264
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by MrMakabar@slrpnk.net to c/degrowth@slrpnk.net

This is just insane. Not only are cars themself mostly unnecessary, if the right infrastructure is provided, but SUVs also use more resources to run and be produced then small cars, without any advantage over them. So an obvious waste, which could easily be cut to reduce emissions.

Source IEA: https://www.iea.org/commentaries/suvs-are-setting-new-sales-records-each-year-and-so-are-their-emissions

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

On the contrary: ships are the third-best one when you consider greenhouse gas emissions per ton-kilometer of cargo moved, which is the metric that matters. They only pollute a lot as a category because there is so much fucking shipping going on. (Reducing that is also an issue, but one for a different thread.)

The only things better are bicycles and sailboats (because they use no fossil fuels at all). Even trains are less efficient, although in the long run they have the advantage of being possible to electrify and run on renewables.

Granted, the other pollution (not greenhouse gas) from ships is terrible because they use the cheapest, nastiest fuel. But as bad as that is, it's still a much, much lower-priority concern than climate change.

(TBH, what we really need are nuclear cargo ships.)

[-] kakes@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

That's honestly a very fair point.

this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
264 points (100.0% liked)

Degrowth

833 readers
1 users here now

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS