205
  • lawful good -- grassy trams
  • neutral good -- bicycles
  • chaotic good -- rail bicycles
  • lawful neutral -- diesel trains
  • true neutral -- walking
  • chaotic neutral -- parkour
  • lawful evil -- airplanes
  • neutral evil -- Las Vegas Loop
  • chaotic evil -- rolling coal
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Techranger@infosec.pub 23 points 1 year ago

l'll speak up for airplanes, or at least airliners in particular. I concede the point they mostly burn non-renewable fuels, but they make excellent use of the resources. Rhetorically speaking, one can cross half the planet in half a day, for not much money, in a mode of transport that is the safest on the planet (typically an order of magnitude safer than cars as I recall).

[-] br3d@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Although don't forget that "for not much money" is partly because air travel is so subsidised. Fuel tends to be largely untaxed, even though fuel taxes on other modes don't really cover the externalities

[-] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

In terms of fuel per passenger unit of distance, air travel is very efficient, the reason why there are so many emissions is the amount of distance you can travel.

Fuel makes up a significant amount of the aircraft's weight at takeoff on long haul flights.

[-] zoe@infosec.pub 7 points 1 year ago

aerial transport is justified for intercontinental transport, but shouldnt be adopted when land travel is possible

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Especially on middle-distance routes where land transport would be faster (considering that airports can't be downtown like train stations can be, the delays associated with airport security, etc.) if the rail infrastructure were decent.

[-] someguy7734206@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

If I recall correctly, aren't high speed trains the safest? At the very least, I recall that the Shinkansen has never had a single safety incident in its entire history, and as for the TGV, there have been a few derailments and a terrorist attack.

[-] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml -2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but there's a lot more airports around.

[-] Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, that's why I put them in lawful. If we can get them to be more sustainable (maybe green hydrogen fuel), then they'd basically just be super fast and super safe sky buses, whereas they're currently extremely polluting sky buses.

[-] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago

We should switch to more coscentious standards. Air travel is a commodity. We must avoid it as much as possible.

[-] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago
[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago
[-] glibg10b@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

It's a website that you can use to edit images (e.g. memes). It adds a watermark to the bottom right of images when saving them

[-] Album@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fun facts:

  • The GO Train pictured in your lawful neutral served 35,234,400 passengers in 2022 and covers 526km connecting 27 cities (rough count).
  • The old diesel-electric fleet was replaced for higher efficiency/lower emission units about a decade ago and these models are now being converted into even lower emission units.
  • In the next decade a large portion of tracks will be electrified.
  • Gatekeeping mass transit is weird
[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

I want a GO train. (I'm in the California Central Valley)

[-] rmd6502@mastodon.social 3 points 1 year ago

@uriel238 @Album yeah! Let's vote for a high speed rail, give the contract to a racist antisemitic jerk who will dig a few feet of test tunnel then throw a party with flamethrowers.

[-] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 1 year ago

*Elon entered the room*

[-] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

That's really rather specific.

[-] rmd6502@mastodon.social 1 points 1 year ago

@uriel238 based on a True Story lol

[-] zoe@infosec.pub 0 points 1 year ago

yea man, i was wondnering too. trains are the least harmful, even the most polluting ones, the amount of torque they deliver for the amound of fuel consumed ratio is just beyond consideration

[-] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Torque doesn't move things, power does.

[-] LimitedWard@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

No buses in this post? I'd place them under chaotic neutral

[-] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com -3 points 1 year ago

Arguing against the lawful good because while all that vegetation is great for pictures the only thought in my mind seeing that is 'fire'.

[-] Pseu@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

They're trams in the city, so relatively slow. Live and maintained vegetation has too much water to burn: boiling away the water takes more energy than the fuel provides.

It's probably also got those pop-up sprinklers, so if a fire does happen, you just turn on the water.

[-] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com -4 points 1 year ago

Covering a city in tram lines and sprinkler systems so you can keep up a fairy tale aesthetic with more grass isn't practical. Just do gravel like the train lines and accept that keeping it pretty would be an irresponsible use of water in our increasingly frequent droughts.

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

It completely depends on the region, though. The grassy tram pic is from Helsinki, which is a plenty moist region that I think is generally predicted to get more rain with climate change. Sustainable urban design should be tailored to the context.

[-] Zink@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

That vegetation is pretty green and not primed for a fire.

Plus we already have cars with tanks full of gasoline driving near green areas in cities.

[-] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 1 year ago

Near but not over and that picture is of an ideal scenario, not a realistic one even if we ignore climate change.

[-] Zink@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Well if this helps instead, people park on their yards every day with hot exhausts and catalytic converters. And some of us with old gravel driveways have a little grass right where we’re actually supposed to park, lol.

But yeah you’re right that when they decided to make that route so nice and green, they signed up for regular maintenance!

[-] someguy7734206@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

My driveway is asphalt and it still has a little bit of grass in the area you're supposed to park.

this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
205 points (92.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

9580 readers
253 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS