Climate Change/Mass Extinction Megathread

[crazy canuck]

Incremental change away from car ownership is happening here. A main cause has been deliberate government policy.  Over the last 20 years roads have been narrowed to create dedicated bike lanes.  Bus only lanes have been built. Zoning regulations allow building condo projects with fewer parking spots compared to units but also require local retail spaces and green spaces so that walking to shops and recreation areas is possible and preferred.

And we are not a small country

[Josquius]

Okay but you're talking about bits and bobs and tweaks here. But earlier it was about where the focus should be and Syt's point that it'd require a lot of changes to our lived environment and infrastructure.

If it's bits and bobs, then I've no issue. If it's more substantial than that then I don't agree that the focus should be transport policy I think climate is the focus and decarbonisation needs can broadly be met by EVs. And to Syt's point about political will - I do also think there are probably real material constraints. We are currently changing the energy basis of our society - and as a consequence will require twice as much energy by 2050 than we currently do. I think that's a massive political, engineering, infrastructure project. So adding re-ordering our entire transport infrastructure to that (which is not necessary to hit net zero) I think would be quite challenging - as I say, aside from political will and finance, purely from a capacity perspective.

In terms of climate and decarbonising emissions are basically equally split between energy, housing, transport, industry and agriculture. We have (sometimes imperfect) solutions for most of housing and transport - which also relies on decarbonising energy. Industry and agriculture are tougher at the minute - but, bluntly, those are probably areas where the solution won't come from the West but China (for example over 50% of the world's steel is made in China, so I suspect the breakthroughs on affordable clean steel will too). But getting there on housing and transport (and probably eventually industry and agriculture) all relies on energy. Again this is where I always have a slight issue with so much of Western environmentalism being framed around restraint and less - in order to achieve net zero we need to double energy supply and transmission as well as basically retrofitting the world. It is more on a huge scale.

I think we may be looking at it from slightly different angles. I can't drive. I might one day learn because it is good for holidays. I have zero interest in cars. My only interest in EVs is as a tool for getting to net zero. Separately my transport preferences are basically public transport - but I don't think that's necessary for energy transition. Whereas I think you might be viewing it as EVs from a what should our transport look like pov?

I don't think it necessarily does take massive changes being made to our environment for the low hanging fruit though.
Certainly what I'd like to see done is more substantial than that. Every time a road gets resurfaced it gets a fundamental redesign to make it more people friendly, more LTNs, elimination of on street parking, investment in rail, etc...
But huge gains can be made just from the simple stuff like better busses.

Its not about reordering our entire transport infrastructure so much as providing choice and nudges so more people go over to more sustainable methods.
Transport iirc is responsible for 20% of our emissions, its not nothing. Its also something that has an impact beyond the climate and is a key part of the failings of our society and economy.

I wouldn't see it as being about restraint and less, so much as providing better options.

I'm not quite sure what you mean on your last bit. Certainly I'm looking at this from a place where cars dominate and I have no choice but to drive whilst you're fortunate in living in a place that does have its shit more together and where public transport is a viable option for basically all your needs.
I see shifting our transport methods as a key in getting to net zero and a huge boon for the country in myriad other ways too.

[Sheilbh]

I'm not quite sure what you mean on your last bit. Certainly I'm looking at this from a place where cars dominate and I have no choice but to drive whilst you're fortunate in living in a place that does have its shit more together and where public transport is a viable option for basically all your needs.

Yeah but that was also a choice. I chose not to learn to drive because I wanted to live in the city and still do. I never saw it as practically necessary for the kind of life I wanted.

I see shifting our transport methods as a key in getting to net zero and a huge boon for the country in myriad other ways too.

So this is where I think we disagree. I don't think it is key or necessary in order to get to net zero. I think it might be a very good thing in other ways but, for the purposes of energy transition, EVs work.

Its not about reordering our entire transport infrastructure so much as providing choice and nudges so more people go over to more sustainable methods.

As I say I disagree, but if you think it's key to getting to net zero, then I'm not sure choice and nudges are enough.

Car travel is about half of transport emissions with road freight being another 30% (as you say overall transport is about a fifth of total emissions). I think if moving people away from cars as well as moving them to EVs is a substantial part of how we get to net zero then I think that's going to be a pretty significant shift. As I say I think it may well be the right thing to do from a transport perspective but purely from an emissions perspective, I think EVs get us there and are a lighter lift given there's lots of other stuff we need to do.

For example for me, from a UK perspective - unless there's major security fears or it (like Huawei) becomes a huge issue for relationships with the US, we should absolutely resist the push to have big tariffs on Chinese EVs. We don't have a sufficient domestic industry to protect. I get why the US and EU are going down that route, I think it might even be right for them (with other policies). But from my perspective with the goal of hitting net zero I think we should be open to Chinese EVs because they'll help drive down emissions more affordably for more people.

There was a very strident lefty article on this which I didn't totally agree with. But I am struck by Western EV companies having massive market cap but expensive vehicles while Chinese ones aren't great on market cap but are "overproducing" which means they're cheap - it feels like somewhere along the way we forgot the point of capitalism... (One for the financialisation/rentier chat)

Transport iirc is responsible for 20% of our emissions, its not nothing. Its also something that has an impact beyond the climate and is a key part of the failings of our society and economy.

Yeah - emissions come from five roughly equal groups: energy, housing, transport, industry and agriculture. Each of those represents about 20% of total emissions globally.

I wouldn't see it as being about restraint and less, so much as providing better options.

I meant more environmentalism in general. It's not restraint and less but more energy, lots of retrofitting and more infrastructure to support it on a pretty vast scale.

[Tamas]

(and, unlike Jos, I do think the end goal should be to ban cars ).

Such a small country point of view.

No it's an "I live in a major urban centre" view

[HVC]

Isn't a big chunk of that transport number from shipping (cargo boat and trucks), not personal transport?

[HVC]

(and, unlike Jos, I do think the end goal should be to ban cars ).

Such a small country point of view.

No it's an "I live in a major urban centre" view

And he drives!

I don't, but I still recognize the important/convenience of it.

[Sheilbh]

Isn't a big chunk of that transport number from shipping (cargo boat and trucks), not personal transport?

Not really.

Transport overall is about 20% of total emissions.

But breaking down that 20% - personal road transport (cars, mopeds, buses, taxis etc) is about half of that. Road freight is about 30%. Aviation (personal and freight) and shipping are both about 10%.

The biggest challenges are long distance road freight, shipping and aviation for technical/technological reasons (a bit like industry and agriculture). We don't currently really have solutions. I'm not sure what the breakdown is on road freight from the last mile distribution systems v long-distance. But we basically know what to do for over 50% of total transport emissions which is move to EVs.

The other challenge with transport particularly is that populations and incomes are rising so, for example, global car ownership is expected to double over the next few decades. That may not be such an issue with Chinese "overproduction" -as I say it is an advantage for China that mass car ownership is coinciding with EVs rolling out. They are going hand in hand rather than being a replacement of existing technology as it is for the West. If we see similar increases in car ownership in, say, South-East Asia, India or Africa then it could similarly be built on relatively affordable Chinese EVs. So we may increase people's access to transport and car ownership while still reducing emissions. But there's a few ifs in there.

[Josquius]

Yeah but that was also a choice. I chose not to learn to drive because I wanted to live in the city and still do. I never saw it as practically necessary for the kind of life I wanted.

I wanted to live in the city and not drive too- I learned to drive before I realised this was even a possible option.
But the UK doesn't really do cities properly. So despite living in a city of a million people not driving is an incredibly difficult thing to do.
And Newcastle's not even the worst of them- Leeds is pretty famous for being the biggest city in Europe without any form of transit.

So this is where I think we disagree. I don't think it is key or necessary in order to get to net zero. I think it might be a very good thing in other ways but, for the purposes of energy transition, EVs work.

I'm not sure. I know technology is advancing and they're less reliant on rare earths than they used to be. But last I heard the quantity they needed was such that just swapping everything one for one was thoroughly infeasible.
There's also the issue of EVs being so much heavier and our roads already suffering from vehicle weight bloat.
Its a much more efficient trade to go from ICE to nothing than ICE to EV.

As I say I disagree, but if you think it's key to getting to net zero, then I'm not sure choice and nudges are enough.

Its politics.
Saying transition to the max now would be by far the best thing to do, but its just not politically feasible. There needs to be a give and take and avoid giving the auto lobby too much ammo to weave a narrative.

For example for me, from a UK perspective - unless there's major security fears or it (like Huawei) becomes a huge issue for relationships with the US, we should absolutely resist the push to have big tariffs on Chinese EVs. We don't have a sufficient domestic industry to protect. I get why the US and EU are going down that route, I think it might even be right for them (with other policies). But from my perspective with the goal of hitting net zero I think we should be open to Chinese EVs because they'll help drive down emissions more affordably for more people.

There was a very strident lefty article on this which I didn't totally agree with. But I am struck by Western EV companies having massive market cap but expensive vehicles while Chinese ones aren't great on market cap but are "overproducing" which means they're cheap - it feels like somewhere along the way we forgot the point of capitalism... (One for the financialisation/rentier chat)

China has other issues altogether that really need tackling. Going away from cars and towards the lower end but the whole international postage union setup needs a good kicking. Its just not great to manufacture things on the other side of the world and ship them over.

I meant more environmentalism in general. It's not restraint and less but more energy, lots of retrofitting and more infrastructure to support it on a pretty vast scale.

Ah right. Yes, I do think things might be slowly changing there; as I've mentioned before a divide forming between the Hobbit and Euro-Green wings of the Green Party. But things are still pretty stuck in the village green preservation society mould in the UK.
Another area to be hopeful for planning reform. Though I'm really going to disappoint myself there.

[Valmy]

Look almost all of Texas was built after 1970. There is a zero possibility we ever do without cars here. We would almost have to level the whole state and try again.

EVs is the best we can do.

[Josquius]

Look almost all of Texas was built after 1970. There is a zero possibility we ever do without cars here. We would almost have to level the whole state and try again.

EVs is the best we can do.

1970 is a long time ago. A typical house has what, a 80 year lifespan?
Start building sensibly now and things will steadily shift that way with time as the old gives way to the new, some outlying suburbs are abandoned and others are infilled and brought up to sensible densities.

Of course with the politics of Texas that isn't happening.

[Valmy]

1970 is a long time ago. A typical house has what, a 80 year lifespan?

Well...theoretically. Not the way we build shit now though 

Start building sensibly now and things will steadily shift that way with time as the old gives way to the new, some outlying suburbs are abandoned and others are infilled and brought up to sensible densities.

Of course with the politics of Texas that isn't happening.

The big cities are doing this, mostly in an attempt to attract people and keep their tax base. Urbanity is cool.

See Downtown Austin:



But just changing the whole layout of the state outside of downtown Austin, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, etc... is a bit much of an ask. Especially in the truck worshipping culture of most of the state and just the geography. And obviously politically even doing something to encourage EV vehicles is a no-go.

[Iormlund]

For example for me, from a UK perspective - unless there's major security fears or it (like Huawei) becomes a huge issue for relationships with the US, we should absolutely resist the push to have big tariffs on Chinese EVs. We don't have a sufficient domestic industry to protect. I get why the US and EU are going down that route, I think it might even be right for them (with other policies). But from my perspective with the goal of hitting net zero I think we should be open to Chinese EVs because they'll help drive down emissions more affordably for more people.

China draws two-thirds of their power from fossil fuels (mostly coal). And making a car is rather energy intensive.
I doubt the impact of buying a Chinese EV is actually net-negative (talking C0₂ levels).

[Barrister]

I mean I am actually (in a Canadian context) a big proponent of public transit.  I'm just counting down the days until the LRT extension hits my neighbourhood.  It's supposed to be in three years, but I highly doubt that timeline.  But they are working on it.

That being said - it's just not possible to ban cars.  First of all there's the whole rural part of the country.  You're never going to get public transit out in the country.

But also - my neighbors (who I quite like) are very vocal about being car-free.  They do ride their bikes everywhere, including with their kids.  That being said however - they use one of those car-rental companies, and I can't help but notice they have a car parked in front of their house more often than not.

[Iormlund]

If you want to reduce the numbers of cars on the road you can do so very easily: mandatory remote work unless your employee really needs to be there (factory workers, nurses, etc). With huge penalties for any rogue employer. Perhaps easiest done via Health & Safety regulations since the legal infrastructure and staff already exist.

[Valmy]

I doubt the impact of buying a Chinese EV is actually net-negative (talking C0₂ levels).

Well the comparison is to buying an equivalent ICE vehicle.