433
We don’t just need electric cars, we need fewer cars - Greenpeace International
(www.greenpeace.org)
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
433 points (95.6% liked)
Europe
11756 readers
1111 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Those could elect politicans who improve their situation. Otherwise, it just looks like people have chosen a non-sustainable way of life, do nothing to improve that, but moan when they are bitten by consequences. I even know about a community outside of Munich where people oppose to set up bus connection (apparently they fear that poorer people move there).
And of course, poor people should receive help - but come on, not everyone who moved to a large house in the middle of nowhere is poor.
Apart from that, by far most the population lives in cities, suburbia, and metropolitan areas. Here is where improvements help in the quickest way, and often are most efficient.
You really like putting the onus on people who are held captive by systems they have very little control over.
I thought the US is a free and democratic country? What happened?
Haha...
Running buses in rural areas just doesn't make economic sense. There are just too few people, buses are running empty most of the time, buses are rare and bus stops are far away. Also, in those rural areas many people don't have supermarkets within walking distance. Did you ever try to bring an entire shopping cart full of groceries home by bus? Because that's how much a family can consume in a week.
You are describing the status quo, not the changed system we need. The superb systems of Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Berlin, Vienna, Paris did not appear overnight out of the blue sky. They are result of political decisions, planning, and sustained, persistent efforts.
By the way, the US had in the 1920ies to 1940ies a traffic system based on dense street car, bus, and train connections. Germany in the 1950ies. People had far less money then. It is certainly not uneconomical.
Funny that you ask, last week I went to the beverages market with my bike trailer and because it was hot, I asked my older neighbor whether I should get something for him, too.
I returned with four beer boxes of about 15 kilogram each, which is about 60 kilograms, a full load of the trailer.
If you are in Europe, I can't recommend the company "hinterher" enough which produces these trailers: Their web site is at https://hinterher.com/ . They are light, extremely sturdy, almost over-engineered, and fully foldable. Not cheap but worth every cent.
Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Berlin, Vienna and Paris are large cities. If you try to run as many buses in a rural area, they will be empty most of the time. If you try to have as many supermarkets as in a large city, they will be empty too.
Also, all of those cities have a mild climate. In a harsh climate, even walking to a bus stop is untenable for some people.
Only in a dominantly car-based system.
Many poorer countries cannot even afford such a car-based system. The use a system based on public transport which already shows that it is more economical.
That's also a macro-economic argument against cars: They cost a lot of resources and money which is not well spent. Ultimately, money for gas ends up for drilling holes into the ground. For EVs, it is not much better. While a transport system based on bikes and public transport leaves far more money in the local economy.
Because rural areas have smaller population density, there are fewer passengers. In such places, there are usually fewer routes, bigger interval between buses, no service during nights and/or weekends. If you need to go somewhere where there is no direct bus line, you may need to take a long detour. Running buses where there are few passengers is uneconomical: an empty bus uses more fuel than a full car. Bicycles can help, but not everyone is fit enough to ride long distance. Also people don't want to ride bicycles during rain, snow or heat. In such places, most people have cars. At least there is no shortage of parking space.
Did you try riding uphill with that much load? In hilly places with steep inclines, a bicycle is almost useless, because it is easier to walk uphill than to ride.
Hehe, I lived in Edinburgh which has a couple pretty impressive slopes. My favorite was Princess street down to Dundas street, snd up the Blackford Hill. It is really nice to have a hub gear and hydraulic disk brakes there.
If I did that kind of shopping there, I'd use an eBike.
And no, most larger German cities and their surroundings are pretty flat, because the are situated at large rivers, such as Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Hannover, Cologne, Frankfurt, Leipzig, Dresden, Bremen, and so on. Stuttgart being an exception.