this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
1342 points (95.6% liked)

Fuck Cars

11685 readers
891 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MajesticElevator@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That's a problem, but small/micro particles aren't the only metric. The gases released by exhaust are also a real problem for people that walk nearby cars, and they're in a big quantity in certain cars.

But yea, balancing all of this is complicated.

Does having heavier electric cars with no exhaust but more tire usage (because heavier cars) so more particles in the air beneficial? I don't believe we have serious studies about this, but it could change the meta.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hear me out here, less cars regardless of their enegry source will reduce both exhaust and microplastics. We don't have to trade one for the other when we can build alternatives that don't produce either.

[–] MajesticElevator@lemmy.zip 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Yea, sure, but cars are still needed in many areas outside of cities

In rural areas or in small villages, it's basically the only real good option, or for someone in a city to reach those areas in a timely manner

I do believe that public transport should be way more developed in cities, to the point where it becomes more worth it to go by public transport than in a car (ex: Paris)

And alternatives will always cause some sort of pollution. Way way less, but not zero.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Those areas don't have nearly as high a concentration of these pollutants as a busy, 6 lane road the center of the city. Thats where improving air quality can matter the most, especially because that road is likely to have more pedestrians breathing the pollutants than a rural road.

[–] MajesticElevator@lemmy.zip 2 points 18 hours ago

And on this I agree. But I still think for the air we breathe, the old polluting cars should go. I’d love a future where public transportation is way more developed and used, and the only remaining cars are electric or at least efficient (bye bye diesel)