Always hated that argument for big cars. You buy a new bed/mattress/big furniture like once a year. Delivery is maybe 50 bucks. The extra cost of a car big enough to transport that stuff is in the thousands. Somehow everyone gets upset when confronted with delivery fees while being perfectly fine with dishing out cash for a car.
Redo the fucking math.
I think that’s a bit of an oversimplification of the argument
I use my car to transport my bike, surfboard, skis, dog, lawnmower, buy furniture, buy lumber etc for projects, and more. It just can’t be beat in terms of convenience. For repairs around the house, gardening, etc, it’s a must-have.
A 1998 CR-V does all that and it cost me $2500. Bomb-proof b20b also, I love it. I don’t think you can beat that in terms of convenience.
I’m all for trains and buses (electric busses would be great!) but the utility wanes when lots of people bring stuff. I used to have a 45 minute bus commute, and the bus had racks for bikes. I’d bring my bike to do the 5 mile trip to and from bus stops at both ends. But lots of people wanted to do that, and you’d have to be early in line to get your bike on the bus, otherwise you had to wait for the next one. I can’t imagine people trying to bring 2x4s or potted plants on the bus! Or their pets, another issue altogether.
So you’ll buy an electric car for some 20k+ once that car breaks down to haul your frequent furniture and lumber purchases?
Because the discussion isn’t about ‘I have a car and won’t exchange it for a train’ but ‘moving transportation onto trains instead of electric cars would be a lot more beneficial as the future of transportation’
So I’ve worked in intermodal (port to train to truck) freight logistics. What you’re missing here is that
“last mile delivery” is a substantial portion of logistics. Semi trucks generally do not take goods to anywhere but big-box stores. Box trucks do that.
intermodal is great, but even if we massively expended rail in the US, trucks would be needed to haul a majority of freight. Logistics deals are negotiated on narrow margins, sometimes down to individual dollars. It is a MASSIVE industry, and intermodal is only truly competitive with certain freight coming and going from certain places.
The Wal-Mart in Whitesburg KY is not ever going to have an intermodal station in it, but they still need food for the grocery store, parts for the hardware store, etc
It is a massive benefit to society to pursue driverless, electrical vehicles, for the logistics industry alone.
I think freight logistics is another topic though. (Last mile) Deliveries will likely stay on trucks and vans, simply because it isn’t feasible to have tracks to everyone’s house. Though increased usage of trains would probably still be cheaper and more efficient here.
My point of argument was related to personal travelling (getting to work, buying groceries, …), as the comment I replied to discussed. Those are activities we could or should probably try to move onto rails or more generally public transport rather than trying to have the same number of cars but just electrified.
Though there might also be regional differences in feasibility. European cities tend to be much more built around public transport and walkable distances, making it much easier to adopt such measures than most of rest of the world (for various reasons).
As soon as car makers start releasing electric vehicles that aren’t concept art and actually useful, I’m first in line. Waiting for phev suv or ute to make it’s way to Oz. (The Mitsubishi only has a phev range of about40km, doesn’t cut it for even a local commute
While I understand and agree with your sentiment, there are a lot of cases where delivery simply isn’t offered. Also, I’d appreciate a less agressive tone as we are intending to have civil discussion.
I agree that public transportation, infrastructure , and zoning laws need a massive overhaul to promote more walkable and pedestrian-friendly cities, but it’s not realistic to eliminate privately owned cars entirely. They will always exist, so it’s best to ensure these cars are as efficient as possible.
Funnily Ive got downvoted for bringing the same argument against replaceable phone batteries in another thread. Like, just pay a tech once every few years to do it for you.
It is, slightly, but that’s not the point. The point is that even when swappable batteries were the norn, most people never did change them. And even among the ones who did, few did this more than once. So is this additional complexity even worth it? e.g. if it costs one penny to make unit with swappable battery, and it costs $1 to perform a swap without it, does it makes sense to do it for 1 in 100 customers who does?
Please tell me where I can get a custom mold for a penny. It was just an example.
I dont understand how you dont see it. You can buy X because you might want to Y, but you probably never would, and even if you do, its better hand it over to professionals. You can put “truck/moving furniture” or “phone/change battery”, same argument.
I see it, it’s just not the same argument. The other argument is like this: X costs thousands while Y costs tens. Y is cheaper.
And it’s bullshit that moving furniture or changing a battery should be hand over to professionals. It can be a simple task.
Also I don’t agree that most people wouldn’t change the battery of it was easily replaceable. We’ll see in a few years when most phones would have easily replaceable battery due to the EU law.
![[meme] Trains are 100000x easier to electrify and automate than cars, so why does everyone keep talking about electric and driverless cars?](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/11c37658-7c32-4cc2-b12c-6ced348bd09d.png){kind=link}
Always hated that argument for big cars. You buy a new bed/mattress/big furniture like once a year. Delivery is maybe 50 bucks. The extra cost of a car big enough to transport that stuff is in the thousands. Somehow everyone gets upset when confronted with delivery fees while being perfectly fine with dishing out cash for a car. Redo the fucking math.
I have a car, and there was no chance i was gonna try and fit it in my hatch back.
that basically means this argument boils down to “every single person needs a truck large enough for a mattress” which is bloody insane
I think that’s a bit of an oversimplification of the argument
I use my car to transport my bike, surfboard, skis, dog, lawnmower, buy furniture, buy lumber etc for projects, and more. It just can’t be beat in terms of convenience. For repairs around the house, gardening, etc, it’s a must-have.
A 1998 CR-V does all that and it cost me $2500. Bomb-proof b20b also, I love it. I don’t think you can beat that in terms of convenience.
I’m all for trains and buses (electric busses would be great!) but the utility wanes when lots of people bring stuff. I used to have a 45 minute bus commute, and the bus had racks for bikes. I’d bring my bike to do the 5 mile trip to and from bus stops at both ends. But lots of people wanted to do that, and you’d have to be early in line to get your bike on the bus, otherwise you had to wait for the next one. I can’t imagine people trying to bring 2x4s or potted plants on the bus! Or their pets, another issue altogether.
So you’ll buy an electric car for some 20k+ once that car breaks down to haul your frequent furniture and lumber purchases?
Because the discussion isn’t about ‘I have a car and won’t exchange it for a train’ but ‘moving transportation onto trains instead of electric cars would be a lot more beneficial as the future of transportation’
So I’ve worked in intermodal (port to train to truck) freight logistics. What you’re missing here is that
“last mile delivery” is a substantial portion of logistics. Semi trucks generally do not take goods to anywhere but big-box stores. Box trucks do that.
intermodal is great, but even if we massively expended rail in the US, trucks would be needed to haul a majority of freight. Logistics deals are negotiated on narrow margins, sometimes down to individual dollars. It is a MASSIVE industry, and intermodal is only truly competitive with certain freight coming and going from certain places.
The Wal-Mart in Whitesburg KY is not ever going to have an intermodal station in it, but they still need food for the grocery store, parts for the hardware store, etc
It is a massive benefit to society to pursue driverless, electrical vehicles, for the logistics industry alone.
I think freight logistics is another topic though. (Last mile) Deliveries will likely stay on trucks and vans, simply because it isn’t feasible to have tracks to everyone’s house. Though increased usage of trains would probably still be cheaper and more efficient here.
My point of argument was related to personal travelling (getting to work, buying groceries, …), as the comment I replied to discussed. Those are activities we could or should probably try to move onto rails or more generally public transport rather than trying to have the same number of cars but just electrified.
Though there might also be regional differences in feasibility. European cities tend to be much more built around public transport and walkable distances, making it much easier to adopt such measures than most of rest of the world (for various reasons).
As soon as car makers start releasing electric vehicles that aren’t concept art and actually useful, I’m first in line. Waiting for phev suv or ute to make it’s way to Oz. (The Mitsubishi only has a phev range of about40km, doesn’t cut it for even a local commute
While I understand and agree with your sentiment, there are a lot of cases where delivery simply isn’t offered. Also, I’d appreciate a less agressive tone as we are intending to have civil discussion.
I agree that public transportation, infrastructure , and zoning laws need a massive overhaul to promote more walkable and pedestrian-friendly cities, but it’s not realistic to eliminate privately owned cars entirely. They will always exist, so it’s best to ensure these cars are as efficient as possible.
Funnily Ive got downvoted for bringing the same argument against replaceable phone batteries in another thread. Like, just pay a tech once every few years to do it for you.
How is it the same argument? A phone with a replaceable battery isn’t more expensive than one whitouth a replaceable battery.
It is, slightly, but that’s not the point. The point is that even when swappable batteries were the norn, most people never did change them. And even among the ones who did, few did this more than once. So is this additional complexity even worth it? e.g. if it costs one penny to make unit with swappable battery, and it costs $1 to perform a swap without it, does it makes sense to do it for 1 in 100 customers who does?
Thats absolutely not the same argument. And please tell me where can I change the battery of my phone for 1$?
Please tell me where I can get a custom mold for a penny. It was just an example.
I dont understand how you dont see it. You can buy X because you might want to Y, but you probably never would, and even if you do, its better hand it over to professionals. You can put “truck/moving furniture” or “phone/change battery”, same argument.
Not a realistic example at all.
I see it, it’s just not the same argument. The other argument is like this: X costs thousands while Y costs tens. Y is cheaper.
And it’s bullshit that moving furniture or changing a battery should be hand over to professionals. It can be a simple task.
Also I don’t agree that most people wouldn’t change the battery of it was easily replaceable. We’ll see in a few years when most phones would have easily replaceable battery due to the EU law.