793
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 143 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Small price to pay for the freedom to travel"

-An actual thing that's been said to me before when I brought up other environmental issues

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 95 points 1 year ago

Nothing says "freedom" like a tool that costs tens of thousands to buy and thousands every year to maintain and use.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 15 points 1 year ago

Meanwhile I can amtrak to DC for $30 round trip 🤷

[-] sadreality@kbin.social 36 points 1 year ago

From where?

This statement doesn't make much sense without context.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Also the traveling part is generally tedious, uncomfortable and boring unless you have a super big luxury car. I'd much rather travel by high-speed rail.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Uranium3006@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago

Our freedom to travel was stolen from us and sold back to us

[-] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

“Small price to pay for the freedom to travel”

Well, they pay a small price for their freedom to travel. It's everybody else that has to suffer the externalities of their choices.

Let's tax antisocial behavior, so that these externalities are internalized. Carbon tax, vehicle weight per passenger tax, vehicle volume per passenger tax, etc.

[-] InputZero@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

'Be careful now, you're starting to sound like a communist.' they say.

Seriously though, you're right, we should do all that. Switching over to EVs won't solve very many problems. Everywhere needs to have fewer vehicles in the road and that's public transit.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 9 points 1 year ago

Fuck them.

They also call me a communist now because I think a 40 hour work week should put a basic roof (efficiency on your own or maybe a basic 2br with a roomie) over your head no matter what you're doing.

Turns out the "Red Scare™" will always return whenever capitalism starts fraying at the seams to keep people from exploring even the slightest reforms.

load more comments (1 replies)

Small price to pay for the freedom to travel

my man you go to work and back again what travel

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Squirrel@thelemmy.club 89 points 1 year ago

Can we just get some real public transportation options in the USA? I've visited Washington D.C., Boston, and New York City recently, and I'm in love with the subway (etc). Where I live would still require a car, but afaik, none of the major cities around me have anything more than a lackluster bus system.

[-] MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca 39 points 1 year ago

Best we can do is another lane on the highway. That should fix the problem!

[-] dodslaser@feddit.nu 32 points 1 year ago

Ok, hear me out: What if we were to dig a system of narrow tunnels under the city, and then let people drive through them. Of course, cars would need to be on some form of automated tracks to make it safe. Then you could link up multiple cars and make long lines of cars following the tracks to the same destination.

It's a brand new concept, I know, but modern problems require modern solutions. Maybe we can sell hats and flamethrowers to generate support.

(/s in case it wasn't obvious)

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Sleazy_Albanese@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

it would have to be on rails. Sure, buses have fewer wheels per passenger but they are also heavier so go through their tyres much faster. Its probably still a net benefit but it doesnt eliminate the problem.

[-] robot_dog_with_gun@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

Its probably still a net benefit

oh god imagine if the math works out that it isn't.

trains, bikes, and sailing ships only.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 74 points 1 year ago

It wasn't the plastic straws after all?
I'm shocked, shocked.

[-] words_number@programming.dev 24 points 1 year ago

Plastic straws are still very harmful for many sea animals and are apart from that entirely unnecessary (unlike tires).

[-] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 37 points 1 year ago

As I read on masto, we should replace the tires with steel to stop the plastic pollution.

Of course to protect the road that would also have to be steel. And we'd need to link all the vehicles together to make best use of the limited steel road surface.

(It's trains)

[-] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Steel dust quickly turns to iron oxide in the environment, which is a fairly common natural mineral (it's the reason red clay is red). To be fair, there might still be some slight negative effects to ecosystems which do not naturally have a lot of iron oxide at the surface, but that wouldn't even be a rounding error compared to the harmful environmental effects of tires and asphalt. Also, steel dust is very heavy so there's essentially no chance of it getting into the air and inhaled.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

What are the odds that a PR group, well aware of the damage of tyres, spun the focus to target small consumable plastics?

Don't look at cars, look at the image of turtles and straws, seagulls and can rings, and porpoises mistaking bags for jellyfish.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] library_napper@monyet.cc 72 points 1 year ago
[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago

Furthermore, death to cars.

[-] codblopsii@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

Meanwhile Florida, Texas, Ohio are all doing burnouts

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] mriguy@lemmy.world 63 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's interesting to me that as soon as EV's are finally seriously becoming a thing, we are told that tire dust, rather than ICE emissions, are really the worst thing possible for the planet (and it's somehow implied that ICE vehicles don't have tires). When somebody points out that ICE vehicles do, in fact, have tires too, EV's are STILL worse because EV's are heavier than the equivalent ICE cars. Strangely, the fact that for years, people have been driving ludicrously overweight vehicles (the Ford F150, weighing in at 4,070 to 5,757 lbs, is the top selling passenger vehicle in the US, and last I checked, it had tires) was never an issue.

[-] zik@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

It's almost like people are incapable of comprehending that all types of pollution are important, not just one or the other. Exhaust emissions are bad. Tyre pollution is also bad. Reducing one is a good step. Reducing both would be even better.

[-] mriguy@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Many things can be bad at once, and I’m sure tire particles really are bad. It is just weird that in the 137 years ICE cars have been manufactured (again, with tires the whole time), the fact that the tire particles were way worse than all the other things cars spew out went completely unnoticed.

I’m only being partially facetious. Yes I understand cars are now much cleaner than they used to be, so probably in the past tailpipe emissions were the dominant problem. But an awful lot of the articles talking about this are pushing the idea that EVs are WORSE for the environment than ICE cars (so let’s just keep driving our F150s!), which is absolutely untrue. Better is still better, even if it isn’t perfect.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

This why so many have always said that EVs are not the solution for climate change, they are and always will be a solution for the auto industry.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] menemen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This (microplastics from wheels) is a well known fact in science for quite some time though.

[-] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just another reason why private cars are a horrible idea

!fuckcars@lemmy.world

[-] rayyyy@kbin.social 34 points 1 year ago

If only we could have a one company pick people up and deliver them to another point or work from home and have our stuff delivered.

[-] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 1 year ago

The thing that picks people up could even have metal wheels as it follows a fixed route, and run on metal roads

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Izzgo@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago

The use of tires will be a daunting thing to change. If somehow we all managed to change to bicycles for instance, there are still tires.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 48 points 1 year ago

The wear is drastically different, at least.

Probably easier to develop an alternative too when it doesn't need to support two tons.

[-] Butterbee@beehaw.org 26 points 1 year ago

The amount of wear on the tires of a bicycle which let's just assume the heaviest person riding the heaviest e-bike would be a few hundred pounds wearing on the tires? Compared to several tons for an auto pressing down on 4 tires it's a LOT less.

[-] puppy@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If a solution reduces a problem by 99% I'd say that's a damn good solution. Instead here we are, clapping and rejoicing when the car companies say the new model is 5% more fuel efficient or 3% lighter over the ongoing model.

[-] Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago

The trend of most new vehicle sales are larger and heavier :(

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tavu@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As per the quote below, a car loses about 0.08g of tread per km.

Compared to a car, a bike tyre is about the same diameter, 10% of the width (~20mm), 28% usable tread depth (~2mm), has 50% less wheels, and can travel 10% the distance (~10000km).

This suggests a (very approximate) tread loss of 0.08 * 10% * 28% * 50% / 10% = ~ 0.01g per km for bicycles.

For replacing longer car journeys less typically travelled by bicycle, rail transport is the best solution and removes the issue of tyre wear.

Quoting [deleted] in r/theydidthemath:

Using the same assumptions as above (215/60R16 tires, 7mm of tread loss over 100,000 km), I estimate the loss of tread by volume from each tire as follows:

Cylinder with a diameter of 664 mm and a height of 215 mm has a volume of 74,412 cm3. Cylinder with a diameter of 664-(2x7)=650 mm and a height of 215 mm has a volume of 71,307 cm3. The volume difference between a new and worn out tire is 3105 cm3.

Typical land to sea ratio of tires is 60-70% land, depending on the type of tire. If we go with an about average value of close to 65% tread, we get the lost rubber volume of about 2000 cm3 or 2,000,000 mm3 over a single tires lifespan.

Each revolution of a tire loses about 0,04 mm3 of tread, which, according to Wolfram Alpha, is a bit less than the volume of a medium grain of sand.

If we look at the entire car with 4 tires over a kilometer of road, we get 80 mm3 or about 0,08 grams of tread lost per car per kilometer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf 21 points 1 year ago

I mentioned this in a discussion a while back. Tires are a huge problem for society.

[-] D3FNC@hexbear.net 20 points 1 year ago

You know, I'd say we had a good run but honestly I just don't feel like lying to make myself feel better. This shit sucks.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] footfaults@hexbear.net 18 points 1 year ago

That was always the thing I was wondering about. Where was the origin of these microplastics. Surely it wasn't all just those little beads that were in soap and shampoo

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
793 points (98.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

9890 readers
1 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS