Comment on Arguing for the car as a good method of transportation is like arguing that having personal diesel generator to power you home is a good idea

• Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Lol, human energy pollutes the most.

  source

  • birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    get a bike that doesn’t pollute, requires only food (i eat as much as ppl who don’t bike) car: same food intake, extra pollution.

    boss, i’m tired of constantly winning.

    source
• newaccountwhodis@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  While this captures some important similarities between the two, I think you missed the most important that makes OP’s thought valid.

  Both are individualistic approaches, unlike centralized energy generation or public transit, which are collectivist approaches. While the former grants greater independence to wealthy enough individuals, the latter is much more efficient and grants liberty regardless of personal wealth. For the individual in a fragmented and individualistic society, the former makes a lot more sense (especially since they cannot build a big energy plant or rail line). As a society, it’s several orders of magnitude more meaningful to push for the latter.

  source

  • JustJack23@slrpnk.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yes, thank you. Very well said.

    source
  • masterspace@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    At a fundamental level you’re just discussing different system designs.

    Public transit systems prioritize efficient resource use, but they do so at the expense of flexibility and resiliency.

    Russia can launch a missile and take out the power to a whole Ukrainian neighbourhood because they all efficiently share a power grid. If they each operated on their own microgrid it would be more expensive and less resource efficient to setup, but it would be more resilient in the face of disruption and easier to move.

    That’s all your really discussing here and it’s a common trade off in system design.

    source

    • JustJack23@slrpnk.net ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yes, but one system is destructive, polluting and shifts the cost of transportation on the individual. So one system is clearly better here. That is why no one (ok very few people) who have electrified house or apartment decides “you know what I will need a diesel generator”.

      source

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Many many many people do have diesel generators for backup power in the case the grid goes down.

        And if you’re building out a new solar system, most will build battery backups for the same reason + cost optimizing.

        If your point is that fossil fuels are more polluting than electric motors, then sure, yeah, we all agree.

        If your point is that we should always optimize for resource efficiency over flexibility and resiliency, then I think you’re a little misguided, as I see no arguments for not building solar microgrids.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• falseWhite@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  “I don’t want to discuss or address any complex issues, so I will double down on the false equivalence”. - this guy 👆 is very smart.

  source