Pete Buttigieg is probably one of the most visible and hard working cabinet members. He’s doing such a great job. https://t.co/GRzFtlseiL
— Don Bon (@donbonvivant2) September 9, 2022
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg touts the Inflation Reduction Act while speaking in San Francisco:
“While unfortunately it didn’t get any Republican votes in Congress, I do wanna note that bill has widespread bipartisan support among the American people.” pic.twitter.com/SOxcA3rrhI
— The Recount (@therecount) September 8, 2022
This is what it looks like when you’ve got people in charge whose principal goal isn’t to destroy the government.
Competence.
h/t @Elex_Michaelson pic.twitter.com/dD8JaI9wbB
— Brian Tyler Cohen (@briantylercohen) September 10, 2022
Today, Secretary Pete Buttigieg spoke with local leaders about I-980, which tore through Oakland in the 1970s.
Rep. Barbara Lee “said she hopes the freeway will one day be transformed into a thriving green space that connects, rather than separates West Oakland.” https://t.co/7FLZbp2zm8
— Nerdy Pursuit (@nerdypursuit) September 9, 2022
Transportation secretary @PeteButtigieg, @RepBarbaraLee & Mayor @LibbySchaaf onboard an AC Transit bus to tour DOT investments in #Oakland. @KTVU pic.twitter.com/WwnG2I7sd0
— Greg Lee (@GregLeeKTVU) September 9, 2022
Pelosi, Buttigieg tour SF Central Subway project; service on track to begin this Fall https://t.co/gYlnh2RzUc @SFMTA_Muni @SFMayorsOffice #sfmuni #sfmta #abc7newsbayarea #abc7newsnow #SF #bayarea
— Suzanne Phan (@SuzannePhan) September 9, 2022
.@SecretaryPete Buttigieg on EVs: the public sector can help guarantee that the inevitable transition to electric vehicles happens quickly enough to deal with climate, in an equitable way to reach those who need it most, and that it’s made in the USA. pic.twitter.com/O4DgQuI1yH
— Gah! I’m just a fan sharing tidbits🏳️🌈 (@petetidbits) September 9, 2022
The 22nd Street Bridge project in Tucson, Arizona is an example of what infrastructure investment looks like in practice — helping people connect to the places and things they need to reach affordably, efficiently, and safely. pic.twitter.com/KpwjwAaRM9
— Secretary Pete Buttigieg (@SecretaryPete) September 6, 2022
Twins Joseph and Penelope “just turned one year old, and it’s just the best thing in the world,” @PeteButtigieg said. https://t.co/fUuBlGMcee
— The Advocate (@TheAdvocateMag) September 9, 2022
James E Powell
I appreciate this because I don’t watch the news so I don’t really know what he’s been up to.
Right-wingers hate him, so I’m sure he’s doing a good job.
WaterGirl
Thanks for this, Anne Laurie. I 💕 Pete Buttigieg and I am so pleased to learn about what they are doing with transportation.
It’s almost like they think people are more important than corporations!
Emmet from Paso Robles
That’s fine, I guess, but I’m not into the cult of personality.
I am very pleased that I don’t know the names of most of the people in Biden’s cabinet – that’s the way it should be in a smoothly functioning, competent government.
NotMax
Open thread?
Pre-COViD (2019), travel time from NY to Maui was 32 hours.
This year showed improvement. Took only a total of 31 hours navigating airline hell, including an overnight at a hotel near LAX on the airline’s dime.
Needless to say, was not the proverbial happy camper.
NotMax
@NotMax
Neglected to state that original itinerary in both cases was around 13 hours.
Alison Rose 💙🌻💛
@Emmet from Paso Robles: I don’t see recognizing someone’s hard work and accomplishments and showing appreciate as “cult of personality” – that’s what Trump has, not Buttigieg, nor anyone else in Biden’s admin. And why shouldn’t people know the names of the people in charge of all the various aspects of their lives?
PaulB
Not to mention that Buttigieg is really remarkable in his communication skills. He’s one of the few leading Democrats that I would trust to be interviewed on a Fox News show. He refuses to accept the host/Republican framing and usually hits his responses out of the park.
Regardless of your opinion of him as a Cabinet Secretary or as a potential future Governor/President candidate, Democrats need those kinds of communication skills.
trollhattan
@NotMax: 13 became 31? In the future, avoid Air Dysgraphia!
PaulB
The sky is a very weird color right now, with poor air quality, both the result of wildfires in the region. The temperature is supposed to be in the 90s today but I couldn’t keep windows open to cool the house down last night due to that air quality. Ugh…
We’re supposed to get some relief on Monday.
Felanius Kootea
Ooh thanks for this! I didn’t know about the new transportation.gov dashboard and it’s already very helpful. Has links to every major US airline’s customer service plan.
narya
I was not originally a fan of Pete–too much consultant-speak–but I’ve become a fan. He is just the right person to be leading that department, and I love how his marriage is normalizing more kinds of families in the public eye. I really appreciate how he is actually aware of how the highway system was used to further segregate cities and to destroy black communities and black wealth in the process.
In my own little corner of the world, someone used my credit card number to purchase a bunch of wings in Anaheim (never been there; hate wings) and stuff at a juice bar in Vegas. Luckily I got an alert quickly, and the card’s been shut down, but jeez is that a pain.
Lazy day today, though; probably make some beans later, just defrosted the freezer, but mostly just sitting around.
trollhattan
@PaulB: Top AQI value I see in our region is 708–basically “inhale and die” level. We’re somehow only 51 here.
Dorothy A. Winsor
I’m heading out to sell books at LITfest in Highland Park. It’s at the corner of Central and St. John, sponsored by East on Central. I’ll be there from 2:30-5. Come on down!
Printers Row is downtown this weekend, so I’m afraid we won’t draw anyone.
Anyway
Wish Sec Pete and the DOT would dial back the security theater at airports. It’s overkill. High time the shoes and liquid checks were discontinued. Yeah yeah TSA pre-check but I shouldn’t have to pay $$ to cut time waiting in line.
Plus anything that trims the powers of TSA/ Homeland sec is to be welcomed.
WaterGirl
@Felanius Kootea: I love that new policy in particular. Customer service plans easily accessible in black and white PLUS complaint form when the transportation provider leaves you in a lurch.
I haven’t looked yet to see if this is only airlines or if it also includes Amtrak and bus service. Just airlines. Still awesome.narya
@Dorothy A. Winsor: No promises, but when/where is the Printers’ Row thing? Looks like rain tomorrow, too, which sucks. ETA: so you’re saying that you don’t expect a crowd, NOT that you will also be at Printers’ Row?
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
I adore him. He works hard. He communicates effectively. He and Chastain are happily and publically being normal, adoring parents, despite the rain of hate from right wingers. Go Sec Pete!!
EDIT: I will add that as a mid-westerner, I do appreciate his mid-western nice.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@narya: I’m NOT at Printers Row. I’m in Highland Park at LITfest, corner of Central and St. Johns. My shift starts at 2:30 and runs to about 5. There will apparently be tents. I’m at table 12
ETA: No promises, I know. I appreciate your even thinking about it!
narya
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Good luck! No way for me to get to HPk . . .
cain
@PaulB:
Yes and there were a lot of evacuations happening last night as well as high winds. Plus we have arsonists setting fires at Mt Tabor.
cain
@Anyway:
I’m totally with you .. but the press with crucify Biden if he did anything. That should be 2nd term stuff
We have not had much terrorism except domestic ones now. How many kids under the age of 18 know anything about al-qaeda?
PaulB
I can’t even imagine an AQI of 708. I think the worst I’ve ever experienced was in the upper 200s, which was enough to have my eyes watering in just the short walk from my front door to my car.
Right now, we’re in the low 100s AQI in my area, which is manageable. I’ve got everything closed down and air purifiers running upstairs and down.
zhena gogolia
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: I think he’s remarkable. Pretty sure he will be POTUS one day.
VOR
@Anyway: I doubt it’s possible to dial back the security theater much. Imagine the rules are loosened and then there is an event. The Right Wing would start screaming about the Biden administration being terrorist friendly well before anyone determined the actual cause of the event. It’s stupid and wasteful, but there it is. A friend has a saying: “If it’s not logical, it’s political”.
Searcher
@VOR: But if we slacken COVID countermeasures and there’s a surge and another hundred thousand people die, what could we have done differently?
divF
Nancy Pelosi looks like she’s in really good shape in these photos. And not just “good shape for 82 y/o”. Do they have a women’s fitness center in the Capitol Hill complex ?
kalakal
@NotMax: That’s awful. You must be knackered.
Amir Khalid
@kalakal:
His arms must be especially tired.
Baud
OT about another decent person in the administration.
Betsy
I love Pete as Transportation Secretary but I have to point out that
ELECTRIC CARS WON’T SAVE US
https://www.planetizen.com/blogs/112490-electric-cars-wont-solve-climate-change
https://9gag.com/gag/aZ0Yvw9
Mike E
My county has the new bivalent shots so which one should I get? I have all Pfizers on my vax card but I’m contemplating if Moderna is the way to go… has anyone here switched up?
trollhattan
Specifically, an intense heavy bag workout regime, the bags being Gym Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Louie Goehmert.
Baud
@Betsy:
I wish we wouldn’t talk down electric cars just as they are getting really popular.
Betsy
@Baud: https://9gag.com/gag/aZ0Yvw9
If you want to talk about the reasons why electric cars are not the answer to emissions, nor pollution, nor our disastrous environment-destroying, human-health-and happiness-destroying car-oriented sprawl form of development, start here: https://jacobin.com/2022/06/electric-cars-renewables-mineral-extraction-climate
trollhattan
@Betsy: EVs are the necessary next step on a longer journey. We need to rid the fleet of ICVs as quickly as earthly possible.
Building a transportation infrastructure that can get people out of motor vehicles is a looooooooong-term goal.
zhena gogolia
I guess King Charles is already being an asshole.
livewyre
@Betsy: I would quickly note in general terms that no single measure is going to solve the whole problem, and that’s fine. Keep in mind how much oil money goes into setting EV against mass transit and renewable against nuclear. Wedge strategies work as well for electrons as for elections.
I’m in favor of using whatever helps wherever it helps and not worrying too much ahead of time (within reason) whether it’ll set other efforts back. Maybe the key is leaving room for everyone who’s interested in a particular measure to dedicate their work to it. A pluralistic approach, basically.
edit: Also, of course, the formula.
zhena gogolia
@Mike E: I stayed with Pfizer. Got it this morning. I haven’t seen any authoritative evidence that you need to switch.
Dangerman
Damn, Texas was just a missed blitz away. Fine ballgame.
Baud
@Betsy:
Did anyone argue that EVs would solve congestion?
Last I checked, we wanted people to move away from gas engines to EVs. Do we not still want that? If so, I hope some of the rhetoric changes.
Betsy
@trollhattan: That journey needs to be WAY shorter (literally and figuratively) — and it needs to be focused on biking, walking, and public transportation — not doubling down on the failed automotive experiment.
prostratedragon
@zhena gogolia: Today’s opera on my radio box is I Puritani.
Btw, wikipedia tells me that this was Victoria’s favorite opera.
Betsy
@Baud: it’s not just congestion. It’s also emissions and pollution, and so much more See the article.
I get what you’re saying; I just bought a hybrid to do what I can, now — but the societal solution MUST RAPIDLY re-focus on real sustainable options, not doubling down on car dependency.
Baud
@Betsy:
I’m not telling people interested in EVs that they’re suckers. We have enough problems building credibility with people to actually turn on a dime like this. By all means, push for other solutions, but slamming EVs hurts our credibility badly.
Felanius Kootea
@zhena gogolia: What did he do?
Gwangung
@Betsy: Society needs to, but it’s not going to change drastically. The biggest stumbling block is getting masses in society to ACCEPT a change. Once that change starts (which it has not yet) , there are ways to move folks into that, and even more when the change propagates.
but the key element is to get that change accepted.
Mike E
@zhena gogolia: that’s my instinct as well. Please let us know how you’re feeling going forward!
Omnes Omnibus
@Emmet from Paso Robles: Transport Bureaucrat Number 1 is exceeding expected parameters. Is that better? Come on, there is nothing wrong with praising the praiseworthy.
zhena gogolia
@Felanius Kootea:
QEII knew not to do stuff like this.
zhena gogolia
@Mike E: I’m very tired but nothing more serious (it’s been 4.5 hours).
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: Has anyone said they would?
Martin
@Baud: The problem isn’t really congestion. The problem is that there is no scenario where EVs can replace ICEs. They can’t scale production to that level because the supply chain isn’t there, and isn’t motivated to be there.
Meanwhile, we keep building infrastructure (freeways, etc.) as if they will be there, which keeps telling the public to aspire to cars. It’s like telling people on an airplane that they’re going to to the moon – look outside and see how far from earth we’re getting – when we know full well an airplane can’t go to the moon. And that infrastructure itself is a major source of carbon emissions.
I’d love EVs to be the solution, but even the auto industry concedes that it won’t work, if you look at their internal data. Forecasts are that by 2030 there will be 300M more ICEs in use than there are now.
We are putting our R&D in the wrong place, our infrastructure spending in the wrong place, and trying to paint a picture of a cleaner future that we know can’t work – at least for the ½ of the population or so that will never have an EV.
California is starting to realize this after much effort trying to make it work. The state needs 1.5M public EV chargers by 2030 for EV uptake to work overall. We have 13,000 – and we need to build 15,000 every month to make the target. The problem is there’s no economic model to make it work. The only way we’re getting that infrastructure is if Caltrans builds it.
Compare to Europe and even most of Asia which is reducing car infrastructure, shifting to bikes, shifting to small EVs (Citroen AMI, as an example, or the Wuling Hongguang Mini EV) which are 1/10th the cost of US EVs and can easily charge off of a 110 outlet – something renters are likely to have, and ramping up rail for longer journeys.
I know the US public doesn’t want to hear that a car centric society needs to end, but it’s either that or meet climate targets. You can’t do both. It’s simply not possible to let everyone haul around an extra 4,000lbs of steel every time they want to buy a bagel. It doesn’t matter if that 4,000lbs is electrified by solar or not – you still can’t meet the target.
Baud
@Martin:
Do we no longer care if people buy EVs over gas cars? Until you answer that question, every thing else is moot.
Martin
@Baud: Problem is, do we have enough money to both invest in the sustainable solutions *and* subsidize the ones that we know can’t work.
This isn’t some small dollar multi billion dollar campaign. This is a multi-trillion dollar industry. That $600B in EV subsidies would build quite a lot of high speed rail that could operate for decades.
Baud
@Martin:
Then fight over future funding. Don’t denigrate EVs, or we’re going to lose so much credibility, we’ll have nothing.
zhena gogolia
@Baud: Sounds like the narrative has been set in stone.
Betsy
@Baud: Straw man alert. As I said, “electric cars won’t save us.”
They’re a relatively insignificant part of the massive solution that is needed — but they do allow us to believe the false hope that we can just keep on driving everywhere, so people will always love to defend them.
You can call that “telling them they’re suckers” if you want. You might be right — they might just be suckers!
Actually *reading up* on the problems of over-reliance on EV as a solution can solve that, though.
Baud
@zhena gogolia:
Right. Why should people trust us about bikes and mass transit when we lied to them about EVs?
Baud
@Betsy:
Since no one ever said EVs would save us, the stawman is saying that EVs won’t save us. It’s putting EVs down, instead of talking about positive next steps.
zhena gogolia
@Baud: Defund the police
Anotherlurker
@Baud: https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4844
This is a good summery of where EVs stand, now.
livewyre
@Baud: That’s why I’m on about wedge strategies. Setting one against the other defeats both. Not saying that’s the plan of anyone here, but that’s the effect of going along with it. And it is a plan.
Betsy
@Martin: exactly so.
It’s also a problem of mere geometry. Those gargantuan pieces of steel have to be placed everywhere. Cities full of parking lots (that is, storage areas for empty cars around every single building used by humans) render cities inaccessible by all other modes of travel — dooming transit, walking, biking, which are the travel modes that ACTUALLY COULD save us.
Omnes Omnibus
@Baud: Riding giant eagles won’t save us either. I don’t care what Gandalf says.
Betsy
@Baud: EVs *should* be put down, because they won’t solve our problems, and will prevent us from solving them with the effective means that would solve them. They are an insignificant part of a meaningful solution. There.
Martin
@Baud: We care. But we shouldn’t subsidize it. The $600B in EV subsidies could give every American a free eBike, and the infrastructure for those bikes could be as simple as some restriping.
The concern is that the public is just proceeding with the assumption that EVs will come along and magically solve everything. And they won’t. And we know they won’t. And we’re lying to the public about that. And when we come clean about that, it’ll be after a LOT of public and consumer money is spent building around a social structure that has to end. Cities (big and small) need to compact, need to become walkable. 80% of car parking needs to be eliminated, which will also free up a lot of land usage for housing, which we also need.
We can either keep throwing good money after bad, or we can own up to what we know needs to happen. My fear is that a few trillion dollars down the road, we’ll have to start talking about rail and it’ll be ‘no, we’re not going to dump another x trillion dollars’. And what do you tell the homeowners that just moved out to the sticks with their electric F-150, that you’re now going to rip out their infrastructure?
zhena gogolia
@Baud: This exchange is really depriving me of any shred of hope.
zhena gogolia
@Martin:
I have literally never heard a single person say that.
livewyre
@Betsy: Are we looking for salvation, or for action? If there’s anywhere I’d draw the line, it’s between ideals and systems. I’d rather move too slowly than stop to tell everyone else they’re moving too slowly. And that’s already assuming there’s only one way to move.
Martin
@Baud: The public believes EVs will save us. There is no public attention being paid to winding down road infrastructure. None. And leaders are afraid to talk about that. That’s why the F-150 Lightning is seen as such a game changer – it’s seen as proof that EVs will save us. The Biden admin hasn’t exactly tried to dispel that idea.
We need Amtrak Joe, not Corvette Joe.
zhena gogolia
I need a new car. There is no public transportation in my town and I need to get to work. Guess I’ll get a Hummer. What’s the dif?
Baud
@Betsy: Fine. I think you lost that battle a long time ago, but at least that’s consistent.
@Martin:
We’re not lying to the public. A lot of greenhouse gas problems don’t even have anything to do with cars. We’re still trying to solve those things. I get the argument about competition for subsidies, but that’s a perennial problem I’m budgeting. You will destroy all public interest in environmental if you abandon EVs completely. The US isn’t giving up it’s cars anytime soon.
livewyre
Actually, I think what we have here isn’t a conflict between which measures will help and which won’t, or even between ideals and practice – it’s a question of morality. Out of all of the measures we could take to solve our environmental crisis and make energy sustainable, which one will make me a good person for advocating it to the exclusion of all others? That’s the real question in front of us. In this conversation, at least.
Uncle Cosmo
@Mike E: I followed 3 Modernas with a Pfizer booster coupla months back, noticed nothing but a sore shoulder for a few daze & no COVID scares (cross fingers toes eyes). YMMV.
Baud
@Martin:
Show me the evidence about what the public believes.
cain
@Betsy:
Only population reduction will save us but lowering emissions is just one tool of many. Plus our cities will be more breathable and that is a big plus.
Baud
@zhena gogolia:
Get one that rolls coal.
Geminid
@Martin: $600 billion wouldn’t build much high speed rail. The $60 billion in the Infrastructure bill that is dedicated to AMTRAK will probably add as much or more passenger rail service, and it can be increased. Money spent on conventional rail service will go much further than investments in high speed rail.
Conventional rail will only carry people at 80 mph, but so what? We already have an air transport system adapted to our widely distributed population, and it can be run on carbon neutral fuel within ten years if we require it.
lowtechcyclist
@Betsy:
Huh?
I got far enough into that article for it to point out that:
So it sounds like they’re saying replacing internal combustion vehicles with EVs would be a huge positive change.
No, it won’t happen all at once, because cars have a much longer lifetime than they used to. It’ll take 15 years to reduce IC cars to a small fraction of all cars on the road.
And yes, greater housing density where there’s a market for it, and greatly expanded mass transit, would be even bigger game-changers. You’re preaching to the choir here, but where do you get the magic wand that will make all that politically feasible?
The IRA was the best we could do right now, Manchin, Sinema, and unified GOP opposition. And it’s a good start. If we get a few more Senators and hold the House, more will be possible.
cain
@Baud:
Besides the challenges of rail and others .. there are decades in the future to get that roll out
Baud
I’m starting to emphasize with people who didn’t trust us about vaccines.
trollhattan
@Martin:
Confess I’m yet to meet someone who believes “EVs will save us.” I also don’t get around much.
Martin
@zhena gogolia: Do you see any meaningful redesign of cities in the US? Any shift away from suburbs which can only function with cars due to the low density. A few places are removing parking minimums, but they are very rare.
No, the American dream proceeds apace – a single family home in the suburbs with an F-150 in the driveway. That’s not possible at net zero.
My city is building more medium density mixed use and less single family, but the rest of the infrastructure isn’t showing up around it. There’s no discussion of light rail/trolley/tram or any kind of local transit. There’s no discussion anywhere of addressing the fare box problem with existing transit. There’s no discussion anywhere of disincentivizing additional auto use by removing infrastructure, removing subsidies, etc. I mean, we have more land use dedicated to free parking than we do to all forms of housing. Just in the parking lot space allocated in Los Angeles you can fit the entirety of Manhattan, Paris, and Barcelona. And we wonder why we have a housing problem (another thing we are throwing a ton of money at, which is to a large degree caused by cars)
peter
@Mike E: After four Pfizer shots — the two initial doses and two boosters — I got the Moderna bivalent booster on Labor Day. Nothing serious, just some short-lived chills and mild fever about 24 hours after the shot.
Omnes Omnibus
@Martin: I don’t know that that’s true. The arguments I have heard in favor of EVs is that they are an improvement on ICVs in the climate effort but not that they will fix the problem in and of themselves. And I am rather agnostic about EVs. Right now they seem to be the toys of well off suburban people and nothing more. That being said, pushing any short term mitigation efforts while working on the bigger solutions seems like a good idea.
TL;DR: The strawman here is that people believe that EVs are the solution.
Omnes Omnibus
@Martin: The reordering of American society will not happen as fast as you want.
Another Scott
The best thing for us moving forward isn’t buying new EVs or transit or electric bikes or hyperlocal or any other single thing. It’s being more efficient, and coming up with ways to be even more efficient in the future.
My hobbyhorse is that the USA is around 4% of the world’s population, so we can’t save the world by ourselves by doing any other single thing. We have to get the world involved in a big way, and we can do that by showing the benefits and creating the new technologies that will lead the way.
FRED tells me that US vehicle miles traveled are still below the February 2020 peak and seem to be falling recently (probably a consequence of higher fuel prices).
The majority of cars and trucks on the road are going to be replaced eventually. Being able to replace them with EVs (of all sorts) would be a good thing. Right now, that is not an option in most cases. But we need to remember that making new widgets and vehicles and transit stations and hyperlocal apartment complexes creates lots of CO2 too.
If we really want to cut CO2 NOW NOW NOW, building more stuff of any sort won’t do it (even though, of course, it is essential for the longer-term). Conservation will do a lot – look at that drop after February 2020, is cheaper, and changing ways of thinking is an essential part of the solution.
Any proposed solution has an important “you first” aspect as well – something that governments can and must work to address.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
trollhattan
@Baud:
I’ll begin with environmental justice. The tens of millions living near highways and major arterials trend poor. Imagine their lives without exhaust seeping into their homes 24/7.
Betsy
@livewyre: Spending $600 billion on EV tech is money that can’t be used for a far more effective solution, like bikes. Half of all car trips are less than 2 miles, a distance that is easily replaced by safe, comfortable bike infra. $600 trillion would go a long way towards a nationally safe, comfortable transit and bike infra network.
Meanwhile, in my county alone thousands of acres of forest was cut down and burnt last year to generate electricity so people can keep driving everywhere.
That’s the problem.
livewyre
In the abstract, every debate about which particular measure to use could be called a distraction from every other measure. The question we’re dancing around is how to make sequestering carbon more profitable than extracting it, on a quick enough scale to keep the atmosphere habitable. I doubt that’s a technological question, or even necessarily an economic one. There’s a reason we value numbers going up that I think is going to have to be addressed on a social level.
Betsy
@Another Scott: modest decongestion pricing alone would drive huge gains in efficiency, immediately, without even a change in technology. Imagine $600 bn to offset congestion pricing impacts on lower-income households. Instant, massive carbon reduction.
Detroit execs must eat, though!
Bex
The story of Pete and Chasten’s first year as parents. http://buttigieg.medium.com/one-year-in-parenting-has-taught-us-about-vulnerability-gratitude-170f6e94cbad
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: I am fine with a lot of spending on both.
livewyre
@Betsy: I’m working away from it being a zero-sum problem, even if it was confined to economics to begin with. We’re going to have to go beyond that if the idea is to actually change things rather than to reassure ourselves of always having been on the right side of history.
ian
@Omnes Omnibus: Free one way eagle ride offer only valid for express trips out of Mordor. Travelers seeking transit into interior need consider alternative plans.
trollhattan
@Another Scott:
Yup. been at my current jerb >10 years. One reason I made the jump was location, I could for the first time stop car commuting and use light rail or bicycle. Worked great and I did not drive to work one day since I began there.
Until…
Reorg has my group out in the suburbs, effective July 1. It’s a half-hour drive or perilous one-hour cycle. I’ll challenge anybody here to take that ride alongside me then tell me it’s a realistic alternative for more than 1/10,000 commuters.
The farther from the city center one goes, the more aggressive drivers are to cyclists.
Lacking a magic want to turn us all Dutch, this is a decades-long quest.
Betsy
@livewyre: well, no — not every measure gets $600 bn in spending to support it, we can’t spend that kind of money on multiple measures because money is not unlimited, and other measures would be far more effective.
So this argument that “what about the kittens that will die, don’t you care about THEM?” — I get it, focusing on one problem does NOT mean you can’t also focus on others, but we are talking about a “focus” that involves throwing away more that half a trillion dollars on something that won’t help much, and other things we are basically not moving forward on much at all, really will help — even will save us.
Betsy
@livewyre: Some resources are finite, though, even when you’re talking only half a trillion dollars.
Omnes Omnibus
@trollhattan: I am not tall enough to be Dutch, and I don’t really care for herring.
sab
@Uncle Cosmo: Same with me. Moderna first two, then two ( or maybe three) Moderna boosters, then a Pfizer booster pkus flu shot. My arm is a little bit sore, but that’s it.
Martin
@Baud:
The majority of greenhouse gas problems are related to cars. Certainly the largest greenhouse problem is related to cars. We’re making quite good progress on the grid. ⅓ of CAs total emissions are passenger vehicles – and that’s after the progress we’ve already made on EVs. Another 15% is commercial vehicles.
And that’s direct impact. Indirect impact is how we design around those cars. A compact shopping district will have shared walls between businesses – so less heat exchange, less heating, less AC, therefore less need for those, which affects emission indirectly. That road infrastructure is expensive. In most towns it’s their largest budget item – more than schools. And if you double the weight of a vehicle, you increase the infrastructure costs by 16x, which is why you’re seeing a lot of budgetary problems in cities because we keep moving to heavier and heavier vehicles.
And anything that is paved – road, parking lot – is displacing a carbon sink with a carbon emitter, so another secondary effect.
If you look at when CO2 emissions really took off, it wasn’t the industrial revolution – it was the mass adoption of cars. That not only increased tailpipe emissions, it radically changed how and where we lived, how we built cities, etc. It’s all of it.
And yes, the US will give up its cars. It’s just not clear how willingly we will, how big of a natural disaster its going to take.
Ken
I love these “Try this one weird trick” articles. Could you summarize, though?
(And apologies if this is a duplicate, I think the blog ate my first attempt.)
The Thin Black Duke
@trollhattan: I hate these “All or Nothing” rhetorical debates.
PaulB
Martin:
Not in far too many locations. An electric bike would be of zero benefit to me, personally.
Care to back up even one of these assertions? Because, frankly, I’m pretty sure that every one of them is false.
trollhattan
@Omnes Omnibus:
The Dutch love them some bikes. Photo forum guy posted this, taken at the recent Dutch Grand Prix racetrack during race week.
https://2.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/66447855/92baab58d9f745ea814dd5b6a7be7d42
PaulB
Indeed. Stupid and counterproductive. Purity trolls are almost as bad as the other variety.
livewyre
@Betsy: Which dollars are we talking about, exactly, though? How many of those are you in any position to allocate? What’s the point of demanding one use for them rather than another in this particular venue? It’s not like any of us are in more of a prominent position to decide what to do with them. So what’s the plan?
What I’m objecting to is the idea that it can be reduced to a problem of allocation in the first place. Individuals can’t decide where billions of dollars go. Billionaires have armies of bean-counters for that, who are mainly employed to optimize for accumulation, which you might agree is a problem in itself.
So I don’t think we can take anyone’s word alone for how to direct these things. It will take consensus.
Martin
@trollhattan: But the Dutch didn’t do it instantly. In fact, Amsterdam only did it because they were broke. They could no longer afford to build car infrastructure so they built bike infrastructure and forced the population to adapt. I mean, the Netherlands is a pretty fucking shitty climate to embrace cycling relative to most of the US.
But Paris looks a hell of a lot like Amsterdam after just 2 years of making their switch. You can do these changes fairly quickly when you are asking the public to spend *less* to fit into the new system, rather than spend more. EVs require spending more. Right now, a lot more – even with the subsidies.
sab
@Martin: Almost all the new residential building in my Ohio city is townhouse complexes. Fifteen years ago it was McMansions in the exurbs with scarcely any building in town. That’s a huge change.
We also have those municipal rent-a-scooter things all over the city that seem to get used a lot. Ubheard of five years ago.
Betsy
@trollhattan: Did you know? The Dutch built their cycling network in 20 years. In 1974, every Dutch square and sidewalk was covered in parked cars. Same in Germany and Denmark.
We could do it here in most places. It’s just a matter of priorities, not whether people speak Dutch.
there’s a great video that explains how the Dutch got their biking results.
It’s nothing unique to the Dutch: they just systematically stopped building freeways, demolished the urban freeways they already had built, and replaced them with people infrastructure, like bike paths, sidewalks, safe crossings, friendly “shared streets” where cars may go but don’t dominate, and bus /tram /train transit.
I’ll try to find it and post. it’s quite a revelation.
ETA: Here it is.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=XuBdf9jYj7o&feature=emb_logo
trollhattan
@The Thin Black Duke: Yup. A large, complicated problem facing all of mankind is going to take uncountable actions, not one of which will be enough by itself.
Some won’t even work, but that’s a price we pay for not sitting around and sifting through them all before beginning. “You mean my A chicken-driven generator wheel in every backyard idea didn’t work? Hey, at least we get eggs.”
Martin
@The Thin Black Duke: It’s not all or nothing. I’m not saying no EVs, no cars. I’m saying cars need to pay their full fare. Right now mass transit is expected to run unsubsidized, but cars are massively subsidized. Just get rid of the car subsidies. The free parking, the free roads, the subsidies to fuel companies, the EV credits. People will still buy them, but they need to fully justify and evaluate that decision. And it needs to become a decision – so massive investment in alternatives – electric buses, BRT, trams, light rail, high speed rail, walking/cycling, etc. How much of a boost to small business would we get if the city didn’t mandate they buy enough land for x parking spaces? If they could just live off of sidewalk traffic?
Make mass transit and walking/biking the primary spend, and make cars the secondary one – the one that has to come to the city begging for support. And we’ll achieve a certain equilibrium. People who really want their cars can still have them. They won’t be cheap, but they can have them. Meanwhile, you remove a MASSIVE tax on low income people to participate in society, and you lower the total tax cost for a usable society by a LOT.
Baud
@Martin:
Not according to the EPA.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
PaulB
Reminds me of the Medicare for All purists who still hate the ACA.
trollhattan
@Betsy: We do not have their drive, nor their focus.
Dutch flood-control experts visit my metroplex and nearly faint when we proudly point out the 100-year flood protection afforded by the levee system. They strive for 10,000-year protection.
And this is California. What of Texas and Florida?
Again, not saying we don’t set goals and proceed, but the US is like nowhere else when it comes to re-engineering how we live.
PaulB
Another unsupported assertion that I’m pretty sure is false.
NotMax
@kalakal
Enough so to drag out of deep storage a coinage from long ago to describe being beyond exhaustion.
Upon stepping through my front door I was tattersnapped.
Just poured first cup of coffee of the day in prep for heading into town to transact a few necessary errands which can’t wait until this coming week.
;)
PaulB
Not to mention the geographic differences between the U.S. and European countries.
Omnes Omnibus
@NotMax: You should have ridden an e-bike.
Kelly
Our power is back on. Modest east wind is bringing a lot of smoke over from the Cedar Creek Fire near Oakridge, OR. On the DEQ scale the PM 2.5 is moderate 75. Smoke is probably gonna keep the forecast high of 97 down under 90.
Betsy
@Martin: Paris is a great example, thanks for bringing that up.
Two years! Dramatic results.
Not only in carbon reduction, but also in happiness, walkability, livability, traffic congestion reduction, airborne particulate reduction, cardiovascular health, quietness (cars are what make cities noisy — Dutch cities are busy but almost breathtakingly silent), safety, recovery of urban room from empty car storage lots (“parking”) converted to places for people .. that’s real progress on multiple metrics and EVs will never be part of it.
Betsy
@PaulB: Most car trips in the US are under 2 miles. That’s a lot of potential trip replacement by mode.
The solutions have a lot less to do with cultural geography and a lot more to do with keeping carmakers happy.
Origuy
@Betsy: Most disabled people can’t ride bikes. Most elderly people can’t ride them where it’s not flat. Rent or borrow a wheelchair and try to go to a doctor’s office and and a grocery store in any medium sized American city. For that matter, get on your bike and bring home a week’s worth of groceries for a family of three.
Until you solve those problems, you won’t get rid of cars any time soon.
Betsy
@PaulB: No, it’s true.
car infra structure (new highway construction) is by formula automatically subsidized at the level of 80% by federal money and they don’t have to be justified financially in order to build new highways. In other words they are subsidized at 80% without need for justification.
However nearly all *transit* systems must show that they are more self-supporting than not before the feds will contribute.
This has been true for decades. Massive, overwhelming subsidies for highways; comparatively, “budget dust” for transit and must show the arithmetic and bid against other transit projects for competitive funding.
How do I know: transportation planner over 20 years.
Geminid
@Martin: Last November “Corvette Joe” signed an Infrastructure bill that included $60 billion for capital investment in AMTRAK. The system’s chief said that this would be “transformational,” and it exceeds total capital investment since AMTRAK was founded. We’ll finally expand a service map that has remained static even as the country has added 130 million residents. Of course we need to do more but this is a good start.
The Infrastructure bill also included a lot of money for mass transit, $10 billion for New York’s MTA alone. This bill was a very underrated piece of legislatiom, in part because of the contentious circumstances of its passage.
I think you are aware of this, but I’m putting it out here again because a lot people think that the recent Schumer/Manchin bill represents the totality of Congress’s and the Biden administration’s contribution to combating global warming, and it doesn’t. There has been plenty of action taken by the various executive branch departments as well.
I see people explain that we can’t solve the climate problem without fundamentally transforming current population distribution and transport patterns as swiftly as possible. I happen not to believe this, and I am sceptical of causing large scale disruption of society and the economy because of a simple principle: if we want a sustainable planet, we need a politically sustainable program to achieve that goal.
opiejeanne
@trollhattan: The AQI here is 144. Really smoky air, some ash.
I’m just outside Seattle, in a little place called Woodinville. The light is yellowish and the sky is gray with smoke.
Not sure which fire this is from, one in Northern Oregon or the ones in the North Cascades, British Columbia, Southwest Washington, and Eastern Washington.
Skykomish has a nasty fire that started today, The Bolt Creek Fire, mandatory evacuation order. Snohomish and King County and state troopers are helping people evacuate. Highway 2 is closed, including Stevens Pass.
sab
@Betsy: Where do you live?
Betsy
@Origuy: actually, more people can ride bikes than can drive cars.
Geographic Flatness has been rendered moot by e-bikes that have pedal assist.
livewyre
Aside from what I mentioned above as a social origin for the attraction to number-go-up, I wonder if there’s a social or cultural element to focusing on One Real Solution to energy.
In an earlier thread there was discussion about the Christian origins of the culture a lot of us in the West are swimming in. Not just religious adherence, but the way we teach each other and our kids, and by implication were taught ourselves. I suspect some of that may be coming to the fore in these discussions – an inclination toward defending the light, and standing against the darkness, regardless of the outcome. Our norms may be pushing us to brush off emphasis on process in favor of personal vindication.
That could be part of what’s gotten us into this mess to begin with. There’s a whole gospel of prosperity that argues for a heavenly reward to inventing a large enough needle to thread a camel through. And now that our own carbon exhaust is choking us, we’re looking for the most personally righteous way to address it, rather than building a network of incentives that can actually result in it being addressed.
We’ve taken leave of our causality. Maybe that’s what to fix.
Betsy
@Origuy: It’s entirely, easily possible to do all those things on bikes.
No one wants to “get rid” of cars, just to make it POSSIBLE for MORE PEOPLE to do *anything at all* by walking or biking. It’s all about giving people a real choice.
@Origuy:
trollhattan
@PaulB:
Guess what percentage of Sacramento Regional Transit revenue is from fares? 5.7%
PaulB
How many of those trips are to the grocery store or equivalent, trips that require storage capacity? Or to work sites that require specialized clothing? Or toolboxes, briefcases, and the like?
Incidentally, I’m not sure what study you are referring to, but the Maryland Transportation Institute found that, in 2021, 52% of all trips in the U.S., using all modes of transportation, not just cars, were for distances of less than three miles. That’s not quite the same thing that you’re saying.
Personally, I’m not talking about “cultural geography.” I’m talking about actual geography, like the far-flung, semi-rural community in which I live, where the electric bike is not even remotely a solution, nor are the other options that you and Martin have discussed.
A densely populated, small country can do things that countries like the United States cannot.
Betsy
@sab: That’s irrelevant, I think?
I’m using national transportation data about car travel.
We have such incredibly detailed data on this stuff, it’s wonderful.
NotMax
@Geminid
Must admit to being impressed by one thing about riding buses in Manhattan this trip there.
Whoever decided and stood firm on installing heavy duty air conditioning units in them deserves a hefty bonus.
Eyeroller
I live in a state that won’t spend the money for shoulders on most roads. Bicycling is dangerous and potentially terrifying. I live in a subdivision a good 10 miles from any denser area. There is no public transportation out here. Even in the nearby college town, bike lanes are erratic to nonexistent. How would an e-bike help me? I suppose I could sell the house I’ve lived in for more than a quarter century but I don’t want to do that yet, and anyway somebody else would buy it and we’d still have the same problem. Fortunately I don’t make many trips since I’m now working at home, and will retire fairly soon. I own a Leaf and drive that most of the time. It’s a shame that the infrastructure is so lacking but it’s the reality we have to deal with.
trollhattan
Digby gets my award for oddest tradition conducted upon the passing of the monarch: informing the royal bees.
Plenty of time left, BTW, to top this.
The Thin Black Duke
@Origuy: “Soylent Green is people.”
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Betsy:
EVs are better than the alternative, which is gas vehicles. The problem here isn’t whether or not EVs will save us. The problem is that while some of the public might be willing to drive an EV, they aren’t AT ALL willing to give up their cars or their long commutes to the exurbs. People can talk about how everyone needs to switch to public transit and bicycles until they are absolutely blue in the face, and there is very little appetite outside of the urban areas for making that happen plus a LOT of opposition to spending tax dollars on it. Worse, the pandemic has made a number of people step back from use of public transit because of disease transmission risk, which right wingers have had a good laugh over. If the approach the environmental movement takes is to bash every option other than taking public transit, then there will be NO SAVING US AT ALL because they will tune you out completely.
Betsy
@PaulB: Sure, the US has a lot of low population, far-flung rural areas, but we also have a lot of cities, and suburbs — and by far the most people live in those places, so we need to get cracking.
PaulB
No, it’s not. I’m not aware of a single mass transit system in the U.S. that is not subsidized, by local, state, and federal funding. The latter funds are mostly used for expansion of mass transit rather than day-to-day operations, of course.
Another Scott
@Betsy: Is this the same $600B that Martin wants to spend on (say) 200M electric bikes??
The Inflation Reduction Act supposedly allocates “$370B in climate and clean energy investments” and that’s over multiple years (I think some of the provisions run to 2030?).
Google tells me that 6.6M EVs were sold worldwide last year. Energy.gov says that around 600,000 plugin vehicles (including plugin hybrids) were sold in the US in 2021.
Let’s say 1M US EVs qualify for the $7500 federal tax credit soon. That’s $7.5B/year. Most of the IRA climate and clean energy money is going elsewhere – not for EV consumer tax subsidies.
Politics is the art of the possible. Nobody is going to win national office in 2022 or 2024 on running on ripping up all the roads and parking lots and replacing cars with e-bikes and scooters. We have to keep moving forward as best we can – incremental progress lasts, and consumer choice has a lot to do with how quickly that incremental progress happens.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
Origuy
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
PaulB
Oh, give me a break. No, it’s not. I’ve had enough of this. Feel free to come back when you’ve joined the real world.
The Thin Black Duke
@Origuy: Thank you.
Geminid
@Geminid: I meant, “plenty of executive action taken…in addition to other legislation.”
Betsy
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: It’s not just consumer preference. It’s public policy. We massively subsidize long commutes and suburban sprawl in so many and such thorough-going ways, it’s hard to even quantify how incredibly subsidized those “choices” are.
Everything from federal transportation spending formulas (that overwhelmingly encourage new highway construction and widening) to mortgage interest deductions on larger homes, to USDA grants and loans that promote sprawl-inducing infrastructure for water and sewer, and far more than I can ever list here, are dollars that subsidize car-dependent living choices and massively punish (monetarily ) urban dwellers, apartment renters, people who use a $20 used bike to get to their job at a fast food place.
So we libs have a TON of work to do to change those policies to be more equitable. — and they’ll end up also being far more sustainable, planet-wise.
livewyre
And of course let’s not forget about the incentive for extraction concerns to propagate… well, concerns, about environmental measures that may compete for finite resources. War of all against all: electric vehicles MUST DESTROY mass transit, renewables MUST DESTROY nuclear, all while the consensus towards stopping extraction of carbon is delayed and diverted.
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy:
I doubt that anyone here is opposed to making cities more walkable and bike-friendly. You have to remember that this conversation started when you popped in and announced that EVs won’t save us (again not something anyone was arguing). I would happily take a train the 140 miles from my place to my parents for most of my visits. I would also happily take a street car from home to work if that was available most days. I support building the infrastructure for that. My guess is that most people here agree with me.
Jay
@Omnes Omnibus:
try “soused” herring. Lightly poached in vinigar with lots of black pepper. Ususally cooked in a baking tray, with a foil covering to keep the moisture in. The “souse” gets tossed due to all the oil it accumulates from the herring.
The 2000 RAV 4 cacked in January, last year. I havn,y gotten around to fixing it yet. I walk or take Skytrain. It’s funny. When we lived at the “Compound”, the RAV was our escape vehicle. Lack of access to transit was a key issue. Here, I’m 200 yards away from a transit center, (Bus, Special Bus, Skytrain).
zhena gogolia
@Betsy: LOTS OF US CANNOT RIDE BIKES
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@trollhattan: I relate. We bought our house based on the idea that I could bike to most workplaces for my industry. That was how it was for a while, but not now. Now, work is a half hour by car and utterly unrealistic by bike. Fortunately, I can work from home some days, but not every day.
Omnes Omnibus
::shutters::
narya
I am not going to start riding a bike again. I don’t own a car, mind you, and I chose my home in part because of its proximity to public transportation. A fair amount of my food is delivered (my CSA share, my fish share); the other, bulk stuff is not stuff I could carry on a bike. And, frankly, not everyone is ABLE to ride a bike. Should we make it more possible to ride bikes? Absolutely! But it’s not the only answer, any more than EVs are. Every step in the right direction is a step in the right direction; we’re going to need a lot of good steps, and it doesn’t help if we insist that the only mode of transport is a purity pony.
MagdaInBlack
@zhena gogolia: Camilla’s expressions are interesting.
WaterGirl
@Kelly: I was about to say “that was fast” because it seemed like your power would be off for much longer than that, but you would surely want to smack me if I said that because being without power is totally disruptive and it surely didn’t feel “fast” to you!
Still, glad your power is back!
Jay
@zhena gogolia:
It’s just like sex, once you learn you never forget, it becomes muscle memory, //
NotMax
Entertaining the thought of currently riding a bike is enough to make the creaky, obstinate knees scream in protest.
ksmiami
@Mike E: I was all Moderna for first 3 vaccinations, but then I just had the flu plus phizer omicon bivalent vax yesterday. So far no side effects
Martin
@PaulB: We’re already struggling to meet battery demands. Pricing was expected to fall continuously, but battery prices have gone up in the last 2 years, which has hurt EV uptake.
The price isn’t just an arbitrary measure, it’s a reflection of the challenges in the supply chain below it. The IEA models that we’ll have 300 million more ICEs on the road in 2030 than today, despite the growth in the EV market.
And in the markets where you see a high EV uptake, they aren’t EVs as Americans recognize them. The Mini EV and AMI are city cars with top speeds of maybe 35MPH. They don’t replace conventional cars, but they fill a gap between conventional cars and other forms of transit, but still require the kind of change in social infrastructure – low speed city streets, etc. that US cities are resisting (a change which would also unlock bike riders from the dangers they perceive riding on existing streets). So even the existing rosy forecasts for EVs based on global sales are misleading *in an American context*. The best selling EV in China has a top speed of 45MPH, a range of 70 miles, and sells for $5K. That’s not even a market we recognize in the US. It’s much closer to golf cart than car. And that might be a solution here, but it’s not the solution US market incentives are chasing. You can’t use the federal EV subsidy to buy something like that, and if the changes needed to accommodate bikes is too much of an ask, it’s going to be too much of an ask for these.
Globally we need hundreds of new mines to open, while we also criticize how mining operations work. The US wants to open more mines in the US, but the minerals we need to meet our demand are primarily located on indigenous lands. Are we just going to force those as we have been oil pipelines?
The underlying problem is that the global social goal is one transportation vehicle per person, which is what the US has. And the underlying question is ‘can we afford to produce 4,000 lbs of steel and lithium and cobalt per person every 10 years’ which is the standard the US has set. And the answer is no, we absolutely cannot do that and meet climate targets.
The only way it works is if you embrace the idea that ONLY the US is entitled to that, offshore the emissions for mining, refining, and construction to other countries denying those countries the same standard of living. And historically, that’s exactly what would have happened, but now those countries have the exact same emissions target, and they’re pushing back. No, they’re not going to open a new mine because Americans demand 50x larger battery packs per person than everyone else, or because we refuse to build trains. They can’t afford the emissions, so they’re saying no.
This is a new dynamic. Net Zero is the first time we’ve ever had a universal economic constraint on every nation. You can’t sell out your human rights for economic gain, or plunder your natural resources, etc. That’s why you’re seeing Europe and Asia both reworking their cities, changing their transportation expectations. And doing it *rapidly*.
sab
@Betsy: It is not irrelevent at all. We don’t all live in big cities.
By the way, public transportation in the Netherlands and UK really sucks if you don’t live in a city, or if you need to get anywhere outside of major commuting times, same as it does in lots of California or all of Ohio.
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@Betsy: How do you think we get public policy?
VOTER PREFERENCE.
Again, you can talk about good policy for days. If it isn’t what most voters want, then either it doesn’t get enacted or if it does, they will get ticked off and overturn it. That applies to absolutely every incentive you have just listed. Why do you think suburbanites run back to the GOP every time the Democrats fix GOP blunders? It isn’t just racism, misogyny, and homophobia. Suburbanites and rural voters HATE incentives that make it more difficult for them to do everything in their cars, and actively vote based on those preferences. Until you figure out a way to change that, NONE of you policy preferences are possible outside of very dense and very blue cities. If they are not realistic across most of America, then those policies will NOT save us.
Betsy
@PaulB: The real world that requires mandatory car ownership just to get a loaf of bread.
I know. It’s bizarre and unreal, and it does suck.
Jay
@Omnes Omnibus:
it’s actually good, not at all like pickled herring.
We are “supposed” to eat lower down on the food chain, mackerel, herring, smelt, flounder, (dabs), gaspereau, shad, what were basics as a kid growing up in the Maritimes, and later in BC, where during Herring Season, (the gut the fish for the roe, ship it off to Japan, then the rest becomes animal meal), you can buy a 5 gallon bucket, ( and the bucket) of herring for $5 with the proceeds going to the Childrens hospital.
The wife likes lobster, I would kill for a frypan full of smelt cooked in a little butter with black pepper, but on the Wet Coast, you can only buy them frozen and they arn”t the same.
livewyre
@Betsy: That’s why I’m focusing just as much on how to change things as on how they need to be. Along the way we might even discover a new way for them to be. Especially in case we need it.
Steeplejack
* DVR Alert *
Excellent neo-noir movie starting in a couple of minutes on TCM: Get Carter (1971), with Michael Caine. “A small-time London gangster ties his brother’s murder to a porno movie and a crime boss.”
eachother
Open Thread: Blimey if what I’m seeing in the UK isn’t going to give Covid a boost. A lot of people shoulder to shoulder. Also, grief antagonizes mucous membranes. Possibly offering an irritated, fertile repository?
Omnes Omnibus
@Jay: No, thank you.
Another Scott
@Martin: You’ve mentioned before that EV battery prices have gone up and you apparently think that will continue. Cite, please?
Counterpoint:
KoreaHerald (from August 16):
Prediction is hard, especially about the future, but most of the world is still investing in big ways in EVs and batteries, with the expectation that prices will continue to drop.
I’m old enough to remember that there was a glut in ICE auto production around the world – I see no reason to expect that we won’t soon (10-20 years (1-2 auto design cycles)) have a glut in EV production around the world as well.
Cheers,
Scott.
Omnes Omnibus
@Steeplejack:
Let us never mention the Stallone remake. Never.
delphinium
Don’t think you can extrapolate what a city does, be it Amsterdam and Paris, and say an entire country can do so. Should we try and model what they are doing and see where it will work here in the states? Sure, but replacing cars with bikes/public transit won’t be done everywhere due to the vast differences in climate, infrastructure, population, and culture.
They have programs that assist homeowners with replacing drafty windows and doors along with improving insulation, and upgrading to energy saving appliances. Hope there is a greater push to implement these programs in more areas. There should also be investments in education to tell homeowners and renters how to lower their energy bill via smart thermostat settings, using fans rather than AC, and shades or blackout curtains to keep summer heat out. In some areas this may be easier to do than redoing the entire infrastructure.
If we can try and make some smaller changes on a large scale that will also lower the carbon footprint and will potentially even out for those people who may need to drive (disabled, work off hours, limited access to public transportation or bike trails, etc). Simply stating “EVs won’t save us” seems incredibly counterproductive.
Betsy
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: Most people, overwhelmingly in fact, would like to be able to bike and walk safely to nearby destinations like parks, daily shopping, and that sort of thing.
Walkable places are so precious to people, that many people will save up all year just to be able to spend a long weekend or a week in such a place.
Walkable bikable places are so incredibly popular, and we build so little of this type of place and infrastructure, that the few places that DO have this wildly popular aspect to them are in such demand that they are grotesquely overpriced.
No one, literally, is talking about ripping up all the roads and taking away the cars. The goal is simple, to make walking and biking safe and a realistic choice, for at least a larger proportion of the millions of Americans who would *like* to be able to exercise the right to move about their communities safely and pleasantly, at all ages.
Hopefully we libs are willing to take the lead in making this happen as much as we can.
Does anyone have any idea how CHEAP it is to build safe, high-comfort bike infra? — It’s literally cheaper than putting in sidewalks. Countries everywhere are building “8-80” bike networks. That means bike infra that is safe and comfortable to use for everyone from age 8 to 80.
(By the way Origuy, well-designed bike paths are highly useful for people who use wheelchairs, as are sidewalks and safe street crossings. And mobility-impaired transit users are a lot more able to access buses and other transit when decent walking infra is in place to get to the stops)
If the commentariat here doesn’t want to reduce subsidies for unsustainable systems, and do everything possible to give Americans sustainable transportation choices, that they overwhelmingly would like to have, then there really is cause for despair.
Jay
@Omnes Omnibus:
if you put lemon or lime on your seafood, cooked or civeche, you will like soused herring.
Omnes Omnibus
@Jay:
Dude, stop trying to make fetch happen.
Mo MacArbie
Just one data point: if you’re as lucky as I used to be to walk to work and back past three grocery stores, it’s easy to just buy a backpack-load at a time. The weekly trunk-filling expedition isn’t required. Alas, I’m in car hell now, but it was great while it lasted. I’d love to find a similar situation again.
That said, when I read things along the lines of “We need to change society”, I start scrolling.
Betsy
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: Then eventually that becomes a problem so unsustainable that it will fix itself (in ways we won’t especially enjoy, which I’d like to avoid).
or in other words —
Not everything in government is political. Sometimes the laws of physics win.
livewyre
@Betsy: The only cause for despair is in mistaking disagreement for opposition. No one here is your moral adversary. We just have perspectives other than yours.
Remember that it’s necessary to take other perspectives into account when building consensus, assuming that’s your goal.
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: The number of straw men you have burned here has added a lot to the world’s CO2 levels.
Geminid
I remember that someone here recently excerpted an article examining the problem of extracting minerals for all the batteries required for projected wide scale use of EVs. I wish I’d noted the source. Anyway, the writer said that dire predictions of scarcity and pollution were exaggerated, that among other factors advances in material technology, and battery recycling that has already started and can be scaled up, meant that the sceptics are talking about an insoluble problem that is being solved even as they speak.
This is similar to criticism of the CHIPS+ bill that I saw here. “They are talking about manufacturing more chips, but that requires a lot of water and we’re running out of water!” As if chip manufacturing cannot be made more efficient in water usage, and water wastage in other areas will never be curtailed.
This is an example of what I call the “Dumb American” idea, that we dimwitted Americans will simply never recognize problems, much less solve them. This tends to breed a kind of “revolutionary”nihilism that I think underrates our potential for adaptation and rules out any progress beyond projected ideal solutions that, as a practical matter, can never be achieved anyway.
twbrandt (formerly tom)
@Betsy:
The auto manufacturers are not the sole villain here. The public has indicated its strong preference to be able to drive anywhere it wants. This is reflected in transportation policies, zoning, etc, which have strong public support. Public attitudes must change.
delphinium
Will also say that in a lot of the European cities, cars were already limited due to the existing infrastructure (eg, narrow roads), so walking/biking to places was far more common anyway. Therefore limiting cars further and building more infrastructure for biking/walking was an easier lift than it will be in the states. It is definitely worth doing here, but with the understanding it will take time, will not be able to be done everywhere, and that taking smaller steps in the meantime should be encouraged.
Betsy
@Omnes Omnibus: I’ve tried in sincerity to tackle the objections folks have raised, one by one, with relevant information, even facts! And candid persuasion
But I’m a transportation planner, so this is not the first time I’ve had to play “Bike Bingo” with people who are hesitant. I don’t mind.
Steeplejack
@Omnes Omnibus:
🙊
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: I think you missed my point.
livewyre
@Betsy: That’s the problem – I’m not convinced at this point that consensus is what you’re after, only recruitment. There isn’t only a technical and economic case to be made, but political, cultural, and social ones as well, and you’re coming across as insensitive at best to those.
I appreciate the expertise you bring to bear on the former two, but unless what you’re satisfied with doing is assuring yourself of having tried your best before moving on, then we have to ask for more than that. Are we solving a problem or just staking claims?
Betsy
@Martin: You are a lot more focused on the specific harms and benefits than I have been on this thread, and it is wonderful.
I’ve barely mentioned the massive problem that our car mandatory transportation system imposes on poor people and minorities. Cars and their costs to poor household are a huge part our affordable housing probelm.
People of color and low-income people are FAR more likely to be injured and killed while walking and biking than non-POC and higher income people. Mostly because of shitty, dangerous, car-only infra where they live and work.
And, while people love to hate on Lycra cyclists, utility cyclists are hugely overlooked. The millions of people who use a beater bike to get to a hard, low-paying job are just as entitled to have safe roads for their commutes as any suburban car commuter.
We libs should be standing up for these things.
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: Is there anyone in this thread who said they were against walkability or bike friendliness? Anyone?
delphinium
One last note, I live in Central NY, well-known for snow, snow, and more snow. While I do not mind walking in cold weather (or rain for that matter), it is understandable many people will find trying to walk thru snow/icy sidewalks an unpleasant, if not sometimes dangerous undertaking (that includes trying to walk to a transit stop).
As other commenters have already mentioned, there are certain areas where infrastructure rebuilds and embracing public transportation will work incredibly well. For those areas, where it will not, we should focus more strongly on other ways to cut carbon emissions and save energy.
livewyre
@Betsy: Standing up for them in what way? I’d like to hear whether you’re willing to consider the perspectives of others in your approach to conveyance of ideas as well as physical conveyance.
zhena gogolia
Was eversor reborn as a transportation specialist?
Betsy
@zhena gogolia: okay, so don’t ride one?
Omnes Omnibus
@Betsy: I don’t get the impression that you are trying to persuade anyone.
livewyre
@Betsy: This is an excellent example of advocacy from a standpoint of personal vindication to the exclusion of consensus. In terms of making a sympathetic case, it represents a near-perfect liability. Less like this, please.
Betsy
@livewyre: in my case, I’ve devoted my entire professional and volunteer life to advancing sustainability in the built environment, helping communities navigate towards their transportation goals in that direction, and advocating for more sustainable and people-focused policies at the state and federal level. Have done most of my work in poor, marginalized communities, as well as conservative rural areas, and in some suburbs and urban centers of privileged folk as well.
I can’t answer for what others may be doing, but I always encourage white liberals to advocate in areas where it can help non-suburban, non-white, non-privileged people, especially the transportation disadvantaged, who struggle with *basic, safe mobility* that allows a person to work, access services and goods, and generally be able to participate as a full person in the world.
Mobility is a condition to freedom.
Betsy
@livewyre: Sorry to hear you don’t like what I have to say! Have a great evening
zhena gogolia
We’re fucked.
livewyre
@Betsy: If you’re willing to dismiss and override others in your advocacy, then the trajectory of your efforts is proprietary, not public. That’s the bottom line – the non-corporate version. I’m disappointed that a lot of points that I agree with in the abstract are being represented in such a way. I hope you’ll reconsider your approach.
Omnes Omnibus
@zhena gogolia: Well, we did let Betsy take over the thread.
Ella in New Mexico
@Betsy:
this whole “EV’s are as bad as ICE’s” drivel is exactly why we still have millions of Ford F350 Super Duty Extended Cab trucks with one driver picking up a case of Miller Lite and some wings to grill clogging up our Walmart Parking lots
Average guy hears this kind of perfectionist drivel and says fuck it nothing is good enough for these environmentalists gimme the gas guzzle
And seriously, it will take an entire generation of bike riders and social enginers to make the world safe for an 80 y/o grandma to pedal 4 miles to pick up her cat food and oatmeal without sustaining either a head injury or becoming an easy target for criminals to roll.
And that’s in an urban setting–how bout people who live 30 miles from a grocery store? How does grandma bike that one in 10 feet of snow?
Planet you think we live on woman?
satby
@Betsy: If you think the average American is going to trade their cars for bikes (even electric ones) you’re quite mistaken. That will be a multigenerational change, and only in urbanized areas if at all. Hell, a majority of people in urban areas with bike trails and public transit still opt to take their cars.
satby
@zhena gogolia: not enuf anti-religion in this troll’s schtick.
cain
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony:
They might give them up if we switched to autonomous cars instead. We can have a lot less out there. Additionally jobs should allow for remote work so folks can work anywhere.
PaulB
LOL… That’s freaking hilarious. Because the one noteworthy aspect of all of your posts here is that you have addressed precisely *none* of the objections that people have raised. Not a single one.
You have instead scolded, lied, and generally behaved like a ridiculous, preening, narcissistic, holier-than-thou asshole, alienating the very people who would be most sympathetic to your cause. Your capacity for self-delusion is staggering.
delphinium
@satby: And this is one of the huge issues with just stating ‘Amsterdam did it!” Car culture is very different between the US and Europe. There is nothing wrong with looking at how other cities have transformed their transportation, and determining what may be applicable here. But our car-centric way of life needs to be acknowledged, along with the reality that changes will take decades and in all likelihood will only be possible in certain parts of our country.
PaulB
Well, she is a rather determined and persistent troll, so that’s not too much of a surprise. And yes, I’m just as guilty as anyone for responding to her bullshit.
I loved her comment that she’s been a “transportation planner over 20 years,” something that is very hard to believe given the rest of her comments here. I’ve read a few websites and seen a few YouTube videos, myself. Plus, I recently had my driveway paved, so I guess those qualify me as a “transportation planner,” too.
gwangung
@PaulB: She’s using the wrong tools to attack the problem. This is a social and cultural change problem. None of the tools she brings are appropriate to address those problems.
PaulB
@gwangung: Oh, I know. But even disregarding that, she’s been blithely dismissing and handwaving away every counter argument throughout this entire thread, despite her claim to be oh so carefully addressing every single one of them.
Your point, and the points made by others, highlights the limitations of this “transportation planner over 20 years.” How can someone possibly spend 20 years on a topic and yet know so little about it?
Uncle Cosmo
@livewyre:
You’ve just stated, in a very calm and respectful fashion something analogous to what I was about to say in much less measured tones:
I cordially invite her and her “transportation advocacy” to Fuck. Right. Off.
gwangung
@PaulB: I wonder how long until we become shills for the energy industry. I see so much self-righteousness that I’m reminded of Berniebots.
PaulB
@gwangung: I suspect that nothing much will change here. The blog tends to be pretty tough on purity trolls like this. They rarely stick around long.
What’s ridiculous and sad is that it would be so easy to foster a good conversation here. All she would have to say is something like, “Hey, electric vehicles are great, but they aren’t enough. There are some other things we could be doing in urban areas, in particular. Here are a few ideas we should be investing more in, and some examples from other countries.”
Had she done that, and then engaged in an honest discussion thereafter, the thread would have been much more informative, and she wouldn’t have made herself look so ridiculous.
Personally, if I were looking into urban planning and transportation planning, one area I’d be focused on is zoning.
PaulB
So, just got a text on my phone telling me to evacuate right now because of a wildfire: don’t take time to pack, just get in the car and go. Always a fun thing to receive.
Fortunately, this was a false alarm for me. It was supposed to go just to the residents of a small town some miles away but was instead sent to a ton of folks. Thoughts and prayers for them, as that would be terrifying.
Geminid
@PaulB: I think the commenter was being honest when she claimed 20 years experience as a transportation planner. But that came across like she thought she could carry her arguments by pulling rank on the nonprofessionals. Good luck trying that here!
That may not have been the intent. I thought the way she claimed that automotive company owners and managers were the main beneficiaries of our favoring automobile use was disingenuous, though . She did it twice and each time I thought wow, does she think I don’t know there are also hundreds of thousands of autoworkers and many communities who benefit from the industry? I think this kind of rhetoric tends to detract from an argument.
That said, I wouldnt call her a troll and I hope she isn’t so discouraged that she gives up. This was a discussion that got a lot of good ideas on the table, I thought.
I think this commenter has made a lot of good contributions on other topics, and the ones sgmhe made today were not so bad, but maybe too stubborn.
rikyrah
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony:
Was not a Pete fan. But, he is very smart and I enjoy he that makes the right wing crazy.
dww44
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
@cain: That is some technology I do think has promise.
PaulB
It’s possible, but given the ignorance of some of her remarks, I’m skeptical.
She’s of the variety that I call a “purity troll,” someone who is so convinced of their own righteousness, and of the rightness of their cause, that they cannot even conceive that others might not see things the same way; cannot conceive that there might be alternate approaches that are just as good, if not better; cannot conceive that there are significant obstacles that they are ignoring or handwaving away. You cannot argue with someone like that.
A typical example of a purity troll would be someone on the left fighting against the ACA, and bashing Obama and Pelosi because they didn’t get Medicare for All.
The discussion in this thread generated much more heat than light, and that is largely due to the intemperate remarks of those two individuals. And, of course, because of idiots like me who got sucked in and responded rather than pieing them and moving on. I’ll try to do better next time.