this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
797 points (95.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

9684 readers
1817 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
 

Highway spending increased by 90% in 2021. This is one of many reasons why car traffic is growing faster than population growth.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yimby@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Two facts:

  1. The average occupancy of a car in my North American city is 1.2 people per car. This does not vary much by city.
  2. Autonomous vehicles will almost certainly be worse for traffic than human driven cars. They will circle empty with no passengers and drive to pick up passengers empty (dead heading) even with a fully rideshare system. If there is widespread private ownership of autonomous vehicles (and you bet your butt that car companies will campaign for this aggressively to keep sales up), the dead heading problems only multiply. If you don't believe me, look up any recent literature on the topic: by most accounts it will be worse, not better. Dead heading is only the tip of the iceberg of problems there.
[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
  1. The average occupancy of a car in my North American city is 1.2 people per car. This does not vary much by city.
  2. Autonomous vehicles will almost certainly be worse for traffic than human driven cars.
  1. Is that for rush hour? Because, overall, the national average is closer to 1.5

  2. Fully agree.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)
  1. How so? Wouldn't autonomous cars disincentivize car ownership, meaning fewer cars that can be on the road?
[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

See the argument of induced demand: “Oh everyone is using self-driving cars, that means there's more space for my car!”

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm not a car owner, so I might be wrong. But I don't think it's normal for people to decide owning a car based on whether or not there's room for it.
Also, I think they meant that self-driving cars that will be taking non-owners to their destination. Since there's already a car that's taking me, I don't need to buy my own.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When people feel there's more room for cars/infrastructure is more hostile to walking, they are more inclined to buy and use a car. That's why adding lanes to highways never works to reduce traffic. You are not making more space for the same amount of cars, you're inducing non-car owners to switch and get one, or already existing car owners to use it more, resulting in more cars in circulation.

Similarly, autonomous cars are perceived as taxis which people irrationally perceive as emotional license to acquire and use a car. Narratives like cars as freedom or tech companies coming to take your car.

Sure, it is counter intuitive, but there's a billion dollar marketing industry dedicated to exploiting this and other similar cognitive biases. See green washing and the use of recycling to promote further consumerism. Or using health labeling to keep unhealthy foods in high demand, etc.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 2 points 2 months ago

The problem you described sounds more like a side effect of the core issue – corporate greed. Cars can be bad, and overuse is a problem, but let's not blame them for the faults of the system. Until the core issue is fixed, nothings will be truly efficient and useful, because those aspects will be sacrificed to profit.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

And what is the average occupancy of a bus in your North American city?

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 0 points 2 months ago

Regarding your 1st point, yes, it is a problem that cars are underutilized. So I think that in addition to promoting public transport, for the time being, we could also promote proper usage of cars. Here in Europe, we don't have much problems with cars compared to US, but oh boy you guys overseas need to tame your F-150 owners.

Regarding the 2nd point, it's not a fact but an opinion. With which I don't really agree. I believe that true self-driving cars will eventually surpass the capabilities of meatbags, but I will look up the literature. Solely based on what you said, it seems to me that the "dead heading" problem is just a logistical issue that can be solved using science/technology (if the fleet of cars is algorithmically dispersed enough, they will always pick up a nearby passenger, as a hypothetical solution).
But yes, the corporations remain an issue and they will surely find a way to mess everything up. That is a separate problem that also needs solving, capitalism and overconsumption.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

Regarding your first point, I'm aware that that is the unfortunate truth. That IS the issue with cars when it comes to efficiency. ~~If you load the car with 3-5 passengers it easily beats busses in efficiency, according to my calculations. But that's not gonna happen.~~

Regarding your second point, the core of the issue is just capitalism, not self-driving cars or privately owned cars.
Cars don't have to drive around empty if they are some sort of shared transport that can pick up the nearest passenger.
If companies aren't gonna cause unnecessary car purchases only those who need them anyway will own them.

Basically, the problem with cars is not cars themselves as a concept, it's the overuse and misuse. But unfortunately, that isn't changing anytime soon.

[–] my_hat_stinks@programming.dev 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you load the car with 3-5 passengers it easily beats busses in efficiency, according to my calculations.

Huh? If you're being very generous you can fit 3 cars into the space of 1 bus. A bus can definitely hold more than 15 people.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website -1 points 2 months ago

I have already rescinded that decision in this comment. But I wasn't comparing the volume, I was comparing the amount of useful work done relative to the weight. If you wish, the details are in the linked comment.

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago

Basically, the problem with cars is not cars themselves as a concept, it's the overuse and misuse. But unfortunately, that isn't changing anytime soon.

So true, extra emphasis on the misuse in the US. I was recently in Iceland, which is a very car centric country, and I was amazed by how much better their car situation was. They kept their roads nice and tight, used roundabouts, they had 30kmph(18mph) speed limits in residential and city centers, raised sidewalks, etc. Best of all most people drove small cars! It was the first time I enjoyed driving and didn't mind being around cars because I actually felt safe.

But then I got back to the US and it was disgusting how wasteful we are with our car infrastructure. Instead of 9ft car lanes our lanes are 12ft minimum often with 8ft buffers. Even small suburban streets are 40 to 50 feet wide. Our parking lots look like lakes of asphalt, and our intersections are so fucking huge there is no safe way for a kid to use them

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Would love to see those calculations.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 0 points 2 months ago

See this.

Spoiler alert: I decided I was wrong.

But try the cool calculator I made!

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even being generous with using SUVs, a really small bus can fit 30+ people, in the same space that would occupy two SUVs with less than 10 people combined.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 1 points 2 months ago

Yeah, I already crossed out that statement. See details here.