Benzina Zero (@benzinazero@mastodon.green)
mastodon.green
Attached: 1 image Per ridurre il traffico la piramide delle priorità deve essere rovesciata, così. In più si riducono smog, rumore, pericolo, incidenti e si migliora la salute dei cittadini e la vivibilità della città https://benzinazero.wordpress.com/2026/02/08/la-piramide-inversa-del-traffico-urbano/ #traffico #mobilità #urbanistica #politica

За да подобрим живота в нашите градове, тези приоритети трябва да бъдат управлявани.

  • br3d@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    14 days ago

    A small nuance is that car sharing is usually better than taxis. A taxi is driving around empty around half the time and has an average occupancy below 1.0. With car share, all the mileage involves moving people to places

    • No_Maines_Land@lemmy.caEnglish
      6·
      14 days ago

      I think that’s a regional dependant one in terms of which should be prioritized. There a lot of factors that could lean on way or another.

      For example, while Taxis drive around empty, car shares sit around empty. That’s a geometry problem that will be different city to city.

      Also, car shares only allow people who can drive (and their passengers) to travel. Taxis can take anyone.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      14 days ago

      A private car typically sits empty and unused 95% of the time, with all its embodied energy and materials, blocking up 10 square meters of street that might otherwise contain sidewalk or trees.

      Thought experiment. Imagine a city where all the car owners sold their cars and took taxis instead. I’m pretty sure this has been modeled and the result is always a massive improvement in terms of resources and space.

      • br3d@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        14 days ago

        Fair comment. On my fantasy mayoral system there’d be no storing cars on public land, so the space issue might be moot

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          14 days ago

          That’s my fantasy too. And I understand it’s roughly the situation in Japan, where urban streets generally do not have parked cars (or sidewalks, alas). It’s because cars are understood to be just another form of private property, to be stored privately. After all, even in the West you don’t just leave your property in a public place, for some reasons it’s only cars. A mind-blowing framing of the problem.

  • yardratianSoma@lemmy.caEnglish
    4·
    14 days ago

    See, the problem with reversing the pyramid, primarily for societies addicted to cars, is that even if all infrastructure was changed to make things the most safe for cyclists and pedestrians, the damage to the mind of the average citizen has to considered as well. The lack of exercise, the lack of the ability to consider one’s individual contribution to environmental pollution and the socioeconomic relationship people have with their private vehicles all have to be dealt as well in order for the outside world to need for such change.

    • No_Maines_Land@lemmy.caEnglish
      5·
      14 days ago

      It’s a process, not a problem. Based on analogous estimates, that process takes about 20 years.

      Infrastructure isn’t a quick fix either, so the physical and mental domains can progress at the same time.

  • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    41·
    14 days ago

    Nice. I’ve looked into this question fairly deeply and this seems fairly accurate.

    Two things that people find counter-intuitive (or in the second case prefer not to think about):

    • an intercity bus is usually greener than a high-speed train, even discounting energy source - mainly because speed carries a major efficiency penalty
    • air travel is an unmitigated disaster on the level of personal carbon footprints - there’s basically no way to make it sustainable