stepping out of the death spiral and convincing 8 billion other humans to leave the death spiral are _radically_ different propositions. 400 people stopping driving for the entire lives -- which is literally not possible for most people, given the way our cities are built and the requirement to work -- would barely equal Taylor Swift's emissions last year.
@@typicallymoody "An analogy is not meant to be interpreted or applied literally." I didn't. "It conveys an idea in simpler terms" By *mapping* a simpler idea we understand to something more complex. Analogies are good or bad depending on how well they map.
Well, you’re just going to have to mark a really really intense pheromone trail then, that overpowers the one that created the death circle. On the upside, the ants who can not detect the new signal are doomed, moving evolution yet another step forward, and each ant that walks the new path reinforces it :)
People always feel hopeless, but they feel hopeless because everyone else says they feel hopeless. We CAN step out of the spiral. We CAN change things. We MUST change things. Thanks for making a great video!
I like the analogy! 13 years ago, I stopped driving a car and only used puplic transportation. Luckily, my city has great subways and buses. 4 years ago, I started cycling to work to even further reduce my carbon footprint. Best decision ever. Cycling 45 min to work and 45 min home is the highlight of my day. Even in rain, cold, and heat, I cycle, (except if there is a typhoon). My mother-in-law offered to buy me a car but I said no. Shopping is no trouble since I can strap a box on the back.
I personally can't stand people who decide to ride bicycles on roads that are shared with cars. Not all but some people who ride bicycles do not follow road rules; riding through red lights, cutting people off, causing congestion by blocking the flow of traffic. I am all for people who want to commute via bicycle but it must be done in dedicated bicycle lanes that help to keep you safe while not impeding my journey in a car.
@@Superbustr Causing congestion, impeding on your journey, breaking taffic rules, slowing you down a bit, are minor problems compared to global warming disasters. You must realize that you're are stuck in the death spiral brain mode, and part of the problem mate.
@@silasteacher The point I made is that if you are a bicyclist: don't be selfish, share the road (or stay on the sidewalk), and don't act like you own the road. If you don't follow any common sense road rules, it's dangerous for yourself on a bicycle and dangerous for other road users. It sounds like those points are lost on you. I don't believe in global warming or man made weather based natural disasters and you shouldn't either. -They are of a higher power.
@@Superbustr No, I undertand your point, there are indeed some unsafe cyclists out there. Believe it or not, they get in my way too, like when they are going on the wrong side of the road. I gave a counter point because it sounds like you need help getting out of the death spiral. You said you don't believe in global warming, (wtf) but do you believe in smog and pollution related illness? Or are you so deeply car-brained those are just made up words too?
@@silasteacher Cars are a minor problem in this “death spiral” you dunce. Giant corporations spewing carbon into the atmosphere at unprecedented pace is the actual problem. Also yea, if bikes are breaking traffic laws they are making it extremely dangerous for everyone, so that’s not a minor problem. Grow up.
Eat plants, and walk places, it isn't hard. Micro mobility is also great, especially for the disabled and for distances over 3 miles, but in a good city you shouldn't need to do that very often. Also, I'm pretty sure EUCs are more efficient than Scooters, they are definitely a more efficient package.
Good presentation of the problem, but the conclusion leaves much to be desired. Even if we all switched to bikes, the oil/coal fired powerplants, the delivery trucks, the manufacturing, and all the other sources of emissions still remain and they account for a lot more in emissions than private transport. So ultimately, while it would help a little bit, it wouldn't save us. The real conclusion of what is to be done: Organise for mass strikes. Organise a mass boycott of polluters. Bring down governments that worry more about rich people's profits, than about the literal survival of the human race. Riding a bike and building more bike lanes will not be enough, we need a systemic solution.
At this point, speaking as an ant, I am sitting to the side of the death spiral, watching the other ants travel themselves towards their inevitable death and thinking, "Well, at least there will be a lot more room for intelligent ants when these idiots are gone.", and looking impatiently at my ant watch.
An "intelligent" ant would tell the "idiots" to stop because the intelligent ant knows that if all the others continue this behaviour, it will lead to the death of the whole colony.
Sorry but an electric e-bike or an electric bicycle does not solve the issue of car congestion in large cities. e-bikes/ e-bicycles don't work. Why? Because you can't travel long distances in them, and they are impractical / unsafe when transporting large quantities of groceries or goods. The solution for large expansive cities such as Los Angeles is to build mass transit systems with trams and light rail trains. Los Angeles up until the late 60s had a world renowned light rail network; that was subsequently torn down and removed. Nothing can be done until the system totally collapses from total greed, corruption, and selfishness. If you live in one of these death spiral cities such as Los Angeles the only thing you can do is to leave and move to another city somewhere else in the world or in the country.
Cant travel long distances? Cant carry groceries? They can do both these things faster and more conveniently than cars in cities. It takes 1h 45min to commute 25km buy car in my city, I can do that in 45min on my ebike. To get groceries I have large panniers that unclip, take them in the shop, then clip them back on, then take them sraight in the house. No need for bags or loading/unloading a car.
It definitely depends what you’re working with. In my city (Calgary, Canada), an ebike is plenty capable or getting someone to a grocery store, school, office, etc. - even in the suburbs. The infrastructure could be adjusted, but it’s not a terrible start if you have e-bikes. Whereas, yeah, in other cities, just getting e-bikes to people may not be as effective. And they’re not a replacement to mass transit, either. All the same, I think e-bikes are a game changer.
People cross the continent on bicycles, so the first statement is at least technically false. Most commutes are under 30 miles, and the higher end (ie close to 30 miles) is not feasible for most (a few people do this regularly), though so it would be more accurate to say that bikes and e-bikes don't work for every situation (but what does?). There is no one silver bullet; there are instead dozens of improvements, each small individually, that could bring about significant change. There are videos of people moving couches by bicycle, so it can be done; it's not impossible, and doesn't have to be dangerous. There are cargo bikes used successfully and regularly by a very few in this country, but common elsewhere. Not that it's necessary to go that far; baskets, backpacks, and panniers can haul a significant amount of stuff. But instead of erecting a strawman (worst possible case for ebikes, and then strike it down), how about going after the low hanging fruit of all the cases where it makes the most sense, and build from there. For example, bike (and ebike) share programs are very popular in many cities, are safe, and have a positive impact on reducing congestion. Since this is a reality today, it rather blatantly counters your statement Ironically, if collapse follows the pattern you suggest (it might), hordes migrating out of LA are likely just to spread collapse, as other communities don't have an infinite capacity to absorb more people.
@@MrRentageek I really don't fully understand what you are saying. Your points are too long and not concrete in their logic. I still don't retract my point which was that trams and light rail systems are the best forms of transport to alleviate congestion in medium to large cities. Where e-bikes work: -In small cities where the commute is less than 15 miles. -In places that offer dedicated bike lanes, that enable bikers to say safe while commuting. -In places where the journey is on flat ground. -When having to only transport yourself and light goods. Where e-bikes don't work: -In larger cities where the commute may be 30 miles plus. -In places that don't have dedicated bike lanes, resulting in a high likelihood of being injured in a car crash. -In places that require climbing and descending steep hills. -When you need to transport multiple people or bulky and heavy goods. (You can make the excuse that you can transport anything on a bicycle but the reality is that it is both dangerous, impracticable, and too time consuming to load a bicycle with large quantities of goods. Such as what they do in India) Lastly: The US has more than enough space to take in. few million people from LA but only if these people are diffused across the US and don't move to just one neighbouring state.
So America is going to change it's habits, and then America is going to convince Asia to follow suit ... how, exactly? Also, as a Canadian watching this, I don't think your strategy would work up here ... distances are just too large, and iunno that cars are the real issue. Side note, I used to drive 12hr trips to see family pretty regularly before I moved closer, so I don't know which electrical vehicle is gonna let you cover 1000km in a day when they take forever to charge and the range in between charges is terrible compared to pumping gas. Oh and that thing called the supply chain, and global trade, which is mostly done by container ship ... I guess you'll just magically fork out the money from your bank account to convert them all to nuclear tomorrow? Your plan is to fly airplanes using ... what will you use? What's your proposal exactly to get to this goal you have? I appreciate that you want to change the world, and I think we as an purportedly intelligent species should be mindful and try to do what we can to protect our planet, but to think that it's reasonable to force others (particularly in less wealthy nations) to follow suit is a bit absurd. Like hey asia, why don't you just shell out a ton of money to redo all your infrastructure! No no, we won't pay for it for you, you need to pay for it yourselves, even though you're already poorer than everyone in the west! Keep up with us Jone's! (You realize we aren't the biggest polluters in the west right? So if we cut back, nothing changes overall anyways in the grand scheme, you realize, right?) EDIT: forgot to mention, the culprit is CO2, which can come from burning anything according to complete combustion ... heck you emit CO2 when you have a campfire ... trying to tackle a general problem like CO2 emission but focusing only on cars and gasoline and oil is kinda the wrong way to think about solving the problem ... stop having campfires and barbeques while you're at it if you really wanna cut back on CO2 emissions. Or go tell china and russia and india and iran and saudi arabia, and japan, and south korea, and germany, and indonesia, and ... you get the picture. You might stop (spoiler, Americans won't stop), but how will you convince literally every one else, to stop burning things in general ... you want combustion to stop? Tell California no more forest fires in summer ... too much CO2!
Fellow Canadian here! I agree, our distances are HUGE. I need a car for trips to visit family, as well. I like my road trips. But I think it comes down to the right tool for the job. I’m not going to ride my bike to see family 6 hours away… but also, I’m a single guy and don’t need more than two big bags for groceries, so I walk, and fill up once a week. For work, I can bike or use transit pretty comfortably. For me, it’s about options. I like having the option to go by bike, bus, car, plane, or train. Really about the right tool for the job. We’ve gotten in the mindset where we think the right tool is always the car (kinda a “when all you have is a hammer…” situation). Yeah, we can do some good for the environment, but it’s really about the freedom to choose the best way to get somewhere, the freedom to breathe in cleaner air, the freedom to travel safely. And you’re right, we won’t just wish it all away. And we definitely can’t impose our will on other countries - which really doesn’t look good coming from a rich country. But! Most of these decisions are made locally, where we do have an impact. I like the idea of making my city a nicer place to live.
@@humanecities I feel that. It's like, if you have a garbage can nearby, you should walk over to it, stomp out your butt, and toss the dead cig into the bin, rather than just flicking it into a nearby bush. We should do what we can, no matter how insignificant it seems. I get that. I (luckily, bless the lord) work from home right now 4 days a week, and in office 1 day per week, so personally I have a pretty small carbon footprint with the car, but I do use it on weekends to visit friends who all live 1-2hr away in adjacent cities. I think it's about using what you need to without overdoing it, and not purposely destroying the planet. Some wear and tear is natural, and if we aren't abusing the planet needlessly, I think things should be fine overall. If you're young and able-body and can walk to the bus stop and catch the bus, and if you can afford a slightly slower commute, and if you feel safe enough to ride public transit, do that, if you're fit and can bike it and feel safe on the road with cars, do that, and if you're going to drive, don't just sleep on the gas pedal and drive around in first gear, burning up the ozone faster than you need to. I'm with it. I still think gas is here to stay for a long time, but I also thing there's a place for balance and for cutting back in certain areas. Nuclear container ships is one place I think we could change. Airplanes...not so much, I think energy-weight ratio of a battery is just not viable for an airplane so we'll have to stay on gas there. Cars well ... I love the combustion engine, even as an electrical engineer who installs induction motors into industrial factories all day, so I'm biased. Don't take my stick shift away from me. I already barely drive it, and I already don't have a future with a retirement or a home in it. This is all I have left. Dear world..don't.
Start with a full charge, stop once during the trip for 15 minutes, and complete the trip. Assuming you visit more than 4 hours after a 1K trip, plenty of time to get a full charge for the trip back, or just overnight charge. Tesla can already do this.
Are we ignoring the fact that we need to transport large amounts of items such as when we go grocery shopping, or when we move? There's no way to fully transition into micro-mobility
We’re not ignoring that. Most trips can be done with micromobility. For the trips that can’t, we have cars, trains, planes, ships, kayaks, canoes, etc… It’s really about the right tool for the job.
I do all my grocery shopping with a bike. I go like twice a week, with a big backpack. But i live in the netherlands, in a city, and supermarkets are close by. It can be done. But yeah this gonna be harder in north america.
If you live in a reasonably designed city, you probably live closer to a grocery store, meaning you don't need Large grocery trips, and they can be taken home easily. When you're moving you can rent a truck, like everyone else ALREADY DOES
The analogy is stretched past its breaking point. If an individual ant leaves the spiral, he saves himself. The ants who stay will die, but the ant who leaves is safe and unaffected by those who stay.
To apply that to _our_ situation, I can't leave the death spiral and save myself. I have to convince the other ants to leave with me or it does no good. Worse, instead of a few hundred ants in a local spiral, it's _8 billion,_ and most of them I have no way of talking to and they don't even speak my language.
An ant without a colony is dead.
@@rudy9067 But a death spiral isn't the whole colony, or even a meaningful percentage of it. You're just pointing out another way the analogy fails.
Stepping out of the death spiral and convincing 8 billion other humans to leave the death spiral are _radically_ different propositions. 400 people stopping driving for the entire lives -- which is literally not possible for most people, given the way our cities are built and the requirement to work -- would barely equal Taylor Swift's emissions last year.
An analogy is not meant to be interpreted or applied literally. It conveys an idea in simpler terms
@@typicallymoody "An analogy is not meant to be interpreted or applied literally."
I didn't.
"It conveys an idea in simpler terms"
By *mapping* a simpler idea we understand to something more complex. Analogies are good or bad depending on how well they map.
Well, you’re just going to have to mark a really really intense pheromone trail then, that overpowers the one that created the death circle.
On the upside, the ants who can not detect the new signal are doomed, moving evolution yet another step forward, and each ant that walks the new path reinforces it :)
Transportation is important, but still just less than 20% of carbon emissions.
It's much more complicated than that...
People always feel hopeless, but they feel hopeless because everyone else says they feel hopeless. We CAN step out of the spiral. We CAN change things. We MUST change things.
Thanks for making a great video!
I like the analogy! 13 years ago, I stopped driving a car and only used puplic transportation. Luckily, my city has great subways and buses. 4 years ago, I started cycling to work to even further reduce my carbon footprint. Best decision ever. Cycling 45 min to work and 45 min home is the highlight of my day. Even in rain, cold, and heat, I cycle, (except if there is a typhoon). My mother-in-law offered to buy me a car but I said no. Shopping is no trouble since I can strap a box on the back.
I personally can't stand people who decide to ride bicycles on roads that are shared with cars. Not all but some people who ride bicycles do not follow road rules; riding through red lights, cutting people off, causing congestion by blocking the flow of traffic. I am all for people who want to commute via bicycle but it must be done in dedicated bicycle lanes that help to keep you safe while not impeding my journey in a car.
@@Superbustr Causing congestion, impeding on your journey, breaking taffic rules, slowing you down a bit, are minor problems compared to global warming disasters. You must realize that you're are stuck in the death spiral brain mode, and part of the problem mate.
@@silasteacher The point I made is that if you are a bicyclist: don't be selfish, share the road (or stay on the sidewalk), and don't act like you own the road.
If you don't follow any common sense road rules, it's dangerous for yourself on a bicycle and dangerous for other road users. It sounds like those points are lost on you.
I don't believe in global warming or man made weather based natural disasters and you shouldn't either. -They are of a higher power.
@@Superbustr No, I undertand your point, there are indeed some unsafe cyclists out there. Believe it or not, they get in my way too, like when they are going on the wrong side of the road. I gave a counter point because it sounds like you need help getting out of the death spiral. You said you don't believe in global warming, (wtf) but do you believe in smog and pollution related illness? Or are you so deeply car-brained those are just made up words too?
@@silasteacher Cars are a minor problem in this “death spiral” you dunce. Giant corporations spewing carbon into the atmosphere at unprecedented pace is the actual problem. Also yea, if bikes are breaking traffic laws they are making it extremely dangerous for everyone, so that’s not a minor problem. Grow up.
The editing on this video is superb. The cut at 1:00
Eat plants, and walk places, it isn't hard.
Micro mobility is also great, especially for the disabled and for distances over 3 miles, but in a good city you shouldn't need to do that very often.
Also, I'm pretty sure EUCs are more efficient than Scooters, they are definitely a more efficient package.
This is so eloquently put. Short and to the point.
Solid video
Wow! What a great comparison
Perfect video
This is an excellent video and a great take. Thank you!!!
So was this like an ad?
Yes
Good presentation of the problem, but the conclusion leaves much to be desired. Even if we all switched to bikes, the oil/coal fired powerplants, the delivery trucks, the manufacturing, and all the other sources of emissions still remain and they account for a lot more in emissions than private transport. So ultimately, while it would help a little bit, it wouldn't save us.
The real conclusion of what is to be done: Organise for mass strikes. Organise a mass boycott of polluters. Bring down governments that worry more about rich people's profits, than about the literal survival of the human race. Riding a bike and building more bike lanes will not be enough, we need a systemic solution.
Awesome and well put together
Great video, this needs to get viral!
Great video! Please do more.
13K and only 218 likes? I call Bull Shit!
Remember why they stopped showing the Thumbs Down totals.
Just block 1 % of the sun light. Problem solved.
We just need everyone to wear a sunhat with a wide brim. Problems solved. Science!
Ah, the Mr Burns solution.
@@philipsalama8083 shouldn’t mr burns be supportive of climate change action because he is nuclear plant owner
@@TheAmericanCatholic In one of the episodes, Burns tries to block the sun. He hated it because it "gives free light, heat and energy".
At this point, speaking as an ant, I am sitting to the side of the death spiral, watching the other ants travel themselves towards their inevitable death and thinking, "Well, at least there will be a lot more room for intelligent ants when these idiots are gone.", and looking impatiently at my ant watch.
An "intelligent" ant would tell the "idiots" to stop because the intelligent ant knows that if all the others continue this behaviour, it will lead to the death of the whole colony.
Fantastic video! Please make more.
The most serious thread out species faces is the ai alignment problem.
Yep, republicans
I'm hearing a lot of complaining.... and not enough solutions in this video.
Sorry but an electric e-bike or an electric bicycle does not solve the issue of car congestion in large cities.
e-bikes/ e-bicycles don't work. Why? Because you can't travel long distances in them, and they are impractical / unsafe when transporting large quantities of groceries or goods.
The solution for large expansive cities such as Los Angeles is to build mass transit systems with trams and light rail trains. Los Angeles up until the late 60s had a world renowned light rail network; that was subsequently torn down and removed. Nothing can be done until the system totally collapses from total greed, corruption, and selfishness. If you live in one of these death spiral cities such as Los Angeles the only thing you can do is to leave and move to another city somewhere else in the world or in the country.
Cant travel long distances? Cant carry groceries? They can do both these things faster and more conveniently than cars in cities. It takes 1h 45min to commute 25km buy car in my city, I can do that in 45min on my ebike. To get groceries I have large panniers that unclip, take them in the shop, then clip them back on, then take them sraight in the house. No need for bags or loading/unloading a car.
It definitely depends what you’re working with. In my city (Calgary, Canada), an ebike is plenty capable or getting someone to a grocery store, school, office, etc. - even in the suburbs. The infrastructure could be adjusted, but it’s not a terrible start if you have e-bikes.
Whereas, yeah, in other cities, just getting e-bikes to people may not be as effective. And they’re not a replacement to mass transit, either. All the same, I think e-bikes are a game changer.
Keep walking in that circle.
People cross the continent on bicycles, so the first statement is at least technically false. Most commutes are under 30 miles, and the higher end (ie close to 30 miles) is not feasible for most (a few people do this regularly), though so it would be more accurate to say that bikes and e-bikes don't work for every situation (but what does?).
There is no one silver bullet; there are instead dozens of improvements, each small individually, that could bring about significant change.
There are videos of people moving couches by bicycle, so it can be done; it's not impossible, and doesn't have to be dangerous. There are cargo bikes used successfully and regularly by a very few in this country, but common elsewhere. Not that it's necessary to go that far; baskets, backpacks, and panniers can haul a significant amount of stuff.
But instead of erecting a strawman (worst possible case for ebikes, and then strike it down), how about going after the low hanging fruit of all the cases where it makes the most sense, and build from there. For example, bike (and ebike) share programs are very popular in many cities, are safe, and have a positive impact on reducing congestion. Since this is a reality today, it rather blatantly counters your statement
Ironically, if collapse follows the pattern you suggest (it might), hordes migrating out of LA are likely just to spread collapse, as other communities don't have an infinite capacity to absorb more people.
@@MrRentageek I really don't fully understand what you are saying. Your points are too long and not concrete in their logic.
I still don't retract my point which was that trams and light rail systems are the best forms of transport to alleviate congestion in medium to large cities.
Where e-bikes work:
-In small cities where the commute is less than 15 miles.
-In places that offer dedicated bike lanes, that enable bikers to say safe while commuting.
-In places where the journey is on flat ground.
-When having to only transport yourself and light goods.
Where e-bikes don't work:
-In larger cities where the commute may be 30 miles plus.
-In places that don't have dedicated bike lanes, resulting in a high likelihood of being injured in a car crash.
-In places that require climbing and descending steep hills.
-When you need to transport multiple people or bulky and heavy goods. (You can make the excuse that you can transport anything on a bicycle but the reality is that it is both dangerous, impracticable, and too time consuming to load a bicycle with large quantities of goods. Such as what they do in India)
Lastly: The US has more than enough space to take in. few million people from LA but only if these people are diffused across the US and don't move to just one neighbouring state.
So America is going to change it's habits, and then America is going to convince Asia to follow suit ... how, exactly? Also, as a Canadian watching this, I don't think your strategy would work up here ... distances are just too large, and iunno that cars are the real issue. Side note, I used to drive 12hr trips to see family pretty regularly before I moved closer, so I don't know which electrical vehicle is gonna let you cover 1000km in a day when they take forever to charge and the range in between charges is terrible compared to pumping gas. Oh and that thing called the supply chain, and global trade, which is mostly done by container ship ... I guess you'll just magically fork out the money from your bank account to convert them all to nuclear tomorrow? Your plan is to fly airplanes using ... what will you use? What's your proposal exactly to get to this goal you have? I appreciate that you want to change the world, and I think we as an purportedly intelligent species should be mindful and try to do what we can to protect our planet, but to think that it's reasonable to force others (particularly in less wealthy nations) to follow suit is a bit absurd. Like hey asia, why don't you just shell out a ton of money to redo all your infrastructure! No no, we won't pay for it for you, you need to pay for it yourselves, even though you're already poorer than everyone in the west! Keep up with us Jone's! (You realize we aren't the biggest polluters in the west right? So if we cut back, nothing changes overall anyways in the grand scheme, you realize, right?) EDIT: forgot to mention, the culprit is CO2, which can come from burning anything according to complete combustion ... heck you emit CO2 when you have a campfire ... trying to tackle a general problem like CO2 emission but focusing only on cars and gasoline and oil is kinda the wrong way to think about solving the problem ... stop having campfires and barbeques while you're at it if you really wanna cut back on CO2 emissions. Or go tell china and russia and india and iran and saudi arabia, and japan, and south korea, and germany, and indonesia, and ... you get the picture. You might stop (spoiler, Americans won't stop), but how will you convince literally every one else, to stop burning things in general ... you want combustion to stop? Tell California no more forest fires in summer ... too much CO2!
Fellow Canadian here! I agree, our distances are HUGE. I need a car for trips to visit family, as well. I like my road trips. But I think it comes down to the right tool for the job. I’m not going to ride my bike to see family 6 hours away… but also, I’m a single guy and don’t need more than two big bags for groceries, so I walk, and fill up once a week. For work, I can bike or use transit pretty comfortably.
For me, it’s about options. I like having the option to go by bike, bus, car, plane, or train. Really about the right tool for the job. We’ve gotten in the mindset where we think the right tool is always the car (kinda a “when all you have is a hammer…” situation).
Yeah, we can do some good for the environment, but it’s really about the freedom to choose the best way to get somewhere, the freedom to breathe in cleaner air, the freedom to travel safely.
And you’re right, we won’t just wish it all away. And we definitely can’t impose our will on other countries - which really doesn’t look good coming from a rich country. But! Most of these decisions are made locally, where we do have an impact. I like the idea of making my city a nicer place to live.
@@humanecities I feel that. It's like, if you have a garbage can nearby, you should walk over to it, stomp out your butt, and toss the dead cig into the bin, rather than just flicking it into a nearby bush. We should do what we can, no matter how insignificant it seems. I get that.
I (luckily, bless the lord) work from home right now 4 days a week, and in office 1 day per week, so personally I have a pretty small carbon footprint with the car, but I do use it on weekends to visit friends who all live 1-2hr away in adjacent cities. I think it's about using what you need to without overdoing it, and not purposely destroying the planet. Some wear and tear is natural, and if we aren't abusing the planet needlessly, I think things should be fine overall. If you're young and able-body and can walk to the bus stop and catch the bus, and if you can afford a slightly slower commute, and if you feel safe enough to ride public transit, do that, if you're fit and can bike it and feel safe on the road with cars, do that, and if you're going to drive, don't just sleep on the gas pedal and drive around in first gear, burning up the ozone faster than you need to. I'm with it. I still think gas is here to stay for a long time, but I also thing there's a place for balance and for cutting back in certain areas. Nuclear container ships is one place I think we could change. Airplanes...not so much, I think energy-weight ratio of a battery is just not viable for an airplane so we'll have to stay on gas there. Cars well ... I love the combustion engine, even as an electrical engineer who installs induction motors into industrial factories all day, so I'm biased. Don't take my stick shift away from me. I already barely drive it, and I already don't have a future with a retirement or a home in it. This is all I have left. Dear world..don't.
Start with a full charge, stop once during the trip for 15 minutes, and complete the trip. Assuming you visit more than 4 hours after a 1K trip, plenty of time to get a full charge for the trip back, or just overnight charge. Tesla can already do this.
High speed rail: 10 hour car ride in 3 hours
Are we ignoring the fact that we need to transport large amounts of items such as when we go grocery shopping, or when we move? There's no way to fully transition into micro-mobility
We’re not ignoring that. Most trips can be done with micromobility. For the trips that can’t, we have cars, trains, planes, ships, kayaks, canoes, etc… It’s really about the right tool for the job.
I do all my grocery shopping with a bike. I go like twice a week, with a big backpack. But i live in the netherlands, in a city, and supermarkets are close by. It can be done. But yeah this gonna be harder in north america.
Cargo bikes are popular in netherlands. They look like they have a small bathtub up front.
If you live in a reasonably designed city, you probably live closer to a grocery store, meaning you don't need Large grocery trips, and they can be taken home easily. When you're moving you can rent a truck, like everyone else ALREADY DOES
Cringe.
but big energy gets to pollute while charging us?