• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    01 year ago

    One of those options emits carbon and drives humanity closer to extinction and one doesn’t. Do you prefer the time saving convenient genocide, or walking?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11 year ago

      Mate, so long as we ship plastic across the pacific, cruises still exist, and execs fly private planes, thats a non-starter.

      Further more, those buses would run empty most of the time, causing more emissions than if people just drove. Have you even been to rural America?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Electric trains still have emissions. Not just power, but maintence as well. Overhead lines go down, pantographs leave metal dust everywhere, hell even just normal rail maintence.

          Theres a reason why all the American passenger lines went bankrupt, and why Amtrak is funded by the government and still struggling.

          And the best part is you’d spend a trillion dollars running lines everywhere, and almost no one would ride it.

          Edit: its costs 75,000 dollars per year per mile to maintain electric track. Its completely unfeasible. http://rockymountainrail.org/documents/RMRABP_CH7_OperatingCosts_03.2010.pdf

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Did your dumb ass really just pull numbers from the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority, a rail planning committee trying to figure out how to make a train from Denver to Vail and say their numbers are equal to what the rest of the country would experience?

            That’s the dumbest thing I’ve read and I’ve read several other comments of yours that are close to it.