this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
700 points (98.6% liked)

Fuck Cars

16413 readers
398 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 99 points 3 days ago (4 children)

And then "conservative" politicians will blame the cyclists.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 42 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Well, it's true. Don't you know mining for ebike batteries pollutes a lot? And bike lanes cause lots of traffic? /s

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

Won't anybody think of the poor children in the Congo cobalt mines? The ones absolutely nobody have a flying fuck about when cobalt was mainly used as a catalyst in gasoline production?

[–] ignotum@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Those are some good points, I'll ditch my bike and drive an electric car during rush traffic instead

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What are you, some kind of communist? Real, red blooded Americans drive coal rolling trucks!

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And beautiful, black oil; also tasty when it falls into a body of fresh water, such as a lake.

[–] tea_n_typewriters@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

Damn DEI cyclists

Although walk > totally mechanical bicycles > scooters > electric bicycles > cars.

[–] coyootje@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

And especially the foreign cyclists

[–] Swaus01@piefed.social 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

Not sure what's going on, but I prefer Worms Armageddon.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

2026 version: both the cyclist and weighted metaphor are in free fall

[–] Naz@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The structural integrity of the bicycle failed approximately 0.2 microseconds after the photo was taken, given a 20,000 kg weight was attached to the seatpost :>

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

not pictured; andy burnham trying to save the ball while pushing the person on the bike off the cliff

[–] Ironrod@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

Ikr! Let's just push all our issues onto him! Then we can complain about tories and start the cycle again!

[–] distal@lemmy.ml 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This has been blatantly obvious since the 90s

[–] Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] distal@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

True. Early researchers like Svante Arrhenius were true geniuses

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's even research from the beginning of the industrialization afaik if we were to go on it would have dire consequences

[–] distal@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I, too, remember this. All the way back in the 1890s someone had calculated CO2 emissions and global warming. Also, the oil industry did in the 1950s, but kept the data for themselves. In both cases, they were right about the CO2 count at the end of the century, about 20 years ago. We've blown right past that number since.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Good question. I found an article that seemed solid enough a few years back and I wish I could cite it and did search a bit now. Of course I found a lot of general history on air pollution but not thst specific research I am talking about. 😕

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

At least they accomplished something in the '90s. And yes, I know it went into effect in 1989, but that's essentially the '90s!

[–] TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

A month ago I watched a movie from the 70s that depicted exactly the situation we are in right now. Country going lying their way to war for petrol

[–] ilillilillilillililli@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

You happen to know the name of the movie?

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Could be Tank Girl, who knows

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

70s... Tank girl... My God I've lost hope in the youth 🤣

Not sure. It could be The Deal but it’s a 2005 movie.

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Remember that industry exists primarily for the consumption habits of end users.

They aren't polluting just for the love of the game, they are doing it to power your devices or make the energy to produce the cheap tat you buy off Amazon.

[–] Iamaquantummechanic@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The bike, too, has been produced in a factory.

But we can reduce consumption, and production a bike causes significantly less pollution that production of a car.

[–] Blemgo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yet at the same time, there are people who cannot afford actually good products, are forced to buy fresh due to planned obsolescence or simply ate unable to buy anything environmentally friendly because there are no products that is/does that. Companies themselves could easily produce more environmentally friendly products, yet don't because it's cheaper and thus better for the profit margins.

The fault and responsibility lies at least as much with companies as it does with consumers/customers, if not more.

The ability to recognize that the responsibility is no single person or entities is a highly important part of fighting climate change. I'm convinced that corporations are running a couple simulatious campaigns; one that tells consumers their choices are ultra important and one that says it's only companies choices that are important so that the 2 sides fight eachother and get less done...

But in the end, both consumers and corporations need to change habits.

[–] Vex_Detrause@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not for the consumption of end user. If they can get their money without end user they will totally drop everyone. They are totally doing it for greed, they are doing it for the game. Do you think they(rich/industry) will stop polluting if you bike everywhere and stop buying stuff?

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

If everyone starts to use a bike, they will produce less petrol.

If you buy less plastic tat you don't need, those factories will shut down or produce something better, and they will produce less plastic.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A good metaphor for getting rid of fossil fuels, makes pushing for further climate goals easier. After all less lobbying money and people in that industry.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

In fact, I don't think it's possible to slow our descent until we shed oil capitalism

[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago

The will is lacking.

So true. I just hope that hydrogen-based combustibles get reasonably cheap (and that the people who research and develop them do not commit suicide by shooting themselves 50 times in the back and then throwing themselves in a burning black bag towards a cliff with spikes at the bottom). Also cleaner, healthier, safer, cheaper and more efficient alternatives to lithium and sodium batteries.

You can cut the chain by voting the right people!

[–] terranoid@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 days ago

The factory must grow

[–] krom@fosstodon.org 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

@dumnezero top that with the war, which overtakes all of them

[–] dumnezero@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago

Doubtful. Firstly because it's very difficult to keep track in war, and it's also difficult (morally too) to count the emission reductions from destruction and death.

And, secondly, because modern wars are integrated into economy and society. Well, Putin may try to change that and turn the whole economy into a war-oriented one (top down control and nationalization), which would be a huge blunder now.

Oh, thirdly, you're mostly referring to the US, so be specific.

Emissions of GHG can be measured at many different layers, you have to decide what analysis, what perspective, you are using; otherwise, you risk counting emissions multiple times. It's all accounting.

This is one conventional way: https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/scope-1-2-and-3-emissions

It is not easy, especially since a lot of data is missing.

I know that you want to say that the US is bad, and that is valid regardless of emissions.

https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pclm.0000569