this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
323 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

1354 readers
40 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] silvercove@lemdro.id 75 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Electric cars are to save automobile industry profits. Not the planet.

If you want to save the planet, then ride a bicycle.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sounds great if you don't have to commute many miles 2 times per day in an area with no public transit.

All just to keep the roof over your head

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Seems to me like having to drive many miles to maintain a job that can pay enough to maintain your fairly far afield home (assuming the home costs less because it's not in the same geography as the office) is a failure of the system as a whole and the company for not making their office work better for their workers.

I mean, unless you have a storefront or regularly have to go to specific places as part of your job, like lawyers going to the court house, then why tf does the company pay for very expensive offices in the middle of a metro area? Put the offices where the workers can actually live near it.

I work in IT, I go to the office to stare at a PC for 8 hours. Something I can literally do anywhere, but instead of IDK, working from home or having distributed offices spaces so people don't have to drive as far, my companies only office is in the middle of a major Metro's downtown in a high rise office for a massive amount of money. So now I have to pay, out of my pocket and time, to drive through downtown traffic, to a parking spot that costs me far too much monthly, so I can simply be physically there to do a job that only requires a PC and an internet connection.

It's all fucking stupid.... And every company seems to do this. Nobody ever comes to our offices and there's literally no reason for them to be where they are, or for me to be there.

[–] steinbring@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

... or walk?

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

... or walk?

Both have their role. Walking is appropriate for local short trips, while bicycles allow you to cover more distance, and is in turn superseded by transit in potential distance covered, while still being a low emissions mode of transportation.

Fewer CO2 emissions is a good goal if you are going to buy a car. Keeping it as long as possible is a better goal.

If the infrastructure allows for it where you live, going car-free is an even better goal for reducing CO2-emissions, and is only one of a long list of benefits of not traveling by car.

Barring that, voting and influencing politicians that can build infrastructure enabling more car-free lives is a good step in the right direction.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hard to carry a TV on a bicycle, or transport loads to the recycling centre, or drop my kids off at school or any one of a thousand things that occur day to day.

Our world redesigned itself with the invention of cars. Trying to exist without them is very hard for your average family, especially those who live outside cities.

[–] silvercove@lemdro.id 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you live in a backwards place this may be so. I can do all of those things without a car.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's a town of 90k people. The kind of town that the vast majority of people in the UK live in.

Just out of curiosity how can you transport something large and bulky, that isn't allowed on public transport, let's say furniture, or the remains of a shed you dismantled or any one of a hundred inconvenient loads that occur during your life without a car?

[–] silvercove@lemdro.id 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Carsharing or you call a transport company. You don't actually need to own a car.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Someone needs to own a car still.

And that someone can't be available every day when I need to do two school runs and an office trip.

That someone can't always be available when the sink springs a leak and I need to go buy some new washers and plumber's mait.

I really question your life experience at this point. If you're single, childless and living in a big city, sure, cars are very unnecessary. For most people this isn't the case

[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The people who broke the testla are the ones who murdered the tree by putting asphalt right up to its trunk.

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or the tree trunk grew to the asphalt.

[–] cooopsspace@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Either the asphalt shohldnt be there or a smaller tree should have been used.

Nonetheless it's clear someone has asphalted right up to the trunk and that should have never occurred.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What a weak tree, in my city the trees pretend the asphalt isn't there and the roots grow right through it

[–] Surface_Detail@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

For real, the pavements here are like bunched-up carpet from all the roots, lol

[–] thisfro@slrpnk.net 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The planet is subscribed to !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 16 points 1 year ago

Weird disconnect here though that stopping climate change was about saving trees, and not our own sorry arses.

[–] nothing@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great joke!

And for the rest: yes, electric cars aren't saving the environment. We just don't have historical data on the effects like we do with fossil fuels. Add in trashed batteries, lithium mining, slave mining, and the shipping costs (in pollution mostly) and it's possibly worse (just counting consumers). We really need to deal with shipping globally and major corporations effects. But I bet you already knew that.

Doesn't matter, companies love greenwashing these days

[–] moonsnotreal@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago

(Just forget about the lithium mines)

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Irony would be the car still kills the planet. I think this is technically coincidence. But I'm in no way an expert and could be entirely wrong. Just commenting to see if anyone definitively has the answer.

Edit: to be clear, I'm discussing the difference between irony and coincidence. My bad.

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They’re significantly less damaging to the environment but the lithium mining is awful and the resources to generate electric currently are pretty damning. But all things considered, even with those they are significantly more eco friendly so if we could focus on green electric generation EV’s would be extremely more friendly.

But a real solution to green transportation involves cutting out vehicles for personal use. Using public transportation like buses and stuff (which can be electric too) would cut down on transportation emissions significantly. Intercity travel is tough because of the distance. Trains are an option, but honestly they aren’t fast enough for most people when you’re traveling hundreds of miles. I think electric cars are still the better option there. Them moving trucks to electric is a big help too. Tractor trailers aren’t as inefficient as many people think. They use exhaust fluid to curb tons of emissions. But they do an extreme amount of driving so it still has a significant impact.

More solar, wind, or hydro electric would make us a very green planet that costs a lot of money and not much interest from people with the money to do it. It’s a solved problem, but no one wants to implement the solution

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Trains can go a lot faster than electric cars what are you talking about

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 1 points 1 year ago

Trains can go faster, but have a stricter schedule. Cars are extremely convenient. You can leave when you want. Want to be in a city at 8 am? It’s a hour away by car so leave by 7. However the only train getting there before 8 leaves at 6. But it takes 20 minutes to get to the station. Or, if we go super green, it take 45 since your walking. You need to leave at 5

It’s similar with a bus, but more manageable when most stops have buses stopping every 15-30 minutes. So for a bus you may need to leave at 6:30 or whatever to make it on time.

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

not from where you are to exactly where you want to go

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wrong, good intercity high speed trains are so much faster that they beat cars even accounting for last mile trips by other methods

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

wrong yourself

over double the time to get to my destination if i take public transport.

This includes high speed rail

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

I said good, nothing good is on that cursed island

[–] Uprise42@artemis.camp 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m gonna reveal more than I’d like to, but I think geographies play a big role here. I’m in America. Rail sucks. It’d take massive investment to make them remotely viable for regular intercity transportation.

I live in Johnstown PA. I frequently travel to Pittsburgh PA because Johnstown is a shit city and offers nothing. But shit cities are were most of the focus is needed. Many people around here don’t understand how much of a difference that would make because what we have now is abhorrent. I need to walk over a mile to my nearest bus stop down a hill with a 10% grade and no sidewalks to be safe on. And that’s if it shows up. Half the time our buses are broke down and non-functional. Of course no one wants to invest more in it when they don’t see the use of it.

But I punched in a train ticket to Pittsburgh. It only leaves 1 time per day at 3:45 PM. It requires a bus connection. It takes 2 hours and 25 minutes. It costs $45 per person. It takes me an hour to drive to Pittsburgh and with my EV that is within a full charge so I can charge at home where I will never notice the cost

Trains are economical, but are not faster for intercity travel. Maybe in Europe but cities are more progressed there and have the funding to do quick travel. In the United States trains are not going to become viable for a very long time unless your on a subway and staying in the same city.

[–] buckykat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The entire Fuxing Hao network has been built in the last like 15 years. We could do that too if we cared to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NightAuthor 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My understanding of the words is similar. Irony is when you expressly think something will happen, and then it doesn’t (or vice versa).

So obviously the owner was thinking “my car is definitely not going to be crushed by a tree” and thus this is actually ironic.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

But that would imply every bad thing is ironic. I think it's when you have reason to believe the exact opposite should happen. You have no reason to believe a tree will never fall. But if you're obsessed about tree falling on car safety, you'd then have that expectation. That's why most things in the song Ironic are actually coincidences, but a song dedicated to irony being wrong about irony is actually ironic.

[–] Tischkante@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago

Technically the city, that didn't take of the tree, killed the car and the tree.

[–] neptune@dmv.social 3 points 1 year ago

Alright Alanis, here's a fork

[–] 30p87@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

It isn't an electric car tho, as it isn't up in flames!

[–] LDaxin@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

It looks still driveable to be honest.

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

"If I'm going down I'm taking one of you with me!"

[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Agree wholeheartedly, but that is one strong roof. Any other car a tree that size would have cut the car in half

[–] Canonical@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

It’s clearly resting on something (the building on the other side of the street) by how it’s positioned. I think you’d be greatly challenged to find a tree that comes to rest naturally like that where there wasn’t something holding the other end up.

[–] phar@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's on the building on the other side...

[–] HurlingDurling@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Ah, had to double take. You are correct