No, they're not AHEAD of their time, it's the rest of the capitalist industries that have stagnated. Remember, first ever cars were electric and hydrogen powered, before the discovery of cheap OIL!
I love that you got Justin Rosniak in for those immortal lines: "I know what you want. I know whatcha came here for. You know that of which I speak? It's a high like no other... It's trains!" Man, I got goosebumps when I heard that.
It's beyong infuriating to me that we developed literally the most economical, efficient and highest capacity mode of transport in history with the railways, and had massive networks crossing entire continents by the early 20th century, only for all that potential to be utterly squandered by over half a century of car addicition.
Yeah, and now it's virtually impossible to make it work in our modern society without forcing a complete economic paradigm shift in people who don't even believe climate change exists. And then there's people with most of their equity in their home, so they are fucked even if they conceptually agree with the shift.
@@danielsmith7023 Good. Then, maybe, you'd enjoy driving it more when the highways aren't completely clogged with people who don't love their cars as much as you and would prefer to take the train if it was a viable option again.
I just hate how much people talk about how expensive public transit is when the highways, cars and car dependancy is the most expensive thing you can do
Or the strange double standard that train lines are expected to pay for themselves through ticket sales, while a highway is just something the government is supposed to provide and maintain for free. Imagine if the same requirements of profitability were apllied to car infrastructure.
"Socialism is when the government does stuff" is a bad and incorrect definition, but lets use that definition for a second. The people who don't support that bad definition of socialism are also the same people who usually quite like road infrastructure and stuff, and often own or work for businesses that directy benefit from the trillions of dollars of expense they did not have to partake in past a small percentage of their own tax money. Yet, they cannot see the benifits of doing the same thing with anything but roads, makes no sense. Why do train lines need to be profitable? Hell, did you know many airlines are required by the government (and paid for) to fly certain unprofitable flight routes (usually to allow certain wealthy people and powerful lawmakers to and from DC, their homes, and vacation spots). See, it makes no sense cuz its not about spending that money, its about maintaining the current social hierarchy and way of life, pretending everything is fine and change is bad, and that has convinced so many people to think the same way.
@@nobettername562 I mean, if socialism is that, than any country is socialist. It's just that people don't understand how much the government already does and that public transit is just replacing stupid spending with smarter spending
@@HazyFelix Yeah, I think I strayed away from the point I wanted to make, which is that its an incorrect definition people think in the US "Socialism is when the governemnt does stuff, and the more stuff it does the more socialist it is, and if it does a whole lot of stuff then its communism" I'm aware its more of a joke but it is perceived like that. And by those who perceive it like that, spending billions and trillions behind the scenes on roads and car infrastructure isn't socialist, but it apparently is when building rail and metro and streetcars and bussing. Its a double standard to which even the owner class doesn't understand how it would help them even in a mostly capitalist system to not have to use cars and trucks for everything. So maybe public infrastructure that doesn't only focus on roads is a good thing, and more people should realize that, even if they don't want the change in lifestyle that will eventually become necessary.
@@raul0ca I dont understand your way of thinking. Taxes pay for the roads but you dont want taxes to pay for trains? Or you are saying taxes enough for the roads but for train taxes aren't enough? Anyway I will look for a bit either way. Although it doesn't really matter whether trains make money or not.Problem here isn't money since America already has enough of it. The problem is traffic, inefficient land use and CO2 emissions. Building more roads never solve either of them. Thats why trains are better not because they are profitable or anything.
@@exosproudmamabear558 In the US when I drive my gas tax goes to pay maintenance on the roads. Trains (light rail) charge passengers for tickets but at the end of the year it is not enough and that deficit will come from takes I pay to local government which also supports schools and police/fire. Paying a tax for an activity you do is less terrible than paying for something you get no benefit from. It's like poor people subsidizing rebates for rich people to get solar panels to lower their electricity bills
"Electric cars suck" wait, what "gas cars are even worse" I see where this is going now edit: It's been 4 months stop replying Damn y'all persistent, fine then
@timmyturner5358r ural towns can be walkable, but I think he and that if you're out living on a ranch or something, which hits close to home for me, cause I did for a long time, and will be doing so again soon. Pickup trucks are a necessity for that type of work nowadays Plus, you need some way to drive into the town to buy your groceries/tools, and there isn't going to be a connected rail system by your remote ranch/farm, because you're the only thing out there
@albanianamericaninmichigan1334 well and then there's the elektrofrosch. Basically a car that reduces a pickup truck to 700kg max and electric - suitable for some farm work.
People who have never lived in a city with a good transit system, can't understand how fast and convenient it is. If you've got a good transit network everything in the city feels like it's in your neighborhood.
Arlington, VA has had their "car free diet" program, and it's pretty cool overall. Except when demand outstripped supply and rents went through the roof.
Keyword “good”. Public transit in most US cities is terrible at worst and mediocre at best. I’ve used the New York transit system countless times and it never ceases to amaze me how they find new ways to fuck things up. Not to mention rampant crime and being constantly accosted by aggressive transients. I’ve never been more glad to move out of the urban jungle and actually own a home and a nice piece of property.
I've lived in such cities and still hated mass transit. I just don't like being crowded in a place with a bunch of people I don't know. But, yes, mass transit in Tokyo is several orders of magnitude better than mass transit in most of the US, where you likely have to wait 20 minutes or more at a bus stop with homeless addicts to make your transfer and your total trip takes several times longer than the same trip would by car.
I am from Brazil. My father said that in the 70s-80s my region was connected by railways, and it was very good for travelling from the countryside to the urban centers. Then by pressure of the automotive industry (according to him, but I do believe it is the case) there was a massive shift in public transportation priorities - highways and roads took the place of trains and trams. It's really not practical and worse for the environment. Traffic jams in my region are unbearable.
America had a very similar shift, they went from having streetcars, trams, and some railways to motorways and cars due to the automotive lobbying after the world wars. My country had a similar thing, everyone was converting to cars so we followed along and let our railways fall apart despite them once being the best in the world.
Like in my local area here in the US. We used to have rail trollies all over my home town and reaching into the next like 5 cities surrounding it. You just kinda waved to get on when it was passing by and pulled the cable on the ceiling to stop when you wanted to go. But they ripped out all those lines only shortly before I was born as the city said they "just needed to add another lane of traffic for tourists". Well guess what, now we have no public transit, the city ended up losing most of its tourists, and the roads are in a horrific state.
That is true, I live in a city with around 600k people and here used to be trains, etc, and now there are some shitty buses, and also, the city was even considered to be the city of the bicycle, to see how much changed.
@@justanotheryoutubechannel I live in Detroit that had 200miles (320km) of streetcar (tram)track in the city limit and around 600 miles (1000km) of suburban streetcar tracks and in the 1940s when my grandmother was taking the streetcars to school she had to go in the middle of a busy street because the streetcar was build in the center of the street before car traffic was a thing as there was only pedestrians cyclists and slow horse carriages so building it in the middle of the street made sense because you only had to cross one lane of horse and buggy traffic. However after the middle class started to buy large amount of cars the cars speed by the streetcar and when people went to cross for the streetcars the my encountered high speed traffic and the city of Detroit dismantled or paved over the hundred of miles of tracks. Dispite Detriot being the auto manufacturering hub of the Usa automotive industry the big three companies didn’t get the streetcars removed because the city owned the lines since the 1920s. The stupid thing looking back was why the city didn’t give dedicated lanes for streetcars and made crosswalks with traffic lights around the streetcar stops so riders wouldn’t be endangered and not destroyed have a massive public transit network.
@@TheAmericanCatholic my city did it well, we have tram metro bus and rail but also big roads. You can live without car quite easily as a station of public transit is always max 5 min walk away from you. But also for people who need cars, the roads are quite great except some incredibly stupid crossroads where you have 9 exits but only 1 lane per 3 exits. Its the perfect balance, you can live just fine without having a car, but if you want to have it, its good too. Only the parking spot system is stupid, as you always have to pay for your parking, even infront of your house. If you park on the street where you live, you pay once a year and its quite cheap, but parking anywhere else is paid for the time you stay there and its extremely expensive. Up to 10$ per hour and you cant have it prepaid, you have to pay each time you park somewhere. Paying for just parking on the streets is annoying, and they have cars with cameras which automatically send you ticket if you haven't paid. And if you park anywhere else on the street where the paid zone isnt marked (the places where you can park have rectangles to mark those spots) you automatically get a ticket. I got a ticket for just stopping on 1 of the parking spots, while my car was still on as i really needed to pee, so i stopped only for 1 min with the engine still on and still got a ticket. Thats the only thing i really hate about this city. Also, you can't be on the parking spot if you haven't already paid, but you have to manually pick the parking location and time in an app to pay the ticket, so you would either have to block the traffic while youre paying (and also you can't be on a phone while on the road, so that another ticket for you), or know which spot for parking is free before starting the drive, paying it in advance and hope that noone gets to that spot before you drive there. (Which is just not possible).. great city overall, but this thing is absolutely stupid
Electric isn't the issue. Mobility in general needs to develop towards lightweight. Simply doesn't make sense to move 2000 kg of vehicle (or even 1000) to move a cargo/people of 80-200 kilograms.
@@razzor4708 as another Eastern European, I'd rather choose Western Europe over America, which currently is attacking and censoring people who aren't "traditionalist Christians". Let's not forget about the American shitty systems and how it's designed to screw everyone except those who are on top. If you like the traditionalist politics then stay as far in the East as possible. Might as well move in the corrupted Russia if you really hate the "woke". "woke never learning history Western Europe"? "Never learning history" seems more like an American thing rather than a West European thing. I never thought that there will be book bannings, but it has happened there again. I never thought that there will be horrendous acts of violence against minorities over stupid and exaggerated lies, but it has happened there again. I never thought that there will be attempts of literally taking children away from parents because either the parent or the child is queer, but it has happened there again. Now tell me, isn't that exactly what happened against people of color, jews, atheists and many other minorites? Isn't history repeating itself? "who forgot their culture and heritage". Culture evolves and expands. Just because something was okay before in a culture it doesn't mean it's okay now. For example, slavery was viewed completely moral, but nowadays it isn't. Another one is that centuries ago being in any other religion rather than the countries' official one was completely forbidden in most countries, now it isn't. Embracing culture for the sake of tradition can be dumb. What's the problem that we don't follow old culture?
@@razzor4708 Eastern Europe really went down the shitter. You guys used to be chad Communists dunking on Nazi punks left and right and now all you do is cry about liberals on twitter being mean to you... Go ahead and move to your safe space of America then.
@@razzor4708 What have we forgotten that muh eastern europe hasn't? Also I think your perception of culture is warped by the fact that western european culture has influenced so many cultures around the world including yours.
As a car enthusiast, I must lend a hand to the train enthusiasts to be able to increase public transit and only people who WANT to drive with luggage will be on the road. Tends to help with safer driving conditions.
bruv let's ban normies off our roads, lorries, cool cars and motorcycles will remain, imagine that. no traffic no speed limits no karens killing motorcyclists because they're on their phone!
@@anamore nah mate i genuinely wish that was the world we lived in. imagine non enthusiasts just being busriders, while the 1% of the population actually get's to enjoy driving
@@filtrakioldhorborn like Plato said 2000 years ago, democracy is a problem when farmer class gets to vote... they should never been given that right to begin with. Same goes for driving cars. It's a mistake we let them drive in the first place.
- That train montage at 10:14 got me so hard I think I need to see a doctor. - On a more serious (but honestly related) note, whenever I watch a train speed by, even if it's a freight train, the total size combined with its speed and the rumble of the ground makes it such an impressive sight that it can give me goosebumps and it honestly makes me think things like "Fuck yeah, America. Progress." I never get that feeling when I see a car, or even an 18-wheeler, speed by.
@@WiretheAlligator One of my admittedly anti-social thoughts is that I want to throw rocks at people and their vehicles who artificially make their vehicle engines obnoxiously loud. Either that or I want to force them to drive electric vehicles. They'd probably hate that just as much.
Yeah, TRAINS… please, lock me up in a metal tube with schizophrenics and junkies and psychopaths. Sign me the fuck up. Cars and suburbs exist as a way to escape all of that diversity. None of you soyboy urbanities can even name that root cause of the problem, so any solutions you come up with are destined fail.
I also think, that the marketing promotes EVs as green and removes "guilt" from environmentally conscious buyers, which causes them to buy a freshly produced car, rather than keep using what you already have until it breaks.
People just avoid the problem rather than solving it, it's like moving to an expensive area without people of color, so you can say that your police department has no problem with police brutality or underperforming children in school. Without public transportation wealthy people will just say "Not our problem, we all got at least one Tesla" while poor people will say: "We can't afford EVs" and out of "compassion" for the poor people the US will let people use their gas powered cars.
That's kinda fucking true. But it's also actually a bit better to buy a modern electric or hybrid car that drive on a gas engine, if you can. Because it is at the end of the day a financial investment that benefits the environment also. And even if you support non car infrastructure, ( like destroy them all toss it in the trash). You're still going to need a car when there is absolutely none. Which is what's so sinister. We've been forced into it
well there is not so need of high speed trains , there is a need of speed trains coordinated with other public transport with separate infrastructure (Trams,Metrobuses, Subway, Railbus or even buses with buspases) 80-100 mph as a standard is good enough for skeleton of rail network as it is higher speed then on highways but it means federal needs to invest into interstate railway connection especially in north east corridor.
Also, let’s not forget, about 70% of greenhouse gasses come from companies, not us at the micro level. Just a way for big companies to deflect blame back to the smaller person.
@@kiwikiwi2483 A church of the 70% could be fixed by showing companies a focus on greener transport is where the money is going, rather than just electric cars that only pretend to be better for the environment
@@kiwikiwi2483 So you'd rather fix the 30% made by billions of people than try to fix the 70% made by a few thousand? (only counting the decision making owners, CEOs, engineers etc.)
It really baffles me that as soon as companies make an electric car, all concept of efficiency goes out the window, because to them it doesnt matter since its all electric anyway. We end up with even bigger, deadlier, more resource intensive SUVs used for transporting ikea furniture and 1 child around the suburbs.
In the past decade, EV's have turned into some of the most greenwashed things that mankind has ever made. Rooftop solar has suffered the same fate. Bonus points if someone has both AND lives in a McMansion.
@@TheAmericanCatholic You missed the part where I clearly said that rooftop solar is up there with electric vehicles as a product that is extremely greenwashed (id est, something that people get so they can FEEL LIKE they are "G O I N G G R E E N"). Put simply, too many people who get rooftop solar do it only for the bragging rights.
You nailed it! Most car enthousiasts actually HATE car-centric infrastructure (although subconsiously). The biggest car nut I know cycles to work every day!
@@PostLagone That's not always possible though. Many people have disabilities that would make something as simple as walking or biking impossible. Are we just going to tell them "oh well guess you'll just have to deal with it"?
Goes to Japan once and now I’m embarrassed by how crappy our metro system is. Traveling all through Tokyo was so easy on their metro lines it’s insane. Faster than a car would imo.
I loathe self driving cars for incentivizing people to buy cars they can't afford. I'm both a car enthusiast & an advocate for rail based infrastructure because car based infrastructure takes away the joys I receive from driving whether it'd be dealing with shit drivers who view driving as solely a chore or putting unenjoyable miles on my car.
I'm trying to follow your logic. How are these people convinced to spend more money than they can afford on self driving cars? People should be free to spend their money as they choose, right? (Deceptive or misleading marketing not included)
@@beilkster It's because they think they need something they don't. Simple as that. It doesn't help that there are movements out there that want to flat-out ban any cars that aren't self-driving, and people hear about those and immediately assume they need to buy a self-driving car in order to comply with laws that aren't even in the books (or won't ever be - the arguments hinge entirely on the assumption that faster reaction times are the sole issue with driver safety, ignoring all other factors such as spatial awareness, decision making and being able to judge conditions ahead-of-time as well as the fact that computers aren't perfect and CAN make mistakes, glitch up or otherwise fail in a wide variety of ways).
Mmmm....tricycle?? It can also allow for better and more storage area too for grocery shopping and the like! :) I was recently looking at bicycles actually because I reaalllyyyy want one of those awesome dutch type bikes, that have standard features that are more "add on" features here in the us. So anyways, I was looking at some bikes on a website, I don't remember the website though, but I actually kinda liked some of the tricycles they had on there and thought huh....man that would be way more convenient when going grocery shopping here in the burbs, bc you can put more groceries in the storage cart thingy between the two back wheels. Anyways, this was kinda long and ramble-y, lolol. But maybe a tricycle would work. Or a bike or trike with a little bit sturdier frame would do? Shit. I just did a Google search and apparently there are bikes for people who are heavier too. I'm going to have to look into that simply because it's interesting. The ones I briefly saw said differing weight requirements for some are like 300-350 and even one or two brands that are 400! That's actually really awesome to see because bike riding is much better and less harmful on the joints of folks who are really overweight. Really awesome to see that! Soo....thanks for this comment because it got me to look into it a little bit. ....even if it was a joke comment, lol...I still appreciate it!
I love cars. But I have to agree with you, if you are in a metro area, cars only kinda serve as a flex(in poorer countries) and basically spend 99% of the time parked. I especially agree that inner city areas should be designed to be more bike and pedestrian friendly! Definitely would help with people not exercising too.
Well I'm pro ride sharing apps/services so that that car that dropped you off can then go pick some one else up as well as easily carpool strangers together.
Me personally, I feel that highways should still exist, but have less lanes. A train could run parallel to the highways, and reduce the number of cars on the road by say, 70%. But yeah, our car-centric society needs to change.
@@thatguyalex2835 Is reality in Belgium that some train lines run parallel to the highway and it's so satisfying to see the cars in traffic (or just driving as well) when we zoom by 🥰
@@myra0224 Agreed. I have been on trains in Europe, and the cars look like they are standing still, as the train goes 140 km/h, and the cars barely go faster than 90 km/h.
Great video, but one major factor that often gets overlooked is not only the carbon cost of getting the rare earth materials and the lithium is the geopolitical aspect of it. The countries that have large deposits of these materials are largely located in the global south, and powerful countries spend incredible amounts of resources to keep those countries in a state of disruption or dependance. Obvious examples is how the US treats much of the South American countries, with assholes like Musk basically "calling" for a coup, just to keep lithium prices down. Its not only about the carbon output, but the real, human cost of these practices and industries that literally exploit people in other countries to make their products.
that is true, but on the other hand the geopolitical and environmental costs related to obtaining, processing and transporting petrol is also often overlooked in these "are electic cars really greener than ICEs?" type of comparisons. both are shit either way.
@@bubberlad Its not really an "on the other hand" arguement :) Its both. Both are shit in their current implementation. Im just pointiing out a real but often neglected or underappreciated reason as to why. Also, technocrats suck and wont save us and all that jazz lmao
@@frenkzors yes i meant as in it goes both ways. it wasn't meant to be a point against yours. i agree that both of them suck, and that it is laughable to imagine that we will simply "tech" our way out of our unsustainable ways of living
@@bubberlad you realise that fossil fuels/oil is what makes the world run right?! There are litteraly millions of oil by-products from car tires to road tar to cable insulation, fertilisers, medical equipments, drugs, fuel for aircrafts, agricultural, construction and mining machines/equipments and ships.
Cities have to come first. Trains are great and all, but they are the final phase in these changes. If you connect two car infested cities together with a train line it's not going to work because you'll step off the train onto a giant carpark next to a 6 lane stroad and you won't be able to get anywhere because you didn't bring your car with you.
Don't we do that with Airplanes already? We rent a car from airport and go on our merry ways. I'm essentially refuting the point trains are last step. Rather fighting climate change is a multi-pronged approach and all of them are necessary.
I agree both are necessary, but I think they need to be done simultaneously. Building a rail line allows you to densly develop the areas right around the station, and more density and riders will follow
both are necessary but they can also be done simultaneously. the first thing to do (imo) is to change zoning laws and allow mixed use development. city planners and traffic engineers should also publish some local/statewide/nationwide (don't really care as long as it's functional and actually makes sense) guidelines to be followed on how to build roads. the cheapest way to rebuild roads would be to just wait until they're scheduled for maintenance anyway (roads have lifespans of like 15-30 years) and repave them to the new specifications - such as having separated bike paths, proper traffic calming measures, and continuous sidewalks, to name just a few guidelines that can be implemented. whenever a new road is paved it can just as easily be made to the new specifications. as this change will be gradual there will be no bulldozing of cities required (though just look at any american car infested cities that were bulldozed to become parking lots clearly no one actually has an issue with bulldozing cities lol) and new developments will just crop up around the newly pedestrianized neighbourhoods over time. we don't have to wait until we've sufficiently redesigned all our cities to be great and people-centric to improve train service. it's best to do both things at the same time because while our cities are gradually redeveloping to be more people-centric, people will slowly start using trains more and more anyway.
That is the current state of affairs where I live. Not only is it significantly more expensive to take the train than to drive, I have to spend additional money once I arrive to rent a car. These are changes which need to happen in tandem. It doesn't matter how walkable the city is if I need to bring my car to reach it, I will still need somewhere to park my pollution box. And excellent inter-city rail isn't economically feasible for the user if I arrive at my destination and need to rent a car because the city isn't walkable and has terrible local transit.
Given humans reluctance to lower their current comfort level, if an EV is better for the environment and is temporary its still better than the alternative. Also, Tesla just released their emissions report and it stated the break even point for model 3 vs ICE equivalent was 5,600 miles. Over the lifetime of the vehicle it was 2x to 6x fewer emissions (depending if it was charged with grid or solar). The quoted 3-5 year equivalent quoted in this video is an old statistic.
No, they are more. The automobile was and is very successful because it is a good solution for many cases and the best/only solution if there are not enough people for public transport. This is important for millions of people. For these people there is no solution without car. So the EV is part of the solution. But we start looking for the best solution for different usecases. The 'one size fits all' cannot be efficient.
Brain dump: Underground metro/subway, trains + highspeed rails, efficient bus/public transits, public bike/scooter/electric moped sharing system, better sidewalks + designated bike lanes for safety, allow skateboarding, overall just to improve the stigma around walking and "public transit". Ask anyone of my friends and they would say they don't use the public transits in the states because its either unclean, uncared for, or unsafe to them. But compared to when we travel abroad to Taiwan, Japan, parts of Europe, etc, they all happily use public transportation. Really hope the states would improve or implement more of these systems soon.
@@cactusjackNV I'm sure it can't be too long, though. Major cities can just make streets and stuff less car focused, maybe add a price for driving in the inner areas of the city similar to the Congestion Charge in London.
@@cactusjackNV The Netherlands used to be car-centric not too long ago. It would take some time but the bigger problem is investment. Long term plans don't really exist for politicians with relatively short terms, but the biggest problem is the push to maintain the car-centric system due to lobbying from oil and car companies. As with many things; corruption and unregulated capitalism is the problem.
@@cactusjackNV Europe did the same shit we did, and removed highways from city center. We constantly build insane highway off ramp things that cost insane amounts of money. Saying something is too far gone is part of the problem and plain wrong. I’m already this fat I might as well just keep eating because it’ll be too hard to work out now. Wtf ?!?
Even easier: carfree streets. Instant money saving. Everything that replaces it is better. Don't need to spend all that money rebuilding. Just #EndCarEra
You mean, most Americans don’t even have access to public transit; it’s not even offered. And in most areas where it is offered, it’s a bus line that runs in one direction once every hour and a half.
Learning about these topics has made me realize how big of a problem poor infrastructure, transportation and planning actually is, yet not many people are willing to change; it’s just so built into *mainly US* culture and is hard to recover from
It's all about DISTANCE. Nutcases like this guy completely miss the point that North American distances are absolutely colossal compared to Europe, Asia, etc. His entire rant about dense urban planning utterly and completely misses the point that in the US, Canada and other large countries, there is ZERO "space pressure", we have the luxury to expand into quiet, spacious urban environments because we CAN. Given a choice, spacious suburban development will always be the preference for families. There is absolutely nothing fundamentally "wrong" with suburban development, IF the infrastructure and space is available to support it. Much more attention is now being placed on efficient and effective suburban planning, which will obviously help. The nonsense about power "transmission losses" in suburban areas is comically stupid. Those losses would be measured in hundredths of a percent.
@@awebuser5914 Even with great distance available, using up large amounts of it unnecessarily is wasteful. Planning should make smaller areas as efficient as possible while saving resources, with long-term thinking. This also deals with the layout of suburban areas and the transportation available (like a lack of bike and/or walking paths). It doesn’t have to include opposite ends of a country but pulling together closer parts of it would be beneficial. I do agree that there’s nothing “wrong” with suburban development if given careful attention; the problem is when it isn’t given careful attention, as commonly seen in some neighborhoods.
@@rachel8089 Yep, at least in Canada, there is now a significant amount of planning that goes into suburban layouts; parks, shopping, services, schools, bike/walking paths.
The thing that gets me is how the same people that refuse to go anywhere without their car will be the same person complaining about traffic on the freeways
I once used the train to travel, but I changed when my ride started to be always late or canceled. Trains in my country zone need more efficient management and maintenance. Also, train stations must be made more accessible; there's no use in traveling by train if I have to ride the car to get to the station.
same. (america) option 1: drive to your destination (20 minutes) option 2: drive to the train depot (10 minutes in the opposite direction) and take the train to your destination (30 minutes) option 3: take the bus to the train depot (40 minutes) and take the train to your destination (30 minutes)
And if you have to do more than 1 transfer to or from a bus, in many cases you're better off walking 5km than riding 5km, which means we might as well say to hell with it and standardize on mopeds or...cars
It’s somewhat true where I live, I’ll usually take the train to London as driving there is genuinely slower and worse than using the train, but it’s ridiculously expensive and nowhere near reliable enough for me to use to commute to the next town over twice a day for example, and the experience is just not good enough, I don’t think I’ve ever ridden a train that actually turned up on time… They need to be faster, cheaper, and more reliable, with modernised train stations so it doesn’t look like it hasn’t been maintained in the last 50 years (which to be honest my local station in a near-city-sized town probably hasn’t, considering the bridges are the same as the ones we had since the 1800’s.)
Trains in Russia come 5 minutes late in the worst scenario. Usually they go right by the schedule. Never thought they can be delayed like here in Europe. That’s crazy.
Most Americans are TERRIFIED of every little change that could effect their suburbia hellscape. No multi story building, no commercial area near houses, no public transportation (it's for the poor). JUST METAL BOXES AND THE SPACE NECESSARY TO MOVE AND PARK THE METAL BOXES.
yea I think that's why some yanks really like those boxy stretched pete 389 as their main truck not that I hate them or anything, they look good and sounds good but they require lot of space to maneuver and park compared to newer gen class 8 trucks
The irony is that suburbs still need public transit. A lot of middle-class people have housekeepers who commute from inner-city areas. They can't afford cars, so they take a bus. And who provides these buses? The suburbs that want their services of course. The problem is that buses are an option of Last Resort for most people.
despite the high speed 2-4 track rail line won't take up as much space as a 6 lane highway. Also no new advances in technology arn't required for construction since electric trains existed since the 1930s
@@davidty2006 true, but you can always slow down if needed. We don't need bullet trains that do 600km/h or whatever, just regular modern trains on regular modern tracks.
Cars are very ineffective in terms of energy. I do not know about the US but in Europe one car is occupied by average by 1.2 person. So to move 1.2 person (120 kg) you have to put in motion another 1500 - 2000 kg of metal. And it costs huge amount of energy. It's not important if you take this energy from gas or battery - the energy still must be somehow produced.
@@Jacksparrow4986 Nah, I'm from Europe. Well maybe not 12kg more like 15-17kg. I'm road bike guy so I go over optimistic :D BTW: e-bikes > electric car
Fortunately cars/vehicles in Europe are significantly smaller and way more efficient compared to american vehicles. In Europe there are no huge f150 pick-up truck or chevy suburbs or cadillac escale, in Europe there are smart, toyota yaris, vw up, golf......
As a car enthusiast I will always love and want a car in my life, however I am in enormous support of sustainability and will always support rail and public infrastructure over highways, this is to benefit the planet obviously but also it benefits the people who have a car that was passed down to them or it is simply their passion. I love your videos and keep up the awesome work, as much as it hurts from a car enthusiast stand point I am all for it when it comes to my future and one day my family's future.
True, I also see the car more as a "toy" for leisure and fun. Something to be useed on weekends to drive to the lake withe friendsand family. Not as an efficient pragmatic mode of every day transport for commuters.
What is more effective for each of us than buying an EV? Go vegan! "Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests. Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent. If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined. Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction. The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
I would use trains more than highways even if i had my dream car. You know, the traffic, gas prices, making your vehicle more damaged by overdriving and so on.
@@someguy2135 Bullshit, the single biggest way to reduce your impact is supporting nuclear power and convincing others to do the same. This idea of individual people's choices making such a massive contribution is ridiculous, it's just not true. The entire concept of a "carbon footprint" was popularized by a marketing campaign from BP. Yes, _that_ BP, British Petroleum. They do this because they want _you_ to feel responsible for climate change and pollution so you'll blame yourself instead of blaming _them_ for their decades of corruption and lobbying. The majority of global emissions (over 60%) come from heating and power generation. Livestock is only responsible for 6%. Even _cars_ and _planes_ make a fairly pitiful contribution, at around 6% and 2% respectively. Telling people that they need to stop eating cheese to stop climate change is like telling them they need to buy lots of scissors to mow their lawn. It's ridiculous and it's just not going to work. What we need to do is start building nuclear reactors *yesterday* and not stop until the power grid is 100% carbon free. In fact we should continue going further, and use the excess power to make synthetic fuels for aviation and road transport via carbon capture. Yes, those synthetic fuels will be more expensive than fossil alternatives. We'll just have to deal with it.
If public transport would be so good and widespread that the majority of people wouldn´t need a car, than the car enthusiasts that are left could drive whatever they want because the impact on the enviroment would only be marginal. That´s the best option in my opinion, I take the train whenever I can but also really enjoy the spontaneity and freedom of owning a car
I own a seven year old small, short range electric car. I agree 100% with this video, with the exception that I think parking lots are worse than highways. (Though both are terrible.) Everyone could drive the same kind of car as me and it would solve almost none of the problems created by cars. Tailpipe emissions are, like, the 74th worst thing about cars. Unnecessary death certainly ranks higher. Gobbling up 60%+ of the surface area of your city ranks higher. Garages rank higher. Unwalkability ranks higher. Destruction of serendipitous discovery of local places ranks higher. Etc.
Neighborhood parking and denser parking options (multilevel garages rater than lots, which would ALSO have an advantage of keeping sun off cars and reducing power draw of air conditioning when you get back in your car in hot areas, and any power requirements for the garage can be met with solar on top and some batteries to power LED lights inside.
@@Jacksparrow4986 Cars are already unsustainable in the long term. Consolidated parking allows for more walkable areas and reduces congestion as people aren't trying to drive from A to B to C etc. Plenty of smaller towns are already doing similar things.
People want to feel like they are reducing their impact on the environment without actually changing the way they live their lives. Moving to electric cars will help the environment about as much as washing the dishes with cold water. Which is to say not much.
@VOLD GAMER I'm pretty sure you made that up. Most of the vehicle is made from the same stuff....plastics, steel, rubber, aluminum, glass. The difference is with the engine and drivetrain. In an ICE vehicle, you have the engine and transmission; in an EV, batteries and electric motors. So DIFFERENT resources are needed to build the EV. Yes, lithium mining is awful...but you are being pretty selective in your outrage if you ignore every other mine...iron ore, coal, limestone, bauxite...needed to make the iron or aluminum engine and transmission. Even if the EV used more resources to build (initial cost), the ICE consumes way more resources every day it's on the road. That's true even if 100% of your power comes from coal.
@VOLD GAMER This is a stupid cuckservative talking point. Much of the resources are more or less the same, you are basically swapping a giant chunk of metal and oil for a giant battery. The batteries are absolutely 100% recycled all the time so long as they aren't damaged beyond repair and even then usually enterprising people take them apart and remove the good cells. People are paying 10-20k for a used Tesla battery for home/off grid storage and other applications, you think scrapyards just throw that shit in the landfill?
Trains are definitely the go-to for mass-transit; for the alternative to personal transportation, making the use of smaller electric carts and bikes more widespread would be good. In a mountain town my uncle lives, near everyone living there uses golf cart type vehicles to get around the place rather than using their full-size cars. These still satisfy the want for personal transportation, are far lighter, and are much more compact.
You forgot about the fact that a TON of people will not be happy unless they are driving there loudest most toxic vehicle possible. I am surrounded by those assholes so yes it's nice that a solution exists. It's just too bad that no one gives a damn.
@@Myke_thehuman You'll run into people like that everywhere. But honestly, they're a minority. Plus you wouldn't have to put up with those people bitching about taking a train because they wouldn't be taking the train to begin with. As a separate note, just make sure the people you're calling assholes actually are assholes. Car enthusiasts often get lumped in with fart-can ricers, status symbol supercar buyers and rollin' coal bro-truckers by the general public, because the general public doesn't know better to understand the difference. So if someone has an obnoxiously loud car or truck but they don't look like they're specifically trying to be obnoxious, they may just be a hobbyist who enjoys working on and/or driving cars recreationally. At that point it's no different from someone who rides bikes recreationally or gardens or builds model railroads or makes and wears custom costumes.
A simple form of "mass transit" is a carpool. If you simply put 4-8 people per vehicle - you remove 75% of vehicles from the commute and all the associated CO2 - if people really believed that CO2 is killing the planet they would right ? but they are not - so I have to conclude they don't believe it or they don't care.
@@litestuffllc7249 It's not that they don't care so much as they don't want to be the first to make the effort. It's basically the bystander effect, everyone expects someone else to step in first.
This is a silly solution . This video advocates tearing up every street and highway , and putting rails everywhere across America in every city , every suburb , all connected , all with stops . Are you kidding me ?? That would take a century of work and hundred of trillions of dollars and tons of co2 with all the heavy construction machinery . This is such a fantasy . I’m not sure why it’s hard for people to ask themselves “what can we do in REALITY” Car pooling is much simpler solution . But nooooo, you gotta burn down and recreate civilization to achieve a goal ?? You’ll never get anywhere thinking like this. We’re already speaking of people not owning cars and having autonomous cars working as ubers. The solution is so much simpler than you think . No need to destroy our country and recreate it.
THANK YOU for specifying the difference for farmers, as a farmer who believes in a carless future for the vast majority of people it is infuriating to see all the climate activists wanting to ban all cars without thinking about people like me who live in a way that they need a car.
i'm very anti car (don't even think they should be allowed in most city centres - there should be a parking garage and you have to walk/bike/take transit in) and even i agree that cars are genuinely required in some cases. in the case of rural living, obviously it's just going to be too much to expect to pave and maintain so many roads and to build out extensive public transit routes that make it possible for every farmer to live a completely car-free life. i honestly think car rentals or car-share programs should still exist too just in case people don't want to own a car but still want to have the option of being able to rent one to do a big furniture haul or a roadtrip or something.
Exactly. As much as I would love to have more bike and pedestrian friendly cities and have public transit, I love my car as well and I'm also aware people living in rural areas will need to own one too. Heck even I'd like to live in the country one day, but I just wanna have options in how I travel too.
I’m a big car guy and people are always confused when they find out I’m also a train guy and big advocate for public transit. First off car guys and gals are in the minority in terms of overall motorists. So getting the majority of people off the roads means less traffic and a better driving experience. Second off if you can reliably get anywhere through public transit you don’t need a daily driver and can use all that garage space for your shitbox project cars!
More effective than buying an EV would be to go vegan. "Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests. Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent. If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined. Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction. The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
@@someguy2135 I don't know that going vegan is feasible for everyone to do so at once. A more realistic goal would be to reduce how much meat, and meat from cows in particular, people eat. In this way, every fast food place save Chic-fil-a is a huge problem; people have forgotten that red meat has always been a luxury. McDonald's burgers are cheap, but the true price is the damage to our environment and the slaughter of billions of animals. Imo fast food burger places should switch to synthetic meat.
@@jjbarajas5341 We agree that cows are the most destructive type of animal raised for food production. That includes dairy. Not only is dairy the most cruel form of animal agriculture, it also requires cows and other ruminants. They produce methane which is 80 times more potent than CO2 in the first 20 years. It then dissipate, but not for about 100 years total. "While the wildfires raging in the Amazon rainforest may constitute an “international crisis,” they are hardly an accident. The vast majority of the fires have been set by loggers and ranchers to clear land for cattle. The practice is on the rise, encouraged by Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s populist pro-business president, who is backed by the country’s so-called “beef caucus.” While this may be business as usual for Brazil’s beef farmers, the rest of the world is looking on in horror. So, for those wondering how they could help save the rainforest, known as “the planet’s lungs” for producing about 20% of the world’s oxygen, the answer may be simple. Eat less meat." -CNN
@@PacificDark Maybe, I don’t really know much about airship projects. I think smaller commuter electric planes are an alternative. Cape Air just bought 75 or so electric planes, the problem is that we need high density travel. The more people a single vehicle can carry the more carbon efficient it is.
Thing about zeplins the actually get more efficient larger you make them. Unlike planes. So not sure zeplins for short trips is a good idea. Pros are definitely strap solar panels to the top
@@PacificDark No. The reason being is lighter than air craft are extremely vulnerable to the weather. They are good for cruising but not a very good reliable transportation system. Additionally helium is very expensive already. The shorter the journey the less viable they become, the more they are affected by local weather patterns. And weather is only getting more extreme. Airships have economic viability only as long range cruisers for pleasure. They could displace some airlines for a slower and gentler travel but they are far from sky trains. I am only touching on the many many reasons why it isn't very viable but the summary is a certain No.
Funnily enough, some of the footage is probably pretty old, the original orange livery for the TGV was used on the experimental trains, and then throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, the trains were then gradually repainted, the last set operating under the orange livery did so in 2001.
Train: "This is... Requiem" * reshapes reality so that businesses trying to stop trains go bankrupt over and over as trains become the dominant form of transport. *
I used to live in Brazil in a regular city, not huge like São Paulo or Rio but not tiny like a village, and Brazil has a very interesting aspect to it: Poverty makes the country accidentally bend into more "communal" values. Not everyone can afford a car, not everyone wants a car, so most people use the bus, and where I lived I could walk 15 minutes and get to the supermarket, on the way there I would see stores of all kinds, so I didn't need to get in a car and move around. Now that I moved to the US my life is so much more miserable because I have to get in a car to go anywhere, I can't walk, I have to fucking drive, I hate driving, its so inefficient. Everywhere is far, most places are just huge parking lots, and tiny shopping areas, bro why. Also, me when train: 😫😫😩😩😩 💗
@@chooseyouhandle Not really, cars have been increasing even in rural areas so traffic is starting to get bad here. The reason for that is car dealers found a way to lure people with "low" advance payments and "low" monthly payments so even those that couldn't afford a car before can suddenly "afford" one now.
Car addicted Americans keep telling me "you can go anywhere with your car". Funnily, with infinite parking lots and traffic jams there's nowhere else to go.
What you described about Brazil is the way people has always lived for millennia. We are made to live like that, it's essential for a minimum of quality of life. And for that reason, no matter how wealthy you are, living like most people live in the US is unsatisfying and alienating on a fundamental, existential level.
The best video of yours I’ve seen yet! Always annoys me around where I live that people try to shut down transit projects because there “too expensive” but stay silent when roadworks cost billions more than any transit we’ve built
Fun fact: Cities from the 50s in the eastern bloc have a planning system of microcities/microrayons, which is based on a centered social space. each microcity can hold 500-3500 people, and the goal is for those residents to have access to every utility/service a city has, in just 500 meters. Also the residents were transported to work via train, trolleybus, or bus, because only ~10% had their own car.
@@bevis1933 As much as I don't support communism, I have to say some post-communist cities in Europe are really thought out. Sure, the ugly buildings weren't the best, but the infrastructure for public transport is great. For example, in Poland you don't need a car in most major cities. You just hop on a trolley and you can basically reach any point of the city if you know the stops and the transport lines. It's dirt cheap too. And pretty fast. Usually it would take you longer in a car because of heavy traffic in such major cities. But trolleys have their own tracks and even when they use the roadspace the road rules are designed in such a way that trolleys and public transport in general always has the priority. I work about 70 km from my home and I just usually take the train to the city I work in and then use public transport to reach where I work. Sometimes the guys who arrive by cars are a bit faster. But that's on a good day. On a bad day with traffic they take longer to arrive.
@@bevis1933 Fun fact, some people do live in a "communistic country" (weird ass way to say that btw) so I'm not sure you can verify that assertion. Anyways, post-Soviet communist countries actually did a very good job at urban design in many cases. It's kind of like one of the only things they did right though.
@@Cavi587 Actually it's not really true. I live in Warsaw for few years already and besides rush hours it's about twice faster to travel by your own car if traveling between outer district and center and about thrice faster if traveling between two outer districts. It's true that you can use public transport to get almost anywhere but I wouldnt call it time effective unless you are travelling between two places near metro station
Interesting that the U. S. has arguably the best freight rail system in the world, but it’s the lack of good passenger rail that gets so many people’s knickers in a twist. (Yes, we’re still depending too much on trucks. Oh, and I think it’s less cars causing damage to the roads and more trucks. There are some roads in national parks that rarely require re-paving despite fairly heavy seasonal traffic, because almost all the traffic is regular cars and almost none is freight trucks.)
@@wmoros4902 the US highway system was a national defence project to ensure the US would always be logisticly connected together. As ww2 showed rail makes for a good military (and now terrorist) target.
@@avroarchitect1793 Regarding your last sentence, roads aren't better at resisting those sort of attacks. Bomb a road hard enough, or god forbid, blow up a major bridge, and roads are just as vulnerable to disruption as rails would be, in that sense.
Its lack of planning. I bring this up regularly and people are quick to mention how dependent our society has become on 'just in time' shipments. Trucks can get it there in a day and trains will likely take 3. Okay so, run your business by buying the shit 3 days earlier, wtf. Its really not that difficult.
The thing people don't mention enough about walkable cities is the sense of *freedom* they provide. People always associate cars with freedom... and sure, if that's what you grew up with, that's how you'll feel. It's how I felt, until I finally moved to a walkable area. But once it sinks in that you can just step out your door and buy a thing of milk, or grab a coffee, or go to a restaurant, or pick up something from the pharmacy, or unwind at the park, it totally changes your perspective. Walking is _the_ mode of transportation innate to humans, and the simple ability to go about your daily life under your own power is liberating on a fundamental level. Walkable cities also reveal more subtle effects which cars have on our lives. For example, spending an hour in a grocery store loading up a massive cart and being miserable is what makes sense when you need to drive several miles to buy food. But when you only need to walk several _minutes_ to the store, it becomes almost effortless to make quick trips to pick up a handful of items. And it enlarges how you see your environment, with all the nearby shops and amenities feeling more like an extension of your home. The park down the street feels almost like my yard. I still have a car, and I still use a car: sometimes I want to go for a drive, or I really do want to buy a cart full of groceries, or I'm just feeling lazy. But I rarely _need_ to use it, and that's just an amazing feeling.
We're not just restricted to walking and bicycling these days, there are plenty of personal electric vehicles to use that for someone in my case is a Godsend since I cannot walk and especially bicycle for very long due to injuries. So unless your corrupt boomer gov hasn't banned them they can add freedom for everybody that wouldn't be possible before, and also help fill in the gaps that trains can't cover.
@@YeeLeeHaw I have somewhat mixed feelings on personal electric vehicles (though it’s not exactly their fault…) The area I’m in is quite walkable, but it’s not perfect. In particular, there’s a lack of bike lanes-or rather, there’s a shoulder which _could_ be a bike lane, but in practice is street parking. This has led to people on electric bikes (especially teens) riding on the sidewalk-which I suspect some parents encourage out of safety concerns. It hasn’t gotten too bad yet, but it’s an accident waiting to happen, and it’s made me a little wary about personal electric vehicles _in my particular area._ I think the short-term solution here is traffic enforcement: primarily of speeding cars to make the streets safer for bikes, and secondarily of the electric bikes themselves. But, I don’t really know.
@@nw42 We don't need more laws, we got too many laws dictating our free movement for no reason; do not give them an inch. It's the cars and trucks that needs to go as they are the ones killing people, then it's nothing but common sense and riding carefully among others, if some can't do that they belong in jail.
What a bunch of bull. I live in a very walkable city (San Francisco). Yes, do you get all of the stuff which is convenient, I'll give you that. But there are tons of downsides too. Biggest one - crime. Where there's people there's increased crime. You're far more likely to get robbed/stabbed/run over in a city. And yes, I've gotten robbed before. The public transportation sucks too with all the people packed into a big tin can like sardines. I bet you always thought bicycling is awesome... well, I got news for you - our bicycling lobby is extremely efficient so bicyclists basically follow no rules as they equate themselves to both cars and pedestrians whenever it suits them. I've gotten nearly run over by the bicycle salmon multiple times. They blow through street light, ignore stop signs, damage cars , block traffic and basically do whatever you want without any reprimand. I bet OP would be proud. Then there's packs of kids walking around all over the place smoking pot and hitting random cars. I live across a kindergarten which means constant noise pollution during hours of operation. I can keep going but you get the picture. It's far from the rosy concept you're trying to see here. It's a major escape for me to get behind the wheel of my sports car and leave this place even if for a day.
@@Synchromesh123 _"I live in a very walkable city (San Francisco). Yes, do you get all of the stuff which is convenient, I'll give you that. But there are tons of downsides too. Biggest one - crime"_ That's a San Francisco issue, that's not because it's easier to walk there. _"You're far more likely to get robbed/stabbed/run over in a city"_ Again, you're connecting dots that aren't supposed to be connected. And what do you mean with run over? aren't you arguing for our point with that? _"The public transportation sucks too with all the people packed into a big tin can like sardines."_ *Your* public transportation sucks, that's not an inherent theme for all public transportation. _" I bet you always thought bicycling is awesome... well, I got news for you - our bicycling lobby is extremely efficient so bicyclists basically follow no rules as they equate themselves to both cars and pedestrians whenever it suits them."_ That's a car problem, cars, trucks, and busses are by far the most dangerous vehicles and they also take up by far the most space, space that could've been used to separate pedestrians and other personal transportation vehicles. _"They blow through street light, ignore stop signs, damage cars , block traffic and basically do whatever you want without any reprimand."_ Yet again, the car is a common theme in your problems, but you refuse to acknowledge that it's the car that is the problem. _"Then there's packs of kids walking around all over the place smoking pot and hitting random cars."_ Cars again lol. Also a San Francisco issue. _"I live across a kindergarten which means constant noise pollution during hours of operation."_ Hmm, cars? _"I can keep going but you get the picture."_ I don't think he does considering your argument is all over the place.
My partner and I love taking trains to places as opposed to flying or driving. Unfortunately, it's not possible for us to travel with our mid-size dog via train. So for extended trips to see family, we usually have no choice but to drive. For day to day, I would LOVE to not be car dependent (and, to a certain extent I have achieved, this by working from home), but I live in a semi-rural area that is unwalkable and lacks any form of public transit nearby.
"EVs only become sustainable after 4-5 years after purchase." Funny because most electric vehicle manufacturers prevent people from repairing EVs (even though they're simpler than a standard combustion engine) so people buy more instead of fixing them and keeping them past 4-5 years.
@@KnightRaymund How so ?¿ please show me a video tutorial replacing car batteries of renault zoe or any oyher car brand that is not nissan leaf which code got hacked
unless you live in flood-prone areas. Or most probably, your local city officials are too feckless to manage the budget properly, if they even got it built at all considering the cost of tunneling alone. man, at this point I'd be okay with overground metros, roads are already noisy after all, what's one more giant hunk of metal will do to my eardrums?
@@ChemySh I lived next to a railroad for a while and I'll say a good modern electric train is actually quite quiet (at least if it's up to 5 cars long, that's what we have here), I never even noticed them because of a constant flow of cars
@@ChemySh That's how Cracow exist. 770k inhabitants including me, but no metro, never beacuse governers of citt are just lazy. Warsaw (Poland's capital, 1,7 million inhabitants) has developed first metro line in 1990s!
The question is "How do we go from this mess to this glorious alternative?" And honestly, we might just need some cities to start tearing up streets to put in streetcars, to mandate mixed development and the 15-minute city, and to actually put these policies into practice. We need somewhere to point where it WORKS, and people can go to and see that it works. Then package it up and ship it worldwide, one freight train at a time.
@@dlazo32696 might not happen anywhere, but who knows. Due to the pandemic, there were a lot of reconstructions this summer in my town to help the economy, and many streets were completely closed and rebuilt. They could as well have put the tracks in
If u need to point somewhere to show transit and walkable urban designs works, just point to Tokyo my guys. Bitch is the largest city on eart and thrives on Transit and Walkable urban design.
A start would be making new developments partially mixed use so that ppl can see if they like it. But the problem remains, a lot of things we want are far. A specific supermarket, a certain food place, your work, etc.
@@Yorick257 here in Tampere, Finland there was a big construction project to really tear up the streets and put rails in. This construction project was recently finished and the first railcars started transporting people in the city, hopefully this becomes wide spread.
As a car enthusiast I fully support these types of pushes. After all, all I want my car for is to take it to a racetrack to beat the ever living snot out of it. Besides that I’d gladly take trains and use my Onewheel to get around. Honestly sounds more fun day to day
@@einar8019 hopefully the repair costs don't make that a living nightmare lol. Just make sure to hit all the maintenance intervals when you do get an M3
Man, but what about when nothing else will make you as happy a nice, relaxing even cruise along your local beltway? Driving 70 in 6th is my happy place, and it’s tough to imagine a world without it.
Something also a negative for electric cars: people seem to forget it requires a cleaner and larger electrical power grid. It can be easily solved with more nuclear power but these same people reject that idea which is why I don't take them seriously when they say they want to get away from fossil fuels
i agree.. nuclear power is underrated people are probably traumatized about the fallout in chernobyl but it was man made lol.. i can only imagine nuclear power plants being handled correctly 😌 it would solve all power problems
nuclear power is great, my dad's into cold salt reactors and I'd like development in that area to be done too, but we have found a safe and relyable energy source that makes a whole bunch of energy, every person dumb enough to be in charge of legislating the systematic removal of nuclear power from countries, who somehow isn't being bought out by at least a couple billion, should be fired for incompetence I don't agree with corruption either I just somehow prefer it to ignorance, at least they get to feel bad about what they are doing
i think people shy away from nuclear solutions because of risks, permits, waste and complexity involved in adding a nuclear solution to any grid. Can any nuclear plant be proposed, approved, built, and operational within 5 years? 10 years maybe? Solar is ready today and can be installed on almost any roof with standard tools by local owners. Open farm fields can be solar as well. New windows with solar power generation built-in are coming soon as well. I think small/micro nuclear is coming, but is at least 5-10 years away just based on the above. So with solar already being affordable and 'easy' to do, why wait for nuclear to catch up?
Yep. Growing up in San Francisco, we had excellent, cheap public transit. Clean and decent rail service. And then Uber and Lyft put their Headquarters in. Suddenly, ride sharing was the future! And they let the trains go down to shyte. Sad. Its a new age version of automotive companies many decades ago lobbying government to get rid of the old tram networks.
The two major things that deteriorate road surfaces in the northern tier of the country is heavy truck traffic and weather. Specifically the freeze-thaw cycle roads experience due to concrete absorbing water from rain and snow melt. Then add in the effects of road salt. I'm a fan of good transit systems where they make sense. In dense urban areas they make a lot of sense. And the US should be using not only more transit but more efficient transit. But there are also areas where cars make more sense. And there are areas where a mix of the two works best. That said the biggest problem in the US that contributes to sprawl is zoning laws that encourage sprawl. Strip malls are one particular issue. But one simple way their impact at least in terms of land use would be to require them to be built with their parking area above the stores. But even if you do that the next municipality over will just let them build to the normal pattern. Another major factor in sprawl is the increase in the size of the average home and lot size.
Parking above the stores? That would be horrible from a constructive sense , It would be far more efficient for the parking to be on the lower floors and the market on the top floors
@@hamboharambe9982 Ok, I'll grant you parking on ground level with the shops on a level above them would make more sense*. But with the growing online purchasing who in their right mind would want to build a strip mall anyway. *What makes even more sense is higher density housing with mixed use zoning.
@@coastaku1954 that's not what i'm saying. i've been watching f1 for decades now and yes it is fun. but we have to make compromises on "fun" things (maybe not motorsports, but private car ownership) to make way for a sustainable world that the rest of the world can also have fun in. so yes, cars are fun and cars are also bad.
One thing that keeps getting missed about in all these anti-car suburb videos is that car dependent areas have the highest mortality rates in the world. Even higher than the most crime ridden inner city. More people have died in the US from cars than from any other disease, war, or crime. Yet this gets ignored time and time again. It doesn't even matter what country. Even in places like Israel, more people have died from cars than from all the wars and violence. The more countries you look at, the more this tends to be true. It is really both shocking and sobering, and it is always ignored.
It's ignored because people today expect media to feed them with all the info they need like toddlers rather than doing research on their own, and they think if it's not reported then it doesn't exist
@@TheChrisey which is why I brought it up. It is not something that is easy yo stumble across. I am hoping people will start talking about it and they will do their own research. Definitely can't depend on the news media
But you have to consider also that 100% of the people that died, were breathing air! That seems a really suspect correlation 🧐, they are hiding something from us.
That's hard to tell if it's a meaningful statistic. Cars kill many people, sure. But what if we remove cars and use trains? Will that lower deaths or just replace the causes?
Fighting climate change with luxury vehicles is also an extremely bourgeois first world solution, the people cooking their food with burning pieces of landfill garbage (they also use as building materials for their shanty town homes) aren't worried whether the Tesla you drive is going to "pay it forward" when it comes to your carbon credits.
Wow another hyperbole argument without any kind of connection from one point to another. It’s like I could cut, copy, and paste this argument to fit taking points from my friends on either side of the spectrum.
It's okay, we can just prevent poor people from rising up out of poverty so that we can continue to fly and drive everywhere. Or...OR...we could just attempt a few cheap ways to offset our CO2 production, such as planting a few billion more trees per year in places that could use some, like Haiti.
Here I was thinking "This Armchair Urbanist guy is way less charming than that Canadian guy with the Dutch granny bike"-but then the trains came on, and I'm like "Okay. I like him. I guess I'll subscribe."
@@julianfeci7838 Yes, and I've since learned his name is #JasonSlaughter. His Dutch Bike video introduced me to the concept of #UrbanDesign, and now I'm obsessed.
Finally, an urbanist TH-cam channel that is funny. Citynerd and Not just bikes don't cut it on that front. One day I will be that fat man on a freakishly heavy bicycle.
In my town, ironically they converted the old train track to a bike trail that effectively made the whole city traversable on bike but also cemented over any capability of using the track for rail purposes again. Legacy Trail, Sarasota County Fl. It really is convenient though.
oh the city near me did something similar by making an old train bridge into a walking bridge, it cant be used for trains anymore but it makes it easy to get across the river without driving
@@kornaros96 Nearly all trains use regenerative braking. Even the diesel ones do as diesel engines are basically the same as hybrid cars using the combustion engine just as a generator for the electric motor.
@@Skylancer727 The problem is there isnt enough storage capacity within the train to reclaim all of the energy you are taking in through regenerative braking.
this content is amazing and should be broadcast into everyone’s phones once a day until im done single handedly tearing apart our highway system with a grapefruit spoon
You nailed the problem people won't accept! Urbanisation has been designed around the car, It annoys me when I have to go to places which could be at walking distance, but you can only get there in a car...or motorcycle. These situations should be prohibited. Also, good public transport and the distance between people's homes and work should be reduced..
@B&O Operator Fairmont lol exactly, like I don't see why people want to eliminate cars as if that would solve anything. Good luck trying to go the grocery store carrying all those bags in inclement weather.
I lust for a world with a robust and efficient public transportation. Specifically so I can rag my car around with fewer people about lmao. For me my car is a hobby, for others it's pure utility that could be better served in other ways. Yes, I would be willing to pay substantially more for the sustainment of roads.
I have no Idea why people think car culture(hot rodders, racers and the like) will die look at the Europeans and Japan they love their sports cars and driving machines and they have tons of great mass transit
@None Gone doesn’t matter how much money gets invested into public transportation it’s going to be full of the most scum people that can’t afford anything. Also who the fuck formats their comment in 4chan format on here? Incel ass
@None Gone I’ll be so happy driving in my personal vehicle while you can have your heroin needle express while people get stabbed and robbed possibly shot just getting to their jobs. That’s fine with me.
I always wanted to see a simulation of what a truly sustainable city would look like. Including EV mass transportation, removal of parking lots, reduction of roads, bikeability, and how emergency vehicles, construction, package delivery, etc will function in those environments. I have a ton of ideas for something like this, but I am not an animator.
NotJustBikes is a good channel for that. I don't know if it's gone into detail on every question you have, but... it kinda seems like this is a solved problem. As in, these cities already exist in places like the Netherlands.
Hey, I want to say thank you for the great videos. When I took my grandma to dinner, the topic of cars and trains popped up, and I talked for a while about how much I wish america had a good train system. She told me a lot of stories about my granddad, and how he would talk the same points (minus the climate change aspect). Its a nice bit of family bonding, and its eye-opening just the extent to which not only is this an issue, its always been an issue with highways.
That's a nice story, but also kinda depressing how we have been facing the same problem for over 3 generations and while people keep giving the solution, we never end up doing it.
@@dlazo32696 We also uniquely have the only private Healthcare system in the world. Doesn't mean the US knows best, that decision makes the US first in spending while having the worst Healthcare outcomes in the world.
I think a key point for the future highway video is how they can split up natural ecosystems too, unless there is thought put into fixing that: i.e. a wildlife bridge. However those are still really rare.
More effective than buying an EV would be to go vegan. "Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests. Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent. If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined. Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction. The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
I honestly love public transit. Not just because it's environmentally friendly, but also because it's a hell of a lot safer and cheaper, and I would much rather browse on my phone or play a video game during my commute than spend the entire time watching to make sure no one is going to kill me. Alas, transit where I live is pretty much buses rather than rail, though at least it's better than cars. My only gripe is trying to go grocery shopping by bus. You can only bring as much as you can physically carry with you from the bus stop to your home. With a car, you can bring several weeks' worth of groceries in a single trip.
There's an easy solution to the grocery thing that NJB did a video on: more grocery stores so people can shop for just the next few days or so. Even with just a bike.
A lot of people find public transit scarier than driving. Don't get me wrong I've dealt with scary people at train stations & you should always be weary of your surroundings but people don't think of the risks of getting harmed in a car accident when comparing the safety of each. Do you think news coverage of crime stories at train stations scare people of riding public transit?
@@danielr9708 Yes, although then each grocery store has to be smaller and offer less variety of goods. It may also be efficient monetarily to supply a few large stores than many smaller stores, which could lead to cheaper goods. I'm not quite sure on the details on how to best provide the same variety of goods as large scale grocery stores in a walkable city plan.
As soon as you said Highways I instantly realized how bonkers and ridiculous highways are. Why not just have trains. No more Billions of tons of asphalt. No more car crashes. No flat tires.
As someone from switzerland, I can say that good rail infrastructure works wonders, they banned heavy trucks from swiss roads and ship everything by train, thats why they built the Gotthard Base Tunnel, they have light and heavy rail. And you do not need a car at all, all cities are walkable or bikeable. The system just works.
There are trucks but they are usually for last-mile and regional deliveries. The Swiss Federal Constitution states any cross-Alps cargo must be hauled by rail though.
@@mikeschumacher Huh, seems a little overkill on the regulation. Maybe this is just my American showing, but I’d think the free market would decide what’s most efficient depending on the distance and cargo. I see a lot of van trailers on trains here that I assume are following that principle. Load the trailer on a train for most of the trip and put it back on a truck for the last part. Same idea with all the containers. Though the “last mile” distance is probably greater based on the size of the US and our rural population densities.
@@averyw.3939 They built a lot of environmental protection and rights to enjoy the environment into their constitution. Plus it’s cheaper for the state as they don’t have to build/maintain lots of roads across the Alps that might end up closed for days or weeks at a time, and potentially cheaper for shippers as they’re not paying $6-7/gal for gas to burn going really slow up and down mountains.
Making cars electric was never the problem, in fact it was a good change for the car industry. The prevalence of cars in our society is the problem. Cars being our primary mode of transportation is the problem. Giant roads cutting through cities (to put cars on) is the problem. People living in rural areas, outside metros, etc...yeah, they have a legitimate reason to own a vehicle. Really not a problem owning an EV out on your ranch. What IS a problem is just...the size of cars. The fact that you need big asphalt roads to put these big metal boxes on...yeah, that's the problem. If your city has even half-decent urban planning and public transit, you have no reason to own a car. It's just that simple.
Nope, eFuels made by Porsche is cheaper and more reliable for already existing infrastructure across globe and existing car platforms. We didn't vote, or asked for EV's. its pure political dicatroship.
If I didn't live in suburb that only had 6 bus trips through out whole day, I would give up my car. Seriously imagine not having to pay for maintenance or insurance or other car stuff, no need to worry about it breaking down mid trip... AHHH that would be heaven
Let me fill you in on something. I live in a very urban area with a decent bus system and a monthly bus pass will cost you exactly the same as car insurance + gas + maintenance! It is crude and rude, but please just keep that in mind!
@@judaspreistvlct seriously? Your bus pass must be insanely expensive, or car ownership is amazingly cheap where you live, up here in the great white north bus passes generally run you between 50 and 100 bucks depending on city. Meanwhile car ownership could be anywhere between 150 and many hundreds (not including car payments). It is 100% of the time cheaper to have a bus pass up here, and I doubt its any different in the states. If you include payments there is no comparison in the least.
i live half an hour outside of a major city... zero transit to the city outside of cars. i can walk a few miles across the county line to the nearest bus stop but the bus system sucks ass
Your belief is incorrect. Building an electric car has a one-time environmental cost that is less than the recurring environmental cost of burning fossil fuel in a normal car.
@@krane15 You have fewer fluids and mechanical parts to deal with. Most EVs have a single-reduction transmission, so there's no transmission oil, just grease. No engine means no engine oil either. The only moving assemblies are the motor shaft and pinion, the spur and differential case, the axles and wheel hubs, the brake pads and rotors, the power steering system and the suspension. In theory you could further reduce that to just four wheels, suspension and steering if you use hubmotors and electronic braking instead. As a result electric cars have much less maintence overhead in terms of both cost and resources. Problem is that you have to replace the batteries every so often. They only actually last a few thousand charge cycles.
@@krane15: EVs don't have fluids. (not like you're imagining anyway.) The power steering is electric not hydraulic, the heat is electric not based on engine coolant, the electric motor doesn't even have coolant in the first place, the electric motor doesn't have oil either, the transmission is a single gearset that is lubricated by gear oil that lasts the life of the transmission, air conditioning doesn't use Freon in any car and hasn't for decades, and...okay, EVs still have windshield washer fluid, made of water and alcohol, but that has zero environmental impact. There is almost nothing about an EV that requires routine service; GM figured that out in 1990 with their EV1 prototype. EVs are so mechanically simple they're downright boring from a tinkerer's perspective.
*YES! THANK YOU!!!* I was part of a test drive with a Tesla a few days ago and what many people don't realize is that electric cars are still cars! (Not to mention the increased amounts of carbon emissions required in producing these "boxes") We're trying to make this world less reliant on the car, and electric cars will only contribute to the ongoing loss of faith in rail transportation. In order to be truly efficient and combat climate change, WE NEED TRAINS! I agree with everything you said in this video and your content should be used to educate the general public about the superior form of public transportation and encourage others to fund it (preferably via private investment or state funding. Construction and operation of either will also create millions of jobs and bring forth economic prosperity for the region with the development of any railroad)
now I'm wondering about another halfway compromise: the electric minicar! Perhaps that thing could be an alternative where building rail is simply not an option? iirc the Dutch does have a problem with them, but that's down to unclear traffic laws and driver qualification regarding e-minicars specifically. An e-minicar would provide protection from the elements like an actual car would, and you won't have to ask permission from thousands of pissed property owners that'll be affected by the rail (dealing with land ownership fuckery, complaints about potential noise/vibration pollution... if my head already hurts from thinking about it, I imagine the fat and lazy bureaucrats in charge would be less willing to vote for sth this troublesome, which won't even be finished until after their tenure)
Well, china, Japan and most developed Asian countries does that already. Even the Europeans are doing the same for a while now and US does have the largest rail network in the world so rails are already used everywhere!
Who wants less dependence on cars? I for one love being able to hop in my car, any time, and head to any place I want. Almost everyone I know feels the same. And you're not creating jobs, you're just moving them from one industry to another.
@@ryangilbert1951 I do want less dependence on cars. Help me make public transport a viable option so I can get off the road and leave you more asphalt to enjoy.
@@ChemySh not about enjoying the roads, it's about privacy/safety/ and convenience. Being able to stop my car to go to the bathroom whenever I want. Being able to start my day whenever I want. Not being packed around a bunch of people that I don't know/trust. Snowstorms stop busses where I'm from, but work doesn't close... what if I have to tow a trailer for landscaping or construction work? I can see where public transit is useful but where I'm from, it would create nightmares for parents trying to schedule their days. Taking kids to school, sporting events, doctors appointments while still trying to get to work. Imagine loading a bus or train up for all of those instances. It just isn't convenient. Maybe for single person in low 20s...
Preach, brother, preach. Electric cars suck. Mostly because since the '90s America's been making cars bigger and heavier. Because "Murka, the home of the free!!!" Back in the '90s, my Ford Fiesta got 35 MPG+ and was so tiny my friends lifted it to place it on a parking lot's island for a practical joke. Even the smallest car today weighs at least 50% more than that. As for suburban sprawl, well... this lifelong urban dweller lived in a Chicago suburb for three years and hated it. Everything was way to inconvenient, so I moved the family back into a tight urban area. Where we could take a bus to art museums, concerts, and sporting events. My youngest ever took a bus to her first two years of university.
Finally, someone fucking said it, electric cars are not the future. The future is not relying on cars to begin with, having solid public transportation and more sustainable modes of transportation.
@@pinakinkale "dude", You talk as if you are the only one to own one!! Since I don't know you, I don't trust you plus you make no sense. A regular car is much more unsustainable and yet they keep getting bought by the millions! Electric cars by definition are a much better option, specially when you get some perspective and think about the early days of regular cars and how those people and industries fought so hard to make them work. Ever had to crank your EV??? Ever got it stuck in the mud in the middle of nowhere? Electric cars have it easy in comparison! SAYING they are unsustainable does not make it so. BTW NOTHING is sustainable in the long run so your point is moot! We have to concentrate on getting gasoline engines off the road in the SHORT RUN. We can worry about the long run later!
@@nixl3518 I never said that electric cars weren’t better, I just said that ultimately the future shouldn’t be car oriented to begin with. Electric cars are a nice stepping stone but we should focus on accessible transportation for all first.
@@pinakinkale I like your idealism but as a practical matter what you're suggesting is impossible, at least where democratic countries are concerned. What you're suggesting is that somehow you can induce the government to provide "accessible transportation" while preventing companies from producing electric cars! Perhaps you mean something else, but that is what you're writing. How geographically extensive do you expect "accessible transportation" has to be before allowing the development of electric cars?
@@Treblaine Yes they can, why do you think housing prices and gas lricrdtare skyrocketing? It's all part of the plan, families will be priced out of suburbia and forced to relocate to apartments in downtown areas.
@@deitz505 "lricrdtare" Could you please proofread what you type, that's a complete nonsense term. Not even google can guess what possible typo that could be. People are NOT being priced out of suburbia to downtown apartments, those are just as unaffordable. Americans are being priced out of EVERYWHERE if you don't already have a home. There is a shortage of all sorts of houses and the same problem with houses in suburbia will hit any "utopia", where houses are bought up by the ultra rich who want to use houses as a way to store their wealth... not because they actually want to use houses as homes. Yes, there's unoccupied homes, but they're mostly uninsulated McMansions in the middle of nowhere or termite&mould infested hoovervilles that are more dangerous to live in that sleeping on the street.
@@Xachremos coming from a car crash channel, I can say there’s some pretty interesting things that happen to motorcycles on the road. I doubt if the riders found them very hilarious, the ones that survived…
They put them to the edge of the road which is the worst possible place for a multitude of reason. It needs to be on a raised throughway, in the center of the road. Even better, a separate path altogether, the same as sidewalks.
![Stroads are Ugly, Expensive, and Dangerous (and they're everywhere) [ST05]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ORzNZUeUHAM/mqdefault.jpg)
Fun fact: the more anti-car urbanist videos I watch, the more TH-cam thinks I want to see car ads.
The more videos showing how bad US and Canadian suburbs are, the more I get ads to immigrate to US and Canada.
Management of you permissions might help!
Maybe you could do a video on the limitations and issues with youtube algorithm? I'd watch it.
That's just the car companies expending money with us instead of with those that can actually make a profit for them.
um adblocker? i haven’t watched a commercial in 20 years
never put stupid people down
without them where would you be
Trains are way too ahead of their time it's insane.
on god
They are already eletric and reliable
@@NickyYey They were electric and reliable 112 years ago. :)
@@michaelpeele5739 they are the peak of the public transportation
No, they're not AHEAD of their time, it's the rest of the capitalist industries that have stagnated. Remember, first ever cars were electric and hydrogen powered, before the discovery of cheap OIL!
I love that you got Justin Rosniak in for those immortal lines: "I know what you want. I know whatcha came here for. You know that of which I speak? It's a high like no other... It's trains!" Man, I got goosebumps when I heard that.
Just goosebumps? Damn.... I guest I am a little weird
Ros's voice made that part 100x funnier
@@gabrielrocha2516 Nah I got a chubby as well
WTYP would love you as a guest
@@Trumpianet combined with Jojo’s is the cherry on top
It's beyong infuriating to me that we developed literally the most economical, efficient and highest capacity mode of transport in history with the railways, and had massive networks crossing entire continents by the early 20th century, only for all that potential to be utterly squandered by over half a century of car addicition.
Yeah, and now it's virtually impossible to make it work in our modern society without forcing a complete economic paradigm shift in people who don't even believe climate change exists.
And then there's people with most of their equity in their home, so they are fucked even if they conceptually agree with the shift.
Yeah, but I really like my car.
@@danielsmith7023 Good.
Then, maybe, you'd enjoy driving it more when the highways aren't completely clogged with people who don't love their cars as much as you and would prefer to take the train if it was a viable option again.
@@danielsmith7023 Same.
Women keep getting harassed on trains for some reason.
I just hate how much people talk about how expensive public transit is when the highways, cars and car dependancy is the most expensive thing you can do
but the taxpayer money!!111!!
Or the strange double standard that train lines are expected to pay for themselves through ticket sales, while a highway is just something the government is supposed to provide and maintain for free. Imagine if the same requirements of profitability were apllied to car infrastructure.
"Socialism is when the government does stuff" is a bad and incorrect definition, but lets use that definition for a second. The people who don't support that bad definition of socialism are also the same people who usually quite like road infrastructure and stuff, and often own or work for businesses that directy benefit from the trillions of dollars of expense they did not have to partake in past a small percentage of their own tax money. Yet, they cannot see the benifits of doing the same thing with anything but roads, makes no sense. Why do train lines need to be profitable? Hell, did you know many airlines are required by the government (and paid for) to fly certain unprofitable flight routes (usually to allow certain wealthy people and powerful lawmakers to and from DC, their homes, and vacation spots). See, it makes no sense cuz its not about spending that money, its about maintaining the current social hierarchy and way of life, pretending everything is fine and change is bad, and that has convinced so many people to think the same way.
@@nobettername562 I mean, if socialism is that, than any country is socialist. It's just that people don't understand how much the government already does and that public transit is just replacing stupid spending with smarter spending
@@HazyFelix Yeah, I think I strayed away from the point I wanted to make, which is that its an incorrect definition people think in the US "Socialism is when the governemnt does stuff, and the more stuff it does the more socialist it is, and if it does a whole lot of stuff then its communism" I'm aware its more of a joke but it is perceived like that. And by those who perceive it like that, spending billions and trillions behind the scenes on roads and car infrastructure isn't socialist, but it apparently is when building rail and metro and streetcars and bussing. Its a double standard to which even the owner class doesn't understand how it would help them even in a mostly capitalist system to not have to use cars and trucks for everything. So maybe public infrastructure that doesn't only focus on roads is a good thing, and more people should realize that, even if they don't want the change in lifestyle that will eventually become necessary.
imagine if trains were real that would be so cool
Imagine if I didn't have to subside your cool train with local taxes. Buses do the job in metro areas more cheaply
@@raul0ca I wouldnt call building 8 lines roads cheaply.
@@exosproudmamabear558 Roads are not cheap but gas taxes and truck use taxes pay for the roads. Passenger rail never makes money. Look it up
@@raul0ca I dont understand your way of thinking. Taxes pay for the roads but you dont want taxes to pay for trains? Or you are saying taxes enough for the roads but for train taxes aren't enough? Anyway I will look for a bit either way. Although it doesn't really matter whether trains make money or not.Problem here isn't money since America already has enough of it. The problem is traffic, inefficient land use and CO2 emissions. Building more roads never solve either of them. Thats why trains are better not because they are profitable or anything.
@@exosproudmamabear558 In the US when I drive my gas tax goes to pay maintenance on the roads. Trains (light rail) charge passengers for tickets but at the end of the year it is not enough and that deficit will come from takes I pay to local government which also supports schools and police/fire.
Paying a tax for an activity you do is less terrible than paying for something you get no benefit from. It's like poor people subsidizing rebates for rich people to get solar panels to lower their electricity bills
"Electric cars suck"
wait, what
"gas cars are even worse"
I see where this is going now
edit: It's been 4 months stop replying
Damn y'all persistent, fine then
I was also a bit bewildered at the beginning.
THIS COMMENT IS LIFE
car bad, train good
@@ROTTERDXM By all statistical measures, yes
They had me in the first half, not gonna lie
Your ability to nuance the point, like "gas is worse" and "rurals will keep needing cars" is why I come to your channel
He made a video on how rural areas can be walkable
@timmyturner5358r ural towns can be walkable, but I think he and that if you're out living on a ranch or something, which hits close to home for me, cause I did for a long time, and will be doing so again soon. Pickup trucks are a necessity for that type of work nowadays
Plus, you need some way to drive into the town to buy your groceries/tools, and there isn't going to be a connected rail system by your remote ranch/farm, because you're the only thing out there
@@perryborn2777 even European farmers own pickup trucks from what I have heard. So ofcourse people will still have pickups 🛻.
@albanianamericaninmichigan1334 well and then there's the elektrofrosch. Basically a car that reduces a pickup truck to 700kg max and electric - suitable for some farm work.
@EminemSucks100 and why do they hate cities? It's so loud and cars are everywhere and it's so hard to find a parking space.
People who have never lived in a city with a good transit system, can't understand how fast and convenient it is.
If you've got a good transit network everything in the city feels like it's in your neighborhood.
Arlington, VA has had their "car free diet" program, and it's pretty cool overall.
Except when demand outstripped supply and rents went through the roof.
Which city?
@@ryccoh europe
Keyword “good”. Public transit in most US cities is terrible at worst and mediocre at best. I’ve used the New York transit system countless times and it never ceases to amaze me how they find new ways to fuck things up. Not to mention rampant crime and being constantly accosted by aggressive transients.
I’ve never been more glad to move out of the urban jungle and actually own a home and a nice piece of property.
I've lived in such cities and still hated mass transit. I just don't like being crowded in a place with a bunch of people I don't know. But, yes, mass transit in Tokyo is several orders of magnitude better than mass transit in most of the US, where you likely have to wait 20 minutes or more at a bus stop with homeless addicts to make your transfer and your total trip takes several times longer than the same trip would by car.
I am from Brazil. My father said that in the 70s-80s my region was connected by railways, and it was very good for travelling from the countryside to the urban centers. Then by pressure of the automotive industry (according to him, but I do believe it is the case) there was a massive shift in public transportation priorities - highways and roads took the place of trains and trams. It's really not practical and worse for the environment. Traffic jams in my region are unbearable.
America had a very similar shift, they went from having streetcars, trams, and some railways to motorways and cars due to the automotive lobbying after the world wars. My country had a similar thing, everyone was converting to cars so we followed along and let our railways fall apart despite them once being the best in the world.
Like in my local area here in the US. We used to have rail trollies all over my home town and reaching into the next like 5 cities surrounding it. You just kinda waved to get on when it was passing by and pulled the cable on the ceiling to stop when you wanted to go. But they ripped out all those lines only shortly before I was born as the city said they "just needed to add another lane of traffic for tourists". Well guess what, now we have no public transit, the city ended up losing most of its tourists, and the roads are in a horrific state.
That is true, I live in a city with around 600k people and here used to be trains, etc, and now there are some shitty buses, and also, the city was even considered to be the city of the bicycle, to see how much changed.
@@justanotheryoutubechannel I live in Detroit that had 200miles (320km) of streetcar (tram)track in the city limit and around 600 miles (1000km) of suburban streetcar tracks and in the 1940s when my grandmother was taking the streetcars to school she had to go in the middle of a busy street because the streetcar was build in the center of the street before car traffic was a thing as there was only pedestrians cyclists and slow horse carriages so building it in the middle of the street made sense because you only had to cross one lane of horse and buggy traffic. However after the middle class started to buy large amount of cars the cars speed by the streetcar and when people went to cross for the streetcars the my encountered high speed traffic and the city of Detroit dismantled or paved over the hundred of miles of tracks. Dispite Detriot being the auto manufacturering hub of the Usa automotive industry the big three companies didn’t get the streetcars removed because the city owned the lines since the 1920s. The stupid thing looking back was why the city didn’t give dedicated lanes for streetcars and made crosswalks with traffic lights around the streetcar stops so riders wouldn’t be endangered and not destroyed have a massive public transit network.
@@TheAmericanCatholic my city did it well, we have tram metro bus and rail but also big roads. You can live without car quite easily as a station of public transit is always max 5 min walk away from you. But also for people who need cars, the roads are quite great except some incredibly stupid crossroads where you have 9 exits but only 1 lane per 3 exits. Its the perfect balance, you can live just fine without having a car, but if you want to have it, its good too. Only the parking spot system is stupid, as you always have to pay for your parking, even infront of your house. If you park on the street where you live, you pay once a year and its quite cheap, but parking anywhere else is paid for the time you stay there and its extremely expensive. Up to 10$ per hour and you cant have it prepaid, you have to pay each time you park somewhere. Paying for just parking on the streets is annoying, and they have cars with cameras which automatically send you ticket if you haven't paid. And if you park anywhere else on the street where the paid zone isnt marked (the places where you can park have rectangles to mark those spots) you automatically get a ticket. I got a ticket for just stopping on 1 of the parking spots, while my car was still on as i really needed to pee, so i stopped only for 1 min with the engine still on and still got a ticket. Thats the only thing i really hate about this city. Also, you can't be on the parking spot if you haven't already paid, but you have to manually pick the parking location and time in an app to pay the ticket, so you would either have to block the traffic while youre paying (and also you can't be on a phone while on the road, so that another ticket for you), or know which spot for parking is free before starting the drive, paying it in advance and hope that noone gets to that spot before you drive there. (Which is just not possible).. great city overall, but this thing is absolutely stupid
The only universal constant in urban planning:
*Railways will do it better*
And trams and trolleybus....
@@alanmay7929 trams are literally trains
@@incompetencelogistics8924 road trains
They have a railway between my house and my cabin in the woods?
@@levistrauss5378 They said urban, not rural. I'd say suburban too. The cabin in the woods isn't even suburban tho...
The part of the description that says "Elon bad actually" has aged well.
Yes it has
Electric isn't the issue.
Mobility in general needs to develop towards lightweight.
Simply doesn't make sense to move 2000 kg of vehicle (or even 1000) to move a cargo/people of 80-200 kilograms.
That city in Georgia that has widely adopted golf carts might be the American take on Dutch cycling standards
We have the technology in bikes, scooters, rickshaws and mopeds.
But alas those solutions cannot work in mixed traffic with American road tanks
If only trains existed to solve this issue
50-120 kg
@@burgerpommes2001
We're talking about Americans.
America: "Mixed use development"
Europe: "Towns"
As Eastern European, i'd choose America over woke never learning history lessons Western Europe,who forgot their culture and heritage all day....
@@razzor4708 as another Eastern European, I'd rather choose Western Europe over America, which currently is attacking and censoring people who aren't "traditionalist Christians". Let's not forget about the American shitty systems and how it's designed to screw everyone except those who are on top.
If you like the traditionalist politics then stay as far in the East as possible. Might as well move in the corrupted Russia if you really hate the "woke".
"woke never learning history Western Europe"? "Never learning history" seems more like an American thing rather than a West European thing. I never thought that there will be book bannings, but it has happened there again. I never thought that there will be horrendous acts of violence against minorities over stupid and exaggerated lies, but it has happened there again. I never thought that there will be attempts of literally taking children away from parents because either the parent or the child is queer, but it has happened there again.
Now tell me, isn't that exactly what happened against people of color, jews, atheists and many other minorites? Isn't history repeating itself?
"who forgot their culture and heritage". Culture evolves and expands. Just because something was okay before in a culture it doesn't mean it's okay now. For example, slavery was viewed completely moral, but nowadays it isn't. Another one is that centuries ago being in any other religion rather than the countries' official one was completely forbidden in most countries, now it isn't. Embracing culture for the sake of tradition can be dumb. What's the problem that we don't follow old culture?
@@razzor4708 Eastern Europe really went down the shitter. You guys used to be chad Communists dunking on Nazi punks left and right and now all you do is cry about liberals on twitter being mean to you...
Go ahead and move to your safe space of America then.
@@razzor4708 i prefer living a semi-decent life than to live in america
@@razzor4708 What have we forgotten that muh eastern europe hasn't? Also I think your perception of culture is warped by the fact that western european culture has influenced so many cultures around the world including yours.
As a car enthusiast, I must lend a hand to the train enthusiasts to be able to increase public transit and only people who WANT to drive with luggage will be on the road. Tends to help with safer driving conditions.
bruv let's ban normies off our roads, lorries, cool cars and motorcycles will remain, imagine that.
no traffic
no speed limits
no karens killing motorcyclists because they're on their phone!
@@filtrakioldhorborn I don't know if you're sarcastic or not, but that would genuinely be heaven.
@@anamore nah mate i genuinely wish that was the world we lived in.
imagine non enthusiasts just being busriders, while the 1% of the population actually get's to enjoy driving
@@filtrakioldhorborn like Plato said 2000 years ago, democracy is a problem when farmer class gets to vote... they should never been given that right to begin with.
Same goes for driving cars. It's a mistake we let them drive in the first place.
@@filtrakioldhorborn bruh if you lived in Canada i would vote for you to be prime minister.
- That train montage at 10:14 got me so hard I think I need to see a doctor.
- On a more serious (but honestly related) note, whenever I watch a train speed by, even if it's a freight train, the total size combined with its speed and the rumble of the ground makes it such an impressive sight that it can give me goosebumps and it honestly makes me think things like "Fuck yeah, America. Progress." I never get that feeling when I see a car, or even an 18-wheeler, speed by.
_sees thousands of cars stuck in traffic on the 8 lane freeway_ Fuck yeah, progress!
I mean, it makes sense, trains can weigh hundreds of tons, and after picking up velocity, go just as fast as any car. They just straight up awesome.
Honestly personally I only ever feel scorn or some similar feeling seeing huge cars go by. They're so dangerous
@@WiretheAlligator One of my admittedly anti-social thoughts is that I want to throw rocks at people and their vehicles who artificially make their vehicle engines obnoxiously loud. Either that or I want to force them to drive electric vehicles. They'd probably hate that just as much.
There is a reason trains are associated with being 'unstoppable'
Hearing him finally say the word "Trains" was probably the most satisfying I've felt in weeks
We have one train near where I live. It carries granite 20 miles each way to concrete plants in the city.
@@ronskancke1489 yeah my city doesn't have passenger rail, only slow buses (because of car traffic)
and the jojo music was just the icing on the cake
Yeah, TRAINS… please, lock me up in a metal tube with schizophrenics and junkies and psychopaths. Sign me the fuck up.
Cars and suburbs exist as a way to escape all of that diversity. None of you soyboy urbanities can even name that root cause of the problem, so any solutions you come up with are destined fail.
Why do I hear a left leaning hungarian screaching happily?
I also think, that the marketing promotes EVs as green and removes "guilt" from environmentally conscious buyers, which causes them to buy a freshly produced car, rather than keep using what you already have until it breaks.
Like the people who carry around a massive hydro flask and then try to lecture me because I have been using the same plastic bottle for 3 months.
@@weaksause6878 Indeed
People just avoid the problem rather than solving it, it's like moving to an expensive area without people of color, so you can say that your police department has no problem with police brutality or underperforming children in school. Without public transportation wealthy people will just say "Not our problem, we all got at least one Tesla" while poor people will say: "We can't afford EVs" and out of "compassion" for the poor people the US will let people use their gas powered cars.
That's kinda fucking true. But it's also actually a bit better to buy a modern electric or hybrid car that drive on a gas engine, if you can. Because it is at the end of the day a financial investment that benefits the environment also. And even if you support non car infrastructure, ( like destroy them all toss it in the trash). You're still going to need a car when there is absolutely none. Which is what's so sinister. We've been forced into it
@@notest396 big true. I fucking hate liberals they are possibly the stupidest self righteous people in the world.
"I'll expand on this particular topic in a future episode."
Oh yeah Alan, inject that train propaganda straight into my veins!
Hahah I love this comment! Gimme that instant high of the train propaganda! Yaasss!
I think he is paid by obb and Canadian pacific at this point
Rail lines are cheaper than making roads right?
@@makisekurisu4674 it cant provide last mile connectivity
@@keshavmittal6365 That's what public transit and your feet are for.
It's worth noting that airlines and aurcraft makers, not only auto makers have lobbied furiously against high speed rail.
As an avgeek and railfan, this fucking hurts.
well there is not so need of high speed trains , there is a need of speed trains coordinated with other public transport with separate infrastructure (Trams,Metrobuses, Subway, Railbus or even buses with buspases)
80-100 mph as a standard is good enough for skeleton of rail network as it is higher speed then on highways
but it means federal needs to invest into interstate railway connection especially in north east corridor.
Do you have any proof of this?
california is building a nice one (hopefully a nice one), so thats cool.
And Big Oil.
Haven't even played the video and 100% you're going to diss all cars and suburban areas while advocating for public transit.
Yep.
Why even bother commenting
@@ryuuseiboi950 I dont know, why did you bother commenting?
Yep.
100% based
Also, let’s not forget, about 70% of greenhouse gasses come from companies, not us at the micro level. Just a way for big companies to deflect blame back to the smaller person.
That 30% could be fixed
@@kiwikiwi2483 A church of the 70% could be fixed by showing companies a focus on greener transport is where the money is going, rather than just electric cars that only pretend to be better for the environment
Uh yeh, but much of that is power plants and oil refining so it's missing the point.
yes and they also get to decide who runs for president or prime minister, because why not
@@kiwikiwi2483 So you'd rather fix the 30% made by billions of people than try to fix the 70% made by a few thousand? (only counting the decision making owners, CEOs, engineers etc.)
It really baffles me that as soon as companies make an electric car, all concept of efficiency goes out the window, because to them it doesnt matter since its all electric anyway. We end up with even bigger, deadlier, more resource intensive SUVs used for transporting ikea furniture and 1 child around the suburbs.
it should be required that you apply for a permit providing a need to own a vehicle if it weighs more than 3000 pounds
@@the.abhiram.r I think you need to look up how many cars weigh over 3,000 pounds lol…that’s like…almost every new car except for Miata’s and similar
In the past decade, EV's have turned into some of the most greenwashed things that mankind has ever made.
Rooftop solar has suffered the same fate.
Bonus points if someone has both AND lives in a McMansion.
@@electric7487 what’s wrong with rooftop solar? The roof on a single family home isn’t doing much so why not use solar panels
@@TheAmericanCatholic You missed the part where I clearly said that rooftop solar is up there with electric vehicles as a product that is extremely greenwashed (id est, something that people get so they can FEEL LIKE they are "G O I N G G R E E N"). Put simply, too many people who get rooftop solar do it only for the bragging rights.
Driving is fun; commuting is hell.
Traffic jams are fun?
@@lol-ih1tl that’s why I said commuting sucks. Driving out in the country on nice winding roads there’s no traffic ;)
Driving should be only for sport and leisure in cities, like riding horses for example
You nailed it! Most car enthousiasts actually HATE car-centric infrastructure (although subconsiously). The biggest car nut I know cycles to work every day!
"Electric cars are the future"
Meanwhile electric trains and trams existing for a century: I guess we never existed
It’s like dippindots being the ice cream of the future bro
Lots of EV morons around, lots
Because shocker people like choosing exactly where they want to go when they want to.
@@jhonklan3794 I'd rather walk or bike exactly where I want to go
@@PostLagone That's not always possible though. Many people have disabilities that would make something as simple as walking or biking impossible. Are we just going to tell them "oh well guess you'll just have to deal with it"?
Goes to Japan once and now I’m embarrassed by how crappy our metro system is. Traveling all through Tokyo was so easy on their metro lines it’s insane. Faster than a car would imo.
Did you use the JPN Rail Pass?
And that is public transit done right.
@Gottes God you can always rent one tho
@Gottes God I'm fine with that as long as it's electric, heavily taxed, and you're not taking it in the city.
@Gottes God Ah so you don't "just want to drive all over the country with your friends." Stop being disingenuous lmao.
I loathe self driving cars for incentivizing people to buy cars they can't afford. I'm both a car enthusiast & an advocate for rail based infrastructure because car based infrastructure takes away the joys I receive from driving whether it'd be dealing with shit drivers who view driving as solely a chore or putting unenjoyable miles on my car.
That's a good way to put it
And trains/trams can litteraly last for a century just needing motors and systems upgrades. I still see 1980 trams and trains in Europe tbh.
I'm trying to follow your logic. How are these people convinced to spend more money than they can afford on self driving cars? People should be free to spend their money as they choose, right? (Deceptive or misleading marketing not included)
@@beilkster
It's because they think they need something they don't. Simple as that.
It doesn't help that there are movements out there that want to flat-out ban any cars that aren't self-driving, and people hear about those and immediately assume they need to buy a self-driving car in order to comply with laws that aren't even in the books (or won't ever be - the arguments hinge entirely on the assumption that faster reaction times are the sole issue with driver safety, ignoring all other factors such as spatial awareness, decision making and being able to judge conditions ahead-of-time as well as the fact that computers aren't perfect and CAN make mistakes, glitch up or otherwise fail in a wide variety of ways).
@@VestedUTuber thanks for elaborating
Using Il Vento D'oro for the trains segment was so fucking good
"Fat Man on a Freakishly Heavy Bicycle" - Sorry, but someone my size needs a more reinforced frame on my bike.
Mmmm....tricycle?? It can also allow for better and more storage area too for grocery shopping and the like! :) I was recently looking at bicycles actually because I reaalllyyyy want one of those awesome dutch type bikes, that have standard features that are more "add on" features here in the us. So anyways, I was looking at some bikes on a website, I don't remember the website though, but I actually kinda liked some of the tricycles they had on there and thought huh....man that would be way more convenient when going grocery shopping here in the burbs, bc you can put more groceries in the storage cart thingy between the two back wheels.
Anyways, this was kinda long and ramble-y, lolol. But maybe a tricycle would work. Or a bike or trike with a little bit sturdier frame would do? Shit. I just did a Google search and apparently there are bikes for people who are heavier too. I'm going to have to look into that simply because it's interesting. The ones I briefly saw said differing weight requirements for some are like 300-350 and even one or two brands that are 400! That's actually really awesome to see because bike riding is much better and less harmful on the joints of folks who are really overweight. Really awesome to see that!
Soo....thanks for this comment because it got me to look into it a little bit. ....even if it was a joke comment, lol...I still appreciate it!
I love cars. But I have to agree with you, if you are in a metro area, cars only kinda serve as a flex(in poorer countries) and basically spend 99% of the time parked. I especially agree that inner city areas should be designed to be more bike and pedestrian friendly! Definitely would help with people not exercising too.
Well I'm pro ride sharing apps/services so that that car that dropped you off can then go pick some one else up as well as easily carpool strangers together.
Me personally, I feel that highways should still exist, but have less lanes. A train could run parallel to the highways, and reduce the number of cars on the road by say, 70%. But yeah, our car-centric society needs to change.
@@thatguyalex2835 Is reality in Belgium that some train lines run parallel to the highway and it's so satisfying to see the cars in traffic (or just driving as well) when we zoom by 🥰
@@myra0224 Agreed. I have been on trains in Europe, and the cars look like they are standing still, as the train goes 140 km/h, and the cars barely go faster than 90 km/h.
@@thatguyalex2835 Here in Belgium, normal trains (so not the high speed international lines) can even go up to 200km/h 😉
Great video, but one major factor that often gets overlooked is not only the carbon cost of getting the rare earth materials and the lithium is the geopolitical aspect of it.
The countries that have large deposits of these materials are largely located in the global south, and powerful countries spend incredible amounts of resources to keep those countries in a state of disruption or dependance.
Obvious examples is how the US treats much of the South American countries, with assholes like Musk basically "calling" for a coup, just to keep lithium prices down.
Its not only about the carbon output, but the real, human cost of these practices and industries that literally exploit people in other countries to make their products.
that is true, but on the other hand the geopolitical and environmental costs related to obtaining, processing and transporting petrol is also often overlooked in these "are electic cars really greener than ICEs?" type of comparisons. both are shit either way.
@@bubberlad Its not really an "on the other hand" arguement :) Its both. Both are shit in their current implementation. Im just pointiing out a real but often neglected or underappreciated reason as to why. Also, technocrats suck and wont save us and all that jazz lmao
@@frenkzors yes i meant as in it goes both ways. it wasn't meant to be a point against yours. i agree that both of them suck, and that it is laughable to imagine that we will simply "tech" our way out of our unsustainable ways of living
+
@@bubberlad you realise that fossil fuels/oil is what makes the world run right?! There are litteraly millions of oil by-products from car tires to road tar to cable insulation, fertilisers, medical equipments, drugs, fuel for aircrafts, agricultural, construction and mining machines/equipments and ships.
Cities have to come first. Trains are great and all, but they are the final phase in these changes. If you connect two car infested cities together with a train line it's not going to work because you'll step off the train onto a giant carpark next to a 6 lane stroad and you won't be able to get anywhere because you didn't bring your car with you.
Don't we do that with Airplanes already? We rent a car from airport and go on our merry ways.
I'm essentially refuting the point trains are last step. Rather fighting climate change is a multi-pronged approach and all of them are necessary.
I agree both are necessary, but I think they need to be done simultaneously. Building a rail line allows you to densly develop the areas right around the station, and more density and riders will follow
both are necessary but they can also be done simultaneously. the first thing to do (imo) is to change zoning laws and allow mixed use development. city planners and traffic engineers should also publish some local/statewide/nationwide (don't really care as long as it's functional and actually makes sense) guidelines to be followed on how to build roads. the cheapest way to rebuild roads would be to just wait until they're scheduled for maintenance anyway (roads have lifespans of like 15-30 years) and repave them to the new specifications - such as having separated bike paths, proper traffic calming measures, and continuous sidewalks, to name just a few guidelines that can be implemented. whenever a new road is paved it can just as easily be made to the new specifications. as this change will be gradual there will be no bulldozing of cities required (though just look at any american car infested cities that were bulldozed to become parking lots clearly no one actually has an issue with bulldozing cities lol) and new developments will just crop up around the newly pedestrianized neighbourhoods over time. we don't have to wait until we've sufficiently redesigned all our cities to be great and people-centric to improve train service. it's best to do both things at the same time because while our cities are gradually redeveloping to be more people-centric, people will slowly start using trains more and more anyway.
That is the current state of affairs where I live. Not only is it significantly more expensive to take the train than to drive, I have to spend additional money once I arrive to rent a car.
These are changes which need to happen in tandem. It doesn't matter how walkable the city is if I need to bring my car to reach it, I will still need somewhere to park my pollution box. And excellent inter-city rail isn't economically feasible for the user if I arrive at my destination and need to rent a car because the city isn't walkable and has terrible local transit.
I'm becoming much more disillusioned with EV's. They're an ok bandaid, nothing more, and nothing less.
Given humans reluctance to lower their current comfort level, if an EV is better for the environment and is temporary its still better than the alternative.
Also, Tesla just released their emissions report and it stated the break even point for model 3 vs ICE equivalent was 5,600 miles. Over the lifetime of the vehicle it was 2x to 6x fewer emissions (depending if it was charged with grid or solar). The quoted 3-5 year equivalent quoted in this video is an old statistic.
No, they are more.
The automobile was and is very successful because it is a good solution for many cases and the best/only solution if there are not enough people for public transport. This is important for millions of people. For these people there is no solution without car. So the EV is part of the solution.
But we start looking for the best solution for different usecases. The 'one size fits all' cannot be efficient.
It's less of a bandaid and more of a catheter. You're never going to want to leave that shit in.
@@alphastratus6623 Lemme guess, Elon Musk is god for you, right?
@@raunakshahi8485 Why? Where did I wrote something even close to this?
Brain dump: Underground metro/subway, trains + highspeed rails, efficient bus/public transits, public bike/scooter/electric moped sharing system, better sidewalks + designated bike lanes for safety, allow skateboarding, overall just to improve the stigma around walking and "public transit".
Ask anyone of my friends and they would say they don't use the public transits in the states because its either unclean, uncared for, or unsafe to them. But compared to when we travel abroad to Taiwan, Japan, parts of Europe, etc, they all happily use public transportation. Really hope the states would improve or implement more of these systems soon.
@@cactusjackNV I'm sure it can't be too long, though. Major cities can just make streets and stuff less car focused, maybe add a price for driving in the inner areas of the city similar to the Congestion Charge in London.
@@cactusjackNV The Netherlands used to be car-centric not too long ago. It would take some time but the bigger problem is investment. Long term plans don't really exist for politicians with relatively short terms, but the biggest problem is the push to maintain the car-centric system due to lobbying from oil and car companies. As with many things; corruption and unregulated capitalism is the problem.
@@cactusjackNV Europe did the same shit we did, and removed highways from city center. We constantly build insane highway off ramp things that cost insane amounts of money. Saying something is too far gone is part of the problem and plain wrong. I’m already this fat I might as well just keep eating because it’ll be too hard to work out now. Wtf ?!?
Even easier: carfree streets. Instant money saving. Everything that replaces it is better. Don't need to spend all that money rebuilding. Just #EndCarEra
You mean, most Americans don’t even have access to public transit; it’s not even offered. And in most areas where it is offered, it’s a bus line that runs in one direction once every hour and a half.
Learning about these topics has made me realize how big of a problem poor infrastructure, transportation and planning actually is, yet not many people are willing to change; it’s just so built into *mainly US* culture and is hard to recover from
Cars control us more than we control cars at this point
The US is a car based consumer culture. And unfortunately we've been the "model" for developing nations to copy. Not good IMO
It's all about DISTANCE. Nutcases like this guy completely miss the point that North American distances are absolutely colossal compared to Europe, Asia, etc. His entire rant about dense urban planning utterly and completely misses the point that in the US, Canada and other large countries, there is ZERO "space pressure", we have the luxury to expand into quiet, spacious urban environments because we CAN. Given a choice, spacious suburban development will always be the preference for families.
There is absolutely nothing fundamentally "wrong" with suburban development, IF the infrastructure and space is available to support it. Much more attention is now being placed on efficient and effective suburban planning, which will obviously help.
The nonsense about power "transmission losses" in suburban areas is comically stupid. Those losses would be measured in hundredths of a percent.
@@awebuser5914 Even with great distance available, using up large amounts of it unnecessarily is wasteful. Planning should make smaller areas as efficient as possible while saving resources, with long-term thinking. This also deals with the layout of suburban areas and the transportation available (like a lack of bike and/or walking paths). It doesn’t have to include opposite ends of a country but pulling together closer parts of it would be beneficial. I do agree that there’s nothing “wrong” with suburban development if given careful attention; the problem is when it isn’t given careful attention, as commonly seen in some neighborhoods.
@@rachel8089 Yep, at least in Canada, there is now a significant amount of planning that goes into suburban layouts; parks, shopping, services, schools, bike/walking paths.
The thing that gets me is how the same people that refuse to go anywhere without their car will be the same person complaining about traffic on the freeways
I once used the train to travel, but I changed when my ride started to be always late or canceled. Trains in my country zone need more efficient management and maintenance. Also, train stations must be made more accessible; there's no use in traveling by train if I have to ride the car to get to the station.
same. (america)
option 1: drive to your destination (20 minutes)
option 2: drive to the train depot (10 minutes in the opposite direction) and take the train to your destination (30 minutes)
option 3: take the bus to the train depot (40 minutes) and take the train to your destination (30 minutes)
And if you have to do more than 1 transfer to or from a bus, in many cases you're better off walking 5km than riding 5km, which means we might as well say to hell with it and standardize on mopeds or...cars
Also safety. Lots of people are literally afraid to take the ones around here because of all the drug addicts
It’s somewhat true where I live, I’ll usually take the train to London as driving there is genuinely slower and worse than using the train, but it’s ridiculously expensive and nowhere near reliable enough for me to use to commute to the next town over twice a day for example, and the experience is just not good enough, I don’t think I’ve ever ridden a train that actually turned up on time… They need to be faster, cheaper, and more reliable, with modernised train stations so it doesn’t look like it hasn’t been maintained in the last 50 years (which to be honest my local station in a near-city-sized town probably hasn’t, considering the bridges are the same as the ones we had since the 1800’s.)
Trains in Russia come 5 minutes late in the worst scenario. Usually they go right by the schedule. Never thought they can be delayed like here in Europe. That’s crazy.
Most Americans are TERRIFIED of every little change that could effect their suburbia hellscape.
No multi story building, no commercial area near houses, no public transportation (it's for the poor). JUST METAL BOXES AND THE SPACE NECESSARY TO MOVE AND PARK THE METAL BOXES.
Yeah we live like kings with our waste.
yea I think that's why some yanks really like those boxy stretched pete 389 as their main truck not that I hate them or anything, they look good and sounds good but they require lot of space to maneuver and park compared to newer gen class 8 trucks
The irony is that suburbs still need public transit. A lot of middle-class people have housekeepers who commute from inner-city areas. They can't afford cars, so they take a bus. And who provides these buses? The suburbs that want their services of course. The problem is that buses are an option of Last Resort for most people.
Most Americans are terrified of everything
Sorry but I actually CAN pay my uber to the grocery store 🤷♀️
building highway
"but how do we pay for it?"
"we just pay for it"
building high speed rail
"but how do we pay for it?"
"REEEEEEEEE"
despite the high speed 2-4 track rail line won't take up as much space as a 6 lane highway.
Also no new advances in technology arn't required for construction since electric trains existed since the 1930s
@@davidty2006 And regular modern trains can reach 230-270km/h without a problem.
@@rattlehead999 mhm and when it comes to mountain passes the power they have is nearly overkill
@@davidty2006 true, but you can always slow down if needed.
We don't need bullet trains that do 600km/h or whatever, just regular modern trains on regular modern tracks.
High speed rail is a waste of money when airplanes exist and aren't locked into a single route.
The absolute flashbang of hearing the Regular Car Reviews "wingadingadingadinga" in one of your videos is a welcome sensation.
I knew I wasn’t tripping when I heard that
When you said "it's trains" my friends and I cheered at the TV like a bunch of NUMTOT dinguses
Cars are very ineffective in terms of energy. I do not know about the US but in Europe one car is occupied by average by 1.2 person. So to move 1.2 person (120 kg) you have to put in motion another 1500 - 2000 kg of metal. And it costs huge amount of energy. It's not important if you take this energy from gas or battery - the energy still must be somehow produced.
This is an excellent argument put into easy to understand terminology.
Yes and average bike it's like ~12kg. Car is worst possible option for commuting.
@@Phoenix898989 I guess you're from the us? Here in Europe bikes are usually heavier.
@@Jacksparrow4986 Nah, I'm from Europe. Well maybe not 12kg more like 15-17kg. I'm road bike guy so I go over optimistic :D BTW: e-bikes > electric car
Fortunately cars/vehicles in Europe are significantly smaller and way more efficient compared to american vehicles. In Europe there are no huge f150 pick-up truck or chevy suburbs or cadillac escale, in Europe there are smart, toyota yaris, vw up, golf......
As a car enthusiast I will always love and want a car in my life, however I am in enormous support of sustainability and will always support rail and public infrastructure over highways, this is to benefit the planet obviously but also it benefits the people who have a car that was passed down to them or it is simply their passion. I love your videos and keep up the awesome work, as much as it hurts from a car enthusiast stand point I am all for it when it comes to my future and one day my family's future.
True, I also see the car more as a "toy" for leisure and fun. Something to be useed on weekends to drive to the lake withe friendsand family. Not as an efficient pragmatic mode of every day transport for commuters.
What is more effective for each of us than buying an EV? Go vegan!
"Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests.
Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent.
If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined.
Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction.
The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper
Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
I hope that one day, a personal car is like a motorcycle or a horse.
Something only enthusiasts have, but you don't need for daily life.
I would use trains more than highways even if i had my dream car. You know, the traffic, gas prices, making your vehicle more damaged by overdriving and so on.
@@someguy2135 Bullshit, the single biggest way to reduce your impact is supporting nuclear power and convincing others to do the same. This idea of individual people's choices making such a massive contribution is ridiculous, it's just not true. The entire concept of a "carbon footprint" was popularized by a marketing campaign from BP. Yes, _that_ BP, British Petroleum. They do this because they want _you_ to feel responsible for climate change and pollution so you'll blame yourself instead of blaming _them_ for their decades of corruption and lobbying.
The majority of global emissions (over 60%) come from heating and power generation. Livestock is only responsible for 6%. Even _cars_ and _planes_ make a fairly pitiful contribution, at around 6% and 2% respectively.
Telling people that they need to stop eating cheese to stop climate change is like telling them they need to buy lots of scissors to mow their lawn. It's ridiculous and it's just not going to work.
What we need to do is start building nuclear reactors *yesterday* and not stop until the power grid is 100% carbon free. In fact we should continue going further, and use the excess power to make synthetic fuels for aviation and road transport via carbon capture. Yes, those synthetic fuels will be more expensive than fossil alternatives. We'll just have to deal with it.
If public transport would be so good and widespread that the majority of people wouldn´t need a car, than the car enthusiasts that are left could drive whatever they want because the impact on the enviroment would only be marginal. That´s the best option in my opinion, I take the train whenever I can but also really enjoy the spontaneity and freedom of owning a car
Yeah subways are a lot of fun .
I own a seven year old small, short range electric car. I agree 100% with this video, with the exception that I think parking lots are worse than highways. (Though both are terrible.) Everyone could drive the same kind of car as me and it would solve almost none of the problems created by cars.
Tailpipe emissions are, like, the 74th worst thing about cars. Unnecessary death certainly ranks higher. Gobbling up 60%+ of the surface area of your city ranks higher. Garages rank higher. Unwalkability ranks higher. Destruction of serendipitous discovery of local places ranks higher. Etc.
Neighborhood parking and denser parking options (multilevel garages rater than lots, which would ALSO have an advantage of keeping sun off cars and reducing power draw of air conditioning when you get back in your car in hot areas, and any power requirements for the garage can be met with solar on top and some batteries to power LED lights inside.
@@gramathy999 have fun paying for that. It does solve a few problems of the car but also makes it uneconomical (if it wasn't before).
@@Jacksparrow4986 Cars are already unsustainable in the long term. Consolidated parking allows for more walkable areas and reduces congestion as people aren't trying to drive from A to B to C etc. Plenty of smaller towns are already doing similar things.
I think, it's in a way like recycle, just to make yourself feel good even though the first of 3R is to reduce and reuse before recycle.
No, the tailpipe emissions are the problem.
People want to feel like they are reducing their impact on the environment without actually changing the way they live their lives. Moving to electric cars will help the environment about as much as washing the dishes with cold water. Which is to say not much.
@VOLD GAMER I'm pretty sure you made that up.
Most of the vehicle is made from the same stuff....plastics, steel, rubber, aluminum, glass. The difference is with the engine and drivetrain. In an ICE vehicle, you have the engine and transmission; in an EV, batteries and electric motors.
So DIFFERENT resources are needed to build the EV. Yes, lithium mining is awful...but you are being pretty selective in your outrage if you ignore every other mine...iron ore, coal, limestone, bauxite...needed to make the iron or aluminum engine and transmission.
Even if the EV used more resources to build (initial cost), the ICE consumes way more resources every day it's on the road. That's true even if 100% of your power comes from coal.
@VOLD GAMER This is a stupid cuckservative talking point. Much of the resources are more or less the same, you are basically swapping a giant chunk of metal and oil for a giant battery. The batteries are absolutely 100% recycled all the time so long as they aren't damaged beyond repair and even then usually enterprising people take them apart and remove the good cells. People are paying 10-20k for a used Tesla battery for home/off grid storage and other applications, you think scrapyards just throw that shit in the landfill?
@VOLD GAMER OVer the whole product life time an electric car is much better. But still cars are part of the problem not the solution.
I just dont wanna drive a car that has a literal shock bomb attached to it
@@heeholee216 As opposed to sitting on a petrol bomb lmao...
Trains are definitely the go-to for mass-transit; for the alternative to personal transportation, making the use of smaller electric carts and bikes more widespread would be good. In a mountain town my uncle lives, near everyone living there uses golf cart type vehicles to get around the place rather than using their full-size cars. These still satisfy the want for personal transportation, are far lighter, and are much more compact.
You forgot about the fact that a TON of people will not be happy unless they are driving there loudest most toxic vehicle possible. I am surrounded by those assholes so yes it's nice that a solution exists. It's just too bad that no one gives a damn.
@@Myke_thehuman
You'll run into people like that everywhere. But honestly, they're a minority. Plus you wouldn't have to put up with those people bitching about taking a train because they wouldn't be taking the train to begin with.
As a separate note, just make sure the people you're calling assholes actually are assholes. Car enthusiasts often get lumped in with fart-can ricers, status symbol supercar buyers and rollin' coal bro-truckers by the general public, because the general public doesn't know better to understand the difference. So if someone has an obnoxiously loud car or truck but they don't look like they're specifically trying to be obnoxious, they may just be a hobbyist who enjoys working on and/or driving cars recreationally. At that point it's no different from someone who rides bikes recreationally or gardens or builds model railroads or makes and wears custom costumes.
A simple form of "mass transit" is a carpool. If you simply put 4-8 people per vehicle - you remove 75% of vehicles from the commute and all the associated CO2 - if people really believed that CO2 is killing the planet they would right ? but they are not - so I have to conclude they don't believe it or they don't care.
@@litestuffllc7249
It's not that they don't care so much as they don't want to be the first to make the effort. It's basically the bystander effect, everyone expects someone else to step in first.
This is a silly solution . This video advocates tearing up every street and highway , and putting rails everywhere across America in every city , every suburb , all connected , all with stops . Are you kidding me ?? That would take a century of work and hundred of trillions of dollars and tons of co2 with all the heavy construction machinery . This is such a fantasy . I’m not sure why it’s hard for people to ask themselves “what can we do in REALITY”
Car pooling is much simpler solution . But nooooo, you gotta burn down and recreate civilization to achieve a goal ?? You’ll never get anywhere thinking like this.
We’re already speaking of people not owning cars and having autonomous cars working as ubers. The solution is so much simpler than you think . No need to destroy our country and recreate it.
THANK YOU for specifying the difference for farmers, as a farmer who believes in a carless future for the vast majority of people it is infuriating to see all the climate activists wanting to ban all cars without thinking about people like me who live in a way that they need a car.
i'm very anti car (don't even think they should be allowed in most city centres - there should be a parking garage and you have to walk/bike/take transit in) and even i agree that cars are genuinely required in some cases. in the case of rural living, obviously it's just going to be too much to expect to pave and maintain so many roads and to build out extensive public transit routes that make it possible for every farmer to live a completely car-free life. i honestly think car rentals or car-share programs should still exist too just in case people don't want to own a car but still want to have the option of being able to rent one to do a big furniture haul or a roadtrip or something.
People like you want to ban people's property. Good luck with that. The US has the 1st amendment and other countries dont.
Exactly. As much as I would love to have more bike and pedestrian friendly cities and have public transit, I love my car as well and I'm also aware people living in rural areas will need to own one too. Heck even I'd like to live in the country one day, but I just wanna have options in how I travel too.
I'm so happy that Switzerland started early to invest in our train infrastructure. And I really hope we won't stop optimizing it. ✌🏻
But wait, the U.S. started early too. Ours was just abandoned because of the then wide open spaces.
It is easy in small countries. Somewhere like Canada is a different animal.
Switzerland is an actual democracy without a giant car and oil lobby. There's the difference.
@@Atombender There is no so called democracy anywhere in europe.
@@mrrailgun6440 That's just straight dumb
I’m a big car guy and people are always confused when they find out I’m also a train guy and big advocate for public transit.
First off car guys and gals are in the minority in terms of overall motorists. So getting the majority of people off the roads means less traffic and a better driving experience.
Second off if you can reliably get anywhere through public transit you don’t need a daily driver and can use all that garage space for your shitbox project cars!
Agreeing and less dents to the rarer crapboxes
And also some concider driving as a chore, so everybody wins!
More effective than buying an EV would be to go vegan.
"Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests.
Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent.
If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined.
Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction.
The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper
Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
@@someguy2135 I don't know that going vegan is feasible for everyone to do so at once. A more realistic goal would be to reduce how much meat, and meat from cows in particular, people eat. In this way, every fast food place save Chic-fil-a is a huge problem; people have forgotten that red meat has always been a luxury. McDonald's burgers are cheap, but the true price is the damage to our environment and the slaughter of billions of animals.
Imo fast food burger places should switch to synthetic meat.
@@jjbarajas5341 We agree that cows are the most destructive type of animal raised for food production. That includes dairy. Not only is dairy the most cruel form of animal agriculture, it also requires cows and other ruminants. They produce methane which is 80 times more potent than CO2 in the first 20 years. It then dissipate, but not for about 100 years total.
"While the wildfires raging in the Amazon rainforest may constitute an “international crisis,” they are hardly an accident.
The vast majority of the fires have been set by loggers and ranchers to clear land for cattle. The practice is on the rise, encouraged by Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s populist pro-business president, who is backed by the country’s so-called “beef caucus.”
While this may be business as usual for Brazil’s beef farmers, the rest of the world is looking on in horror.
So, for those wondering how they could help save the rainforest, known as “the planet’s lungs” for producing about 20% of the world’s oxygen, the answer may be simple. Eat less meat." -CNN
I’m a commercial pilot. Against my best interests, we need trains ASAP
Do you think airships can be a viable alternative to travel legs under 200 miles?
@@PacificDark
Maybe, I don’t really know much about airship projects. I think smaller commuter electric planes are an alternative. Cape Air just bought 75 or so electric planes, the problem is that we need high density travel.
The more people a single vehicle can carry the more carbon efficient it is.
Thing about zeplins the actually get more efficient larger you make them. Unlike planes. So not sure zeplins for short trips is a good idea. Pros are definitely strap solar panels to the top
@@PacificDark No.
The reason being is lighter than air craft are extremely vulnerable to the weather. They are good for cruising but not a very good reliable transportation system.
Additionally helium is very expensive already.
The shorter the journey the less viable they become, the more they are affected by local weather patterns.
And weather is only getting more extreme.
Airships have economic viability only as long range cruisers for pleasure. They could displace some airlines for a slower and gentler travel but they are far from sky trains.
I am only touching on the many many reasons why it isn't very viable but the summary is a certain No.
Who said we would use helium hydrogen is fine… 🔥
Commuting by car is a housing market failure
That was the most intense train montage I've ever seen
Funnily enough, some of the footage is probably pretty old, the original orange livery for the TGV was used on the experimental trains, and then throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, the trains were then gradually repainted, the last set operating under the orange livery did so in 2001.
Never thought trains could be so badass with JoJo music, gotta love them even more
Train: "This is... Requiem" * reshapes reality so that businesses trying to stop trains go bankrupt over and over as trains become the dominant form of transport. *
now what about high effiency carbon-neutral modern steam locomotives (yes they exist South African Railways Red devil is one of them)
WEEB! FILTHY WEEB!
Speaking of badass trains, have you ever heard of Might Gaine?
If not, I would be delighted to introduce you: th-cam.com/video/A_PhZ7cSDjI/w-d-xo.html
@@pranavghantasala6808 yuck thats not conventional rail throw it in the trash
I used to live in Brazil in a regular city, not huge like São Paulo or Rio but not tiny like a village, and Brazil has a very interesting aspect to it: Poverty makes the country accidentally bend into more "communal" values. Not everyone can afford a car, not everyone wants a car, so most people use the bus, and where I lived I could walk 15 minutes and get to the supermarket, on the way there I would see stores of all kinds, so I didn't need to get in a car and move around. Now that I moved to the US my life is so much more miserable because I have to get in a car to go anywhere, I can't walk, I have to fucking drive, I hate driving, its so inefficient. Everywhere is far, most places are just huge parking lots, and tiny shopping areas, bro why.
Also, me when train: 😫😫😩😩😩
💗
And the atomization is now amplified massively due to the internet.
@@chooseyouhandle Not really, cars have been increasing even in rural areas so traffic is starting to get bad here. The reason for that is car dealers found a way to lure people with "low" advance payments and "low" monthly payments so even those that couldn't afford a car before can suddenly "afford" one now.
Car addicted Americans keep telling me "you can go anywhere with your car". Funnily, with infinite parking lots and traffic jams there's nowhere else to go.
@@ilghizabsolutely. Cars are the least efficient. They represent a tragedy of the commons scenario
What you described about Brazil is the way people has always lived for millennia. We are made to live like that, it's essential for a minimum of quality of life.
And for that reason, no matter how wealthy you are, living like most people live in the US is unsatisfying and alienating on a fundamental, existential level.
The best video of yours I’ve seen yet! Always annoys me around where I live that people try to shut down transit projects because there “too expensive” but stay silent when roadworks cost billions more than any transit we’ve built
Fun fact: Cities from the 50s in the eastern bloc have a planning system of microcities/microrayons, which is based on a centered social space. each microcity can hold 500-3500 people, and the goal is for those residents to have access to every utility/service a city has, in just 500 meters. Also the residents were transported to work via train, trolleybus, or bus, because only ~10% had their own car.
Yep only commies could bring hell on earth zero freedom zero independence.
Fun fact we don’t live in a communistic country
@@bevis1933 As much as I don't support communism, I have to say some post-communist cities in Europe are really thought out. Sure, the ugly buildings weren't the best, but the infrastructure for public transport is great. For example, in Poland you don't need a car in most major cities. You just hop on a trolley and you can basically reach any point of the city if you know the stops and the transport lines. It's dirt cheap too. And pretty fast. Usually it would take you longer in a car because of heavy traffic in such major cities. But trolleys have their own tracks and even when they use the roadspace the road rules are designed in such a way that trolleys and public transport in general always has the priority. I work about 70 km from my home and I just usually take the train to the city I work in and then use public transport to reach where I work. Sometimes the guys who arrive by cars are a bit faster. But that's on a good day. On a bad day with traffic they take longer to arrive.
@@bevis1933 Fun fact, some people do live in a "communistic country" (weird ass way to say that btw) so I'm not sure you can verify that assertion. Anyways, post-Soviet communist countries actually did a very good job at urban design in many cases. It's kind of like one of the only things they did right though.
@@Cavi587 Actually it's not really true. I live in Warsaw for few years already and besides rush hours it's about twice faster to travel by your own car if traveling between outer district and center and about thrice faster if traveling between two outer districts. It's true that you can use public transport to get almost anywhere but I wouldnt call it time effective unless you are travelling between two places near metro station
Interesting that the U. S. has arguably the best freight rail system in the world, but it’s the lack of good passenger rail that gets so many people’s knickers in a twist. (Yes, we’re still depending too much on trucks. Oh, and I think it’s less cars causing damage to the roads and more trucks. There are some roads in national parks that rarely require re-paving despite fairly heavy seasonal traffic, because almost all the traffic is regular cars and almost none is freight trucks.)
It's just massively overshadowed by huge highways systems which is much easier to commute sadly
@@wmoros4902 the US highway system was a national defence project to ensure the US would always be logisticly connected together. As ww2 showed rail makes for a good military (and now terrorist) target.
@@avroarchitect1793 Regarding your last sentence, roads aren't better at resisting those sort of attacks. Bomb a road hard enough, or god forbid, blow up a major bridge, and roads are just as vulnerable to disruption as rails would be, in that sense.
Its lack of planning. I bring this up regularly and people are quick to mention how dependent our society has become on 'just in time' shipments. Trucks can get it there in a day and trains will likely take 3. Okay so, run your business by buying the shit 3 days earlier, wtf. Its really not that difficult.
Even the best trains can't get me from my doorstep to the grocery store in 10 minutes.
The thing people don't mention enough about walkable cities is the sense of *freedom* they provide.
People always associate cars with freedom... and sure, if that's what you grew up with, that's how you'll feel. It's how I felt, until I finally moved to a walkable area. But once it sinks in that you can just step out your door and buy a thing of milk, or grab a coffee, or go to a restaurant, or pick up something from the pharmacy, or unwind at the park, it totally changes your perspective. Walking is _the_ mode of transportation innate to humans, and the simple ability to go about your daily life under your own power is liberating on a fundamental level.
Walkable cities also reveal more subtle effects which cars have on our lives. For example, spending an hour in a grocery store loading up a massive cart and being miserable is what makes sense when you need to drive several miles to buy food. But when you only need to walk several _minutes_ to the store, it becomes almost effortless to make quick trips to pick up a handful of items. And it enlarges how you see your environment, with all the nearby shops and amenities feeling more like an extension of your home. The park down the street feels almost like my yard.
I still have a car, and I still use a car: sometimes I want to go for a drive, or I really do want to buy a cart full of groceries, or I'm just feeling lazy. But I rarely _need_ to use it, and that's just an amazing feeling.
We're not just restricted to walking and bicycling these days, there are plenty of personal electric vehicles to use that for someone in my case is a Godsend since I cannot walk and especially bicycle for very long due to injuries. So unless your corrupt boomer gov hasn't banned them they can add freedom for everybody that wouldn't be possible before, and also help fill in the gaps that trains can't cover.
@@YeeLeeHaw I have somewhat mixed feelings on personal electric vehicles (though it’s not exactly their fault…) The area I’m in is quite walkable, but it’s not perfect. In particular, there’s a lack of bike lanes-or rather, there’s a shoulder which _could_ be a bike lane, but in practice is street parking. This has led to people on electric bikes (especially teens) riding on the sidewalk-which I suspect some parents encourage out of safety concerns. It hasn’t gotten too bad yet, but it’s an accident waiting to happen, and it’s made me a little wary about personal electric vehicles _in my particular area._
I think the short-term solution here is traffic enforcement: primarily of speeding cars to make the streets safer for bikes, and secondarily of the electric bikes themselves. But, I don’t really know.
@@nw42 We don't need more laws, we got too many laws dictating our free movement for no reason; do not give them an inch. It's the cars and trucks that needs to go as they are the ones killing people, then it's nothing but common sense and riding carefully among others, if some can't do that they belong in jail.
What a bunch of bull. I live in a very walkable city (San Francisco). Yes, do you get all of the stuff which is convenient, I'll give you that. But there are tons of downsides too. Biggest one - crime. Where there's people there's increased crime. You're far more likely to get robbed/stabbed/run over in a city. And yes, I've gotten robbed before. The public transportation sucks too with all the people packed into a big tin can like sardines. I bet you always thought bicycling is awesome... well, I got news for you - our bicycling lobby is extremely efficient so bicyclists basically follow no rules as they equate themselves to both cars and pedestrians whenever it suits them. I've gotten nearly run over by the bicycle salmon multiple times. They blow through street light, ignore stop signs, damage cars , block traffic and basically do whatever you want without any reprimand. I bet OP would be proud.
Then there's packs of kids walking around all over the place smoking pot and hitting random cars. I live across a kindergarten which means constant noise pollution during hours of operation. I can keep going but you get the picture. It's far from the rosy concept you're trying to see here. It's a major escape for me to get behind the wheel of my sports car and leave this place even if for a day.
@@Synchromesh123 _"I live in a very walkable city (San Francisco). Yes, do you get all of the stuff which is convenient, I'll give you that. But there are tons of downsides too. Biggest one - crime"_
That's a San Francisco issue, that's not because it's easier to walk there.
_"You're far more likely to get robbed/stabbed/run over in a city"_
Again, you're connecting dots that aren't supposed to be connected. And what do you mean with run over? aren't you arguing for our point with that?
_"The public transportation sucks too with all the people packed into a big tin can like sardines."_
*Your* public transportation sucks, that's not an inherent theme for all public transportation.
_" I bet you always thought bicycling is awesome... well, I got news for you - our bicycling lobby is extremely efficient so bicyclists basically follow no rules as they equate themselves to both cars and pedestrians whenever it suits them."_
That's a car problem, cars, trucks, and busses are by far the most dangerous vehicles and they also take up by far the most space, space that could've been used to separate pedestrians and other personal transportation vehicles.
_"They blow through street light, ignore stop signs, damage cars , block traffic and basically do whatever you want without any reprimand."_
Yet again, the car is a common theme in your problems, but you refuse to acknowledge that it's the car that is the problem.
_"Then there's packs of kids walking around all over the place smoking pot and hitting random cars."_
Cars again lol. Also a San Francisco issue.
_"I live across a kindergarten which means constant noise pollution during hours of operation."_
Hmm, cars?
_"I can keep going but you get the picture."_
I don't think he does considering your argument is all over the place.
My partner and I love taking trains to places as opposed to flying or driving. Unfortunately, it's not possible for us to travel with our mid-size dog via train. So for extended trips to see family, we usually have no choice but to drive. For day to day, I would LOVE to not be car dependent (and, to a certain extent I have achieved, this by working from home), but I live in a semi-rural area that is unwalkable and lacks any form of public transit nearby.
"EVs only become sustainable after 4-5 years after purchase." Funny because most electric vehicle manufacturers prevent people from repairing EVs (even though they're simpler than a standard combustion engine) so people buy more instead of fixing them and keeping them past 4-5 years.
Tesla is the only maker that does this to their customers/victims.
that is not true
@@KnightRaymund How so ?¿ please show me a video tutorial replacing car batteries of renault zoe or any oyher car brand that is not nissan leaf which code got hacked
@@Kevin-fn5tk they have a million mile warranty do they not?
They’re also a small fortune to fix
"Hey Joe, this is a really cool train we're designing here."
"I know! You think anyone will ever set it to the Jojo theme?"
"What?"
"What?"
I’m glad it wasn’t just me who heard it
Between this and the Vulfpeck, I have great respect for this guy's taste.
the audio clip is i think from Justin Rozniak out of donoteat01 and WTYP Well Theres Your Problem. cant remember which original episode though.
This doesn’t even take Into account that metro systems are the coolest mode of transportation
unless you live in flood-prone areas. Or most probably, your local city officials are too feckless to manage the budget properly, if they even got it built at all considering the cost of tunneling alone.
man, at this point I'd be okay with overground metros, roads are already noisy after all, what's one more giant hunk of metal will do to my eardrums?
@@ChemySh I lived next to a railroad for a while and I'll say a good modern electric train is actually quite quiet (at least if it's up to 5 cars long, that's what we have here), I never even noticed them because of a constant flow of cars
And a great mugging experience
@@ChemySh There is a overhead metro station right next to my house, no sound
@@ChemySh That's how Cracow exist. 770k inhabitants including me, but no metro, never beacuse governers of citt are just lazy. Warsaw (Poland's capital, 1,7 million inhabitants) has developed first metro line in 1990s!
Bro rly dropped the hardest trains edit at 10:15 and thought we wouldn’t notice
The question is "How do we go from this mess to this glorious alternative?"
And honestly, we might just need some cities to start tearing up streets to put in streetcars, to mandate mixed development and the 15-minute city, and to actually put these policies into practice. We need somewhere to point where it WORKS, and people can go to and see that it works. Then package it up and ship it worldwide, one freight train at a time.
Tearing up streets for streetcars? Not gonna happen in America buddy.
@@dlazo32696 might not happen anywhere, but who knows. Due to the pandemic, there were a lot of reconstructions this summer in my town to help the economy, and many streets were completely closed and rebuilt. They could as well have put the tracks in
If u need to point somewhere to show transit and walkable urban designs works, just point to Tokyo my guys. Bitch is the largest city on eart and thrives on Transit and Walkable urban design.
A start would be making new developments partially mixed use so that ppl can see if they like it.
But the problem remains, a lot of things we want are far. A specific supermarket, a certain food place, your work, etc.
@@Yorick257 here in Tampere, Finland there was a big construction project to really tear up the streets and put rails in. This construction project was recently finished and the first railcars started transporting people in the city, hopefully this becomes wide spread.
As a car enthusiast I fully support these types of pushes. After all, all I want my car for is to take it to a racetrack to beat the ever living snot out of it. Besides that I’d gladly take trains and use my Onewheel to get around. Honestly sounds more fun day to day
same here i take the bus/commuter rail(also waaaaay cheaper than paying for gas) to work but im a car guy(currently saving up to a m3)
@@einar8019 hopefully the repair costs don't make that a living nightmare lol. Just make sure to hit all the maintenance intervals when you do get an M3
@@brockweaver8476 it wont be a daily driver so it should not be a issue
Same perspective as me.
Keep the cars; internal combustion and lightweight EVs for track/sporting events.
Man, but what about when nothing else will make you as happy a nice, relaxing even cruise along your local beltway? Driving 70 in 6th is my happy place, and it’s tough to imagine a world without it.
Something also a negative for electric cars: people seem to forget it requires a cleaner and larger electrical power grid. It can be easily solved with more nuclear power but these same people reject that idea which is why I don't take them seriously when they say they want to get away from fossil fuels
i agree.. nuclear power is underrated people are probably traumatized about the fallout in chernobyl but it was man made lol.. i can only imagine nuclear power plants being handled correctly 😌 it would solve all power problems
nuclear power is great, my dad's into cold salt reactors and I'd like development in that area to be done too, but we have found a safe and relyable energy source that makes a whole bunch of energy, every person dumb enough to be in charge of legislating the systematic removal of nuclear power from countries, who somehow isn't being bought out by at least a couple billion, should be fired for incompetence
I don't agree with corruption either I just somehow prefer it to ignorance, at least they get to feel bad about what they are doing
i think people shy away from nuclear solutions because of risks, permits, waste and complexity involved in adding a nuclear solution to any grid. Can any nuclear plant be proposed, approved, built, and operational within 5 years? 10 years maybe?
Solar is ready today and can be installed on almost any roof with standard tools by local owners. Open farm fields can be solar as well. New windows with solar power generation built-in are coming soon as well.
I think small/micro nuclear is coming, but is at least 5-10 years away just based on the above. So with solar already being affordable and 'easy' to do, why wait for nuclear to catch up?
@@eulldog Solar panels require rare earth materials, shit ton of space and they aren't recyclable.
Didn't Alex Jones said this lmao.
Yep. Growing up in San Francisco, we had excellent, cheap public transit. Clean and decent rail service. And then Uber and Lyft put their Headquarters in. Suddenly, ride sharing was the future! And they let the trains go down to shyte. Sad. Its a new age version of automotive companies many decades ago lobbying government to get rid of the old tram networks.
The two major things that deteriorate road surfaces in the northern tier of the country is heavy truck traffic and weather. Specifically the freeze-thaw cycle roads experience due to concrete absorbing water from rain and snow melt. Then add in the effects of road salt.
I'm a fan of good transit systems where they make sense. In dense urban areas they make a lot of sense. And the US should be using not only more transit but more efficient transit. But there are also areas where cars make more sense. And there are areas where a mix of the two works best. That said the biggest problem in the US that contributes to sprawl is zoning laws that encourage sprawl. Strip malls are one particular issue. But one simple way their impact at least in terms of land use would be to require them to be built with their parking area above the stores. But even if you do that the next municipality over will just let them build to the normal pattern. Another major factor in sprawl is the increase in the size of the average home and lot size.
Parking above the stores? That would be horrible from a constructive sense , It would be far more efficient for the parking to be on the lower floors and the market on the top floors
@@hamboharambe9982
Ok, I'll grant you parking on ground level with the shops on a level above them would make more sense*. But with the growing online purchasing who in their right mind would want to build a strip mall anyway.
*What makes even more sense is higher density housing with mixed use zoning.
Alternate title: All Cars Are Bad, Yes Even Electric Ones Too.
Adds a new meaning to ACAB.
Lmao
Not all cars are bad, cars are great fun IF you know how to have fun with them, however I do agree that urban areas and cars don't mix well at all
@@coastaku1954 things that can bring individuals joy can still be bad.
@@bubberlad Come on, you don’t look at Car racing and say “Oh wow that’s terrible”
@@coastaku1954 that's not what i'm saying. i've been watching f1 for decades now and yes it is fun. but we have to make compromises on "fun" things (maybe not motorsports, but private car ownership) to make way for a sustainable world that the rest of the world can also have fun in.
so yes, cars are fun and cars are also bad.
One thing that keeps getting missed about in all these anti-car suburb videos is that car dependent areas have the highest mortality rates in the world. Even higher than the most crime ridden inner city. More people have died in the US from cars than from any other disease, war, or crime. Yet this gets ignored time and time again.
It doesn't even matter what country. Even in places like Israel, more people have died from cars than from all the wars and violence. The more countries you look at, the more this tends to be true. It is really both shocking and sobering, and it is always ignored.
It's ignored because people today expect media to feed them with all the info they need like toddlers rather than doing research on their own, and they think if it's not reported then it doesn't exist
@@TheChrisey which is why I brought it up. It is not something that is easy yo stumble across. I am hoping people will start talking about it and they will do their own research. Definitely can't depend on the news media
But you have to consider also that 100% of the people that died, were breathing air! That seems a really suspect correlation 🧐, they are hiding something from us.
@@alen7480 don’t you find very sus that everyone before and after that was breathing air, and then died?
That's hard to tell if it's a meaningful statistic.
Cars kill many people, sure. But what if we remove cars and use trains? Will that lower deaths or just replace the causes?
Homer: What advantages does this motor car have over say...a train. Which I could also afford.
Fighting climate change with luxury vehicles is also an extremely bourgeois first world solution, the people cooking their food with burning pieces of landfill garbage (they also use as building materials for their shanty town homes) aren't worried whether the Tesla you drive is going to "pay it forward" when it comes to your carbon credits.
"Let them buy Teslas!"
Wow another hyperbole argument without any kind of connection from one point to another. It’s like I could cut, copy, and paste this argument to fit taking points from my friends on either side of the spectrum.
@@AAblade7 welcome to the youtube comment section 😊
Love your first sentence in your comment 👍
It's okay, we can just prevent poor people from rising up out of poverty so that we can continue to fly and drive everywhere. Or...OR...we could just attempt a few cheap ways to offset our CO2 production, such as planting a few billion more trees per year in places that could use some, like Haiti.
Finally some one gives trains the proper entrance they deserve. (It was pretty cool)
Yeah, what song was that? I played the songs in the video description and didn't hear it.
@@TheGardenStater It's "Jojo's bizarre Adventure: Golden Wind"
@@TheGardenStater The specific song could be found if you type golden wind finale ost. The part you hear in this vid is toward the end of the song.
Here I was thinking "This Armchair Urbanist guy is way less charming than that Canadian guy with the Dutch granny bike"-but then the trains came on, and I'm like "Okay. I like him. I guess I'll subscribe."
I think his channel is called" not just bikes"
People actually watch these channels?
@@sybsygstgstsgysg5330 Hey. Something for everybody! TH-cam can't be all pirate #Barbie videos and #Backrooms.
@@julianfeci7838 Yes, and I've since learned his name is #JasonSlaughter. His Dutch Bike video introduced me to the concept of #UrbanDesign, and now I'm obsessed.
@@JonBogdanove I think all methods of transportation are great in their own way.
Finally, an urbanist TH-cam channel that is funny. Citynerd and Not just bikes don't cut it on that front.
One day I will be that fat man on a freakishly heavy bicycle.
I too have such aspirations
In my town, ironically they converted the old train track to a bike trail that effectively made the whole city traversable on bike but also cemented over any capability of using the track for rail purposes again. Legacy Trail, Sarasota County Fl. It really is convenient though.
Huh. Maybe they could convert the highway into rail.
oh the city near me did something similar by making an old train bridge into a walking bridge, it cant be used for trains anymore but it makes it easy to get across the river without driving
Mine too. But we didnt use that rail line for 15+ years
By the way, on some lines, a train can keep rolling for over 80km without putting a single watt of power into the motor. Just on inertia.
Whilst also using regenerative braking which pumps power back into the grid.
@@darren25061965 if such systems exist. If not, that massive kinetic energy is wasted at resistor banks
Yeah that means absolutely nothing. If you don't know any physics, don't comment. That has nothing to do with efficiency whatsoever.
@@kornaros96 Nearly all trains use regenerative braking. Even the diesel ones do as diesel engines are basically the same as hybrid cars using the combustion engine just as a generator for the electric motor.
@@Skylancer727 The problem is there isnt enough storage capacity within the train to reclaim all of the energy you are taking in through regenerative braking.
ironic, "the future" actually means return to XIXth century invention
The car is a XIXth century invention.
@@asterix71c
Fun fact - 19th century cars were either steam or battery electric. Petroleum-based fuel wasn't popularized until the early 20th.
as with plastic
@@VestedUTuber Today I learned... :)
@@asterix71c Correct!! The train is XIIV!!
this content is amazing and should be broadcast into everyone’s phones once a day until im done single handedly tearing apart our highway system with a grapefruit spoon
You nailed the problem people won't accept! Urbanisation has been designed around the car, It annoys me when I have to go to places which could be at walking distance, but you can only get there in a car...or motorcycle. These situations should be prohibited. Also, good public transport and the distance between people's homes and work should be reduced..
It poured the rain down here tonight and was 45 degrees. Glad I could get in my warm and dry SUV and get to where I wanted to go.
@B&O Operator Fairmont lol exactly, like I don't see why people want to eliminate cars as if that would solve anything. Good luck trying to go the grocery store carrying all those bags in inclement weather.
I’m not sitting with a bunch of disgusting people in a crowded train fuck that
@@B-and-O-Operator-Fairmont ok but it isn't always raining, and isn't always cold. And you have to walk through the parking lot so you get wet anyway.
@@B-and-O-Operator-Fairmont
the most low IQ dumb response I have ever seen
I lust for a world with a robust and efficient public transportation. Specifically so I can rag my car around with fewer people about lmao. For me my car is a hobby, for others it's pure utility that could be better served in other ways. Yes, I would be willing to pay substantially more for the sustainment of roads.
If people get off the road, we won't need such overbuilt infrastructure. Overall it'd be cheaper for you too.
I have no Idea why people think car culture(hot rodders, racers and the like) will die look at the Europeans and Japan they love their sports cars and driving machines and they have tons of great mass transit
Yeah too bad public transportation is disgusting I mean how dirty it is and how many disgusting freaks you see on it
@None Gone doesn’t matter how much money gets invested into public transportation it’s going to be full of the most scum people that can’t afford anything. Also who the fuck formats their comment in 4chan format on here? Incel ass
@None Gone I’ll be so happy driving in my personal vehicle while you can have your heroin needle express while people get stabbed and robbed possibly shot just getting to their jobs. That’s fine with me.
I always wanted to see a simulation of what a truly sustainable city would look like. Including EV mass transportation, removal of parking lots, reduction of roads, bikeability, and how emergency vehicles, construction, package delivery, etc will function in those environments.
I have a ton of ideas for something like this, but I am not an animator.
There's also crime management and response. Leave that unsolved, and you wonder why small businesses struggle to survive even in a high tech city.
NotJustBikes is a good channel for that. I don't know if it's gone into detail on every question you have, but... it kinda seems like this is a solved problem. As in, these cities already exist in places like the Netherlands.
What is the name of the simulator he uses in his video?
@@AlintraxAika Cities Skylines
Or you can just come to Barcelona and see it yourself.
If you got the dollars to do it
I live in San Francisco area and ride a motorcycle as a primary mode of transportation. Sure it's inconvenient at times, but I never sit in traffic.
Motorcycles are kool..it prolly has more good days than bad..
Hey, I want to say thank you for the great videos. When I took my grandma to dinner, the topic of cars and trains popped up, and I talked for a while about how much I wish america had a good train system. She told me a lot of stories about my granddad, and how he would talk the same points (minus the climate change aspect). Its a nice bit of family bonding, and its eye-opening just the extent to which not only is this an issue, its always been an issue with highways.
That's a nice story, but also kinda depressing how we have been facing the same problem for over 3 generations and while people keep giving the solution, we never end up doing it.
@@ArielHal9000 Because Americans know cars are superior.
@@dlazo32696 We also uniquely have the only private Healthcare system in the world. Doesn't mean the US knows best, that decision makes the US first in spending while having the worst Healthcare outcomes in the world.
I think a key point for the future highway video is how they can split up natural ecosystems too, unless there is thought put into fixing that: i.e. a wildlife bridge. However those are still really rare.
Good point!
More effective than buying an EV would be to go vegan.
"Eating a vegan diet could be the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact on earth, a new study suggests.
Researchers at the University of Oxford found that cutting meat and dairy products from your diet could reduce an individual's carbon footprint from food by up to 73 per cent.
If everyone stopped eating these foods, they found that global farmland use could be reduced by 75 per cent, an area equivalent to the size of the US, China, Australia and the EU combined.
Not only would this result in a significant drop in greenhouse gas emissions, it would also free up wild land lost to agriculture, one of the primary causes for mass wildlife extinction.
The new study, published in the journal Science, is one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, looking into the detrimental effects farming can have on the environment and included data on nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries." -The Independent" newspaper
Link to the full article at my channel under "About."
I honestly love public transit. Not just because it's environmentally friendly, but also because it's a hell of a lot safer and cheaper, and I would much rather browse on my phone or play a video game during my commute than spend the entire time watching to make sure no one is going to kill me. Alas, transit where I live is pretty much buses rather than rail, though at least it's better than cars. My only gripe is trying to go grocery shopping by bus. You can only bring as much as you can physically carry with you from the bus stop to your home. With a car, you can bring several weeks' worth of groceries in a single trip.
There's an easy solution to the grocery thing that NJB did a video on: more grocery stores so people can shop for just the next few days or so. Even with just a bike.
@@danielr9708 Unfortunately that seems to be incompatible with strip malls and wal-marts. :-/
@@ROTTERDXM Yeah...
A lot of people find public transit scarier than driving. Don't get me wrong I've dealt with scary people at train stations & you should always be weary of your surroundings but people don't think of the risks of getting harmed in a car accident when comparing the safety of each. Do you think news coverage of crime stories at train stations scare people of riding public transit?
@@danielr9708 Yes, although then each grocery store has to be smaller and offer less variety of goods. It may also be efficient monetarily to supply a few large stores than many smaller stores, which could lead to cheaper goods. I'm not quite sure on the details on how to best provide the same variety of goods as large scale grocery stores in a walkable city plan.
in case anyone was wondering, the track playing at 8:17 is saint pepsi - pineapple juniors c:
tysm
Thanks!
Yes! The main thing I love about Japan is that they have trains everywhere. You don't need a car. I so wish we'd do that here!
we had it here tons of track were torn out 50 years ago. there are many problems with trains this control freak doesn't talk about.
Japan also has a population density that makes train usage much more practical, if not an absolute necessity.
Yes, I too wish to be crammed into a metal box like a literal sardine shoulder to shoulder with people.
They also don't have a crime problem.
I like having my own schedule
As soon as you said Highways I instantly realized how bonkers and ridiculous highways are. Why not just have trains. No more Billions of tons of asphalt. No more car crashes. No flat tires.
also no more idiots cutting you off.
As someone from switzerland, I can say that good rail infrastructure works wonders, they banned heavy trucks from swiss roads and ship everything by train, thats why they built the Gotthard Base Tunnel, they have light and heavy rail. And you do not need a car at all, all cities are walkable or bikeable. The system just works.
There must still be some truck traffic no? Unless construction sites all have a rail line built to them.
@@averyw.3939 Trains take construction materials to a nearby freight yard then they are loaded onto smaller trucks to comply with Swiss law.
There are trucks but they are usually for last-mile and regional deliveries. The Swiss Federal Constitution states any cross-Alps cargo must be hauled by rail though.
@@mikeschumacher Huh, seems a little overkill on the regulation. Maybe this is just my American showing, but I’d think the free market would decide what’s most efficient depending on the distance and cargo. I see a lot of van trailers on trains here that I assume are following that principle. Load the trailer on a train for most of the trip and put it back on a truck for the last part. Same idea with all the containers. Though the “last mile” distance is probably greater based on the size of the US and our rural population densities.
@@averyw.3939 They built a lot of environmental protection and rights to enjoy the environment into their constitution. Plus it’s cheaper for the state as they don’t have to build/maintain lots of roads across the Alps that might end up closed for days or weeks at a time, and potentially cheaper for shippers as they’re not paying $6-7/gal for gas to burn going really slow up and down mountains.
Making cars electric was never the problem, in fact it was a good change for the car industry. The prevalence of cars in our society is the problem. Cars being our primary mode of transportation is the problem. Giant roads cutting through cities (to put cars on) is the problem. People living in rural areas, outside metros, etc...yeah, they have a legitimate reason to own a vehicle. Really not a problem owning an EV out on your ranch. What IS a problem is just...the size of cars. The fact that you need big asphalt roads to put these big metal boxes on...yeah, that's the problem. If your city has even half-decent urban planning and public transit, you have no reason to own a car. It's just that simple.
The lithium they use in electric cars is harmful to the environment and it never degrades like gasoline does.
Nope, eFuels made by Porsche is cheaper and more reliable for already existing infrastructure across globe and existing car platforms.
We didn't vote, or asked for EV's.
its pure political dicatroship.
If I didn't live in suburb that only had 6 bus trips through out whole day, I would give up my car. Seriously imagine not having to pay for maintenance or insurance or other car stuff, no need to worry about it breaking down mid trip... AHHH that would be heaven
Let me fill you in on something. I live in a very urban area with a decent bus system and a monthly bus pass will cost you exactly the same as car insurance + gas + maintenance! It is crude and rude, but please just keep that in mind!
@@judaspreistvlct seriously? Your bus pass must be insanely expensive, or car ownership is amazingly cheap where you live, up here in the great white north bus passes generally run you between 50 and 100 bucks depending on city. Meanwhile car ownership could be anywhere between 150 and many hundreds (not including car payments). It is 100% of the time cheaper to have a bus pass up here, and I doubt its any different in the states. If you include payments there is no comparison in the least.
@@mikespark72 Right, if you get the car used, and no payments, that is what I was referring to.
i live half an hour outside of a major city... zero transit to the city outside of cars. i can walk a few miles across the county line to the nearest bus stop but the bus system sucks ass
@@judaspreistvlct Here a monthly bus pass costs ~30 euros. I pay more just for fuel
I believe changing to electric cars has the same overall impact on the climate as banning plastic straws has on the amount of plastic in the ocean
The ocean is a garbage. Its just out of sight. Until a tidal wave brings all the junk back to us.
Your belief is incorrect. Building an electric car has a one-time environmental cost that is less than the recurring environmental cost of burning fossil fuel in a normal car.
@@deusexaethera But what of the mechanics? The powertrain may be electric but what of the rest of the car? Are we using all synthetic fluids here?
@@krane15
You have fewer fluids and mechanical parts to deal with. Most EVs have a single-reduction transmission, so there's no transmission oil, just grease. No engine means no engine oil either. The only moving assemblies are the motor shaft and pinion, the spur and differential case, the axles and wheel hubs, the brake pads and rotors, the power steering system and the suspension. In theory you could further reduce that to just four wheels, suspension and steering if you use hubmotors and electronic braking instead. As a result electric cars have much less maintence overhead in terms of both cost and resources.
Problem is that you have to replace the batteries every so often. They only actually last a few thousand charge cycles.
@@krane15: EVs don't have fluids. (not like you're imagining anyway.) The power steering is electric not hydraulic, the heat is electric not based on engine coolant, the electric motor doesn't even have coolant in the first place, the electric motor doesn't have oil either, the transmission is a single gearset that is lubricated by gear oil that lasts the life of the transmission, air conditioning doesn't use Freon in any car and hasn't for decades, and...okay, EVs still have windshield washer fluid, made of water and alcohol, but that has zero environmental impact. There is almost nothing about an EV that requires routine service; GM figured that out in 1990 with their EV1 prototype. EVs are so mechanically simple they're downright boring from a tinkerer's perspective.
*YES! THANK YOU!!!* I was part of a test drive with a Tesla a few days ago and what many people don't realize is that electric cars are still cars! (Not to mention the increased amounts of carbon emissions required in producing these "boxes") We're trying to make this world less reliant on the car, and electric cars will only contribute to the ongoing loss of faith in rail transportation. In order to be truly efficient and combat climate change, WE NEED TRAINS! I agree with everything you said in this video and your content should be used to educate the general public about the superior form of public transportation and encourage others to fund it (preferably via private investment or state funding. Construction and operation of either will also create millions of jobs and bring forth economic prosperity for the region with the development of any railroad)
now I'm wondering about another halfway compromise: the electric minicar! Perhaps that thing could be an alternative where building rail is simply not an option?
iirc the Dutch does have a problem with them, but that's down to unclear traffic laws and driver qualification regarding e-minicars specifically. An e-minicar would provide protection from the elements like an actual car would, and you won't have to ask permission from thousands of pissed property owners that'll be affected by the rail (dealing with land ownership fuckery, complaints about potential noise/vibration pollution... if my head already hurts from thinking about it, I imagine the fat and lazy bureaucrats in charge would be less willing to vote for sth this troublesome, which won't even be finished until after their tenure)
Well, china, Japan and most developed Asian countries does that already. Even the Europeans are doing the same for a while now and US does have the largest rail network in the world so rails are already used everywhere!
Who wants less dependence on cars? I for one love being able to hop in my car, any time, and head to any place I want. Almost everyone I know feels the same. And you're not creating jobs, you're just moving them from one industry to another.
@@ryangilbert1951 I do want less dependence on cars. Help me make public transport a viable option so I can get off the road and leave you more asphalt to enjoy.
@@ChemySh not about enjoying the roads, it's about privacy/safety/ and convenience. Being able to stop my car to go to the bathroom whenever I want. Being able to start my day whenever I want. Not being packed around a bunch of people that I don't know/trust. Snowstorms stop busses where I'm from, but work doesn't close... what if I have to tow a trailer for landscaping or construction work? I can see where public transit is useful but where I'm from, it would create nightmares for parents trying to schedule their days. Taking kids to school, sporting events, doctors appointments while still trying to get to work. Imagine loading a bus or train up for all of those instances. It just isn't convenient. Maybe for single person in low 20s...
Preach, brother, preach. Electric cars suck. Mostly because since the '90s America's been making cars bigger and heavier. Because "Murka, the home of the free!!!" Back in the '90s, my Ford Fiesta got 35 MPG+ and was so tiny my friends lifted it to place it on a parking lot's island for a practical joke. Even the smallest car today weighs at least 50% more than that.
As for suburban sprawl, well... this lifelong urban dweller lived in a Chicago suburb for three years and hated it. Everything was way to inconvenient, so I moved the family back into a tight urban area. Where we could take a bus to art museums, concerts, and sporting events. My youngest ever took a bus to her first two years of university.
Finally, someone fucking said it, electric cars are not the future. The future is not relying on cars to begin with, having solid public transportation and more sustainable modes of transportation.
Dream on and watch the electric car take over as it already has in some places!! You might not like it but nobody cares!
@@nixl3518 dude I own an EV, they already took over my area😂. Trust me I love to see it but it’s not sustainable in the long run
@@pinakinkale "dude", You talk as if you are the only one to own one!! Since I don't know you, I don't trust you plus you make no sense. A regular car is much more unsustainable and yet they keep getting bought by the millions!
Electric cars by definition are a much better option, specially when you get some perspective and think about the early days of regular cars and how those people and industries fought so hard to make them work. Ever had to crank your EV??? Ever got it stuck in the mud in the middle of nowhere? Electric cars have it easy in comparison! SAYING they are unsustainable does not make it so.
BTW NOTHING is sustainable in the long run so your point is moot! We have to concentrate on getting gasoline engines off the road in the SHORT RUN. We can worry about the long run later!
@@nixl3518 I never said that electric cars weren’t better, I just said that ultimately the future shouldn’t be car oriented to begin with. Electric cars are a nice stepping stone but we should focus on accessible transportation for all first.
@@pinakinkale I like your idealism but as a practical matter what you're suggesting is impossible, at least where democratic countries are concerned. What you're suggesting is that somehow you can induce the government to provide "accessible transportation" while preventing companies from producing electric cars! Perhaps you mean something else, but that is what you're writing. How geographically extensive do you expect "accessible transportation" has to be before allowing the development of electric cars?
Glad people are finally catching on to this. If something is single use and can’t be repaired and reused, it isn’t environmentally friendly
It's better than ICE cars. The health effects are absurdly bad from ICE's too. That alone makes me welcome EV's if ICE is the alternative
Batteries can be repaired and reused. All of suburbia cannot be torn down and have the population forcibly relocated to car-free utopias.
@@Treblaine Yes they can, why do you think housing prices and gas lricrdtare skyrocketing? It's all part of the plan, families will be priced out of suburbia and forced to relocate to apartments in downtown areas.
@@deitz505 "lricrdtare" Could you please proofread what you type, that's a complete nonsense term. Not even google can guess what possible typo that could be.
People are NOT being priced out of suburbia to downtown apartments, those are just as unaffordable.
Americans are being priced out of EVERYWHERE if you don't already have a home.
There is a shortage of all sorts of houses and the same problem with houses in suburbia will hit any "utopia", where houses are bought up by the ultra rich who want to use houses as a way to store their wealth... not because they actually want to use houses as homes.
Yes, there's unoccupied homes, but they're mostly uninsulated McMansions in the middle of nowhere or termite&mould infested hoovervilles that are more dangerous to live in that sleeping on the street.
Not all batteries can be repaired just as not all trash can be segregated
As long as we're making wishes, I wish motorcycles, scooters, and e-bikes were given their due in urban planning :)
NOICE : )))))))))))
jajajajjajajjajajjajajaj
Yeah because an 85-year-old can bring home a weeks worth of groceries on a bicycle. 😂😂😂
As a motorcyclist, I approve this message. I’d totally buy an electric motorcycle if they weren’t stupid expensive for having piss poor range.
@@Xachremos coming from a car crash channel, I can say there’s some pretty interesting things that happen to motorcycles on the road. I doubt if the riders found them very hilarious, the ones that survived…
They put them to the edge of the road which is the worst possible place for a multitude of reason. It needs to be on a raised throughway, in the center of the road. Even better, a separate path altogether, the same as sidewalks.