While I agree in principle with the OP, I feel I must point out that that wouldn’t completely make cars unnecessary. There are still remote or sparsely populated areas (a lot actually in my country) where comprehensive public transport is impractical or next to impossible. I’d say we have use for both. Especially so if self driving means being able to summon a car when you need one without needing to own one. Or would that actually count as public transport then…?
comprehensive public transport is impractical or next to impossible
That’s how we used to do transit before cars were invented. The US had a railway line to even the most remote farms. USSR had amazing railways that interconnected almost everything despite being the biggest country on earth by a wide margin.
Generally the trick is to build densely populated walkable towns where you don’t need a car for daily activities, and connect them with railways. In that case, it doesn’t matter what the overall population density is.
Even for sparsely populated land, if you can build an asphalt road wider than 2 lanes, chances are you can also build a small commuter railway there eventually. It would also be cheaper overall, if you consider externalities like everyone having to own a car, car crashes being a lot more common than rail crashes, and of course CO₂ emissions and the climate change that comes along with them. And that’s besides the socioeconomic benefits of letting everyone have a way to travel, rather than only those with financial means to maintain a car and the ability to drive.
Cars are sometimes necessary, but it’s like 1% of what they are used for currently.
Yeah, you’re never gonna live without trucks and vans either, you need those for the last few kilometres of the logistics chain. Still, we should reduce the remaining cars by half at least, and I’m saying that sitting in a train that goes so frequently that I don’t have to check a schedule.
![[meme] choochoo](https://quokk.au/static/media/posts/8L/4e/8L4eFCNmnx9NzyK.webp){kind=link}
While I agree in principle with the OP, I feel I must point out that that wouldn’t completely make cars unnecessary. There are still remote or sparsely populated areas (a lot actually in my country) where comprehensive public transport is impractical or next to impossible. I’d say we have use for both. Especially so if self driving means being able to summon a car when you need one without needing to own one. Or would that actually count as public transport then…?
That’s how we used to do transit before cars were invented. The US had a railway line to even the most remote farms. USSR had amazing railways that interconnected almost everything despite being the biggest country on earth by a wide margin.
Generally the trick is to build densely populated walkable towns where you don’t need a car for daily activities, and connect them with railways. In that case, it doesn’t matter what the overall population density is.
Even for sparsely populated land, if you can build an asphalt road wider than 2 lanes, chances are you can also build a small commuter railway there eventually. It would also be cheaper overall, if you consider externalities like everyone having to own a car, car crashes being a lot more common than rail crashes, and of course CO₂ emissions and the climate change that comes along with them. And that’s besides the socioeconomic benefits of letting everyone have a way to travel, rather than only those with financial means to maintain a car and the ability to drive.
Cars are sometimes necessary, but it’s like 1% of what they are used for currently.
Yeah, well said. I agree with you on that, sometimes cars are still needed
Yeah, you’re never gonna live without trucks and vans either, you need those for the last few kilometres of the logistics chain. Still, we should reduce the remaining cars by half at least, and I’m saying that sitting in a train that goes so frequently that I don’t have to check a schedule.