Checkmate!
Is this coach class?
> setting has bikes and trains
> still using cars as main form of transportation
Hold on, let me just load up the family onto my bicycle and ride the 15 miles to the grocery store.
Some people are completely unable to understand that not everybody lives in a city with everything on their doorstep, some people have children, and some people need to be able to transport more than a few small items at a time.
Trains and bikes are much more inconvenient. Though bikes are good for close proximity.
I find the opposite to be true. Taking a train is so much more convenient. Don’t have to find a place to park, don’t have to do any work to get there. Just sit down and wait
Bikes are nice because I don’t have to worry about traffic much, and generally parking isn’t an issue
Cars are really inconvenient. You have a gigantic vehicle that you have to navigate around many other vehicles, then find a parking spot, usually not close to where you’re actually going
Cars are much more advanced tech than bikes. Hell we have partly self driving electric cars now. That’s some sci-fi shit
huh, now i want to slap some sensors on my ebike so it can do ACC
That’s why I can’t understand how some bikes can cost as much as a small used car.
And some watches cost far more than both.
Price isn’t always perfectly aligned with complexity or utility 🤷♀️
You do know steam powered locomotives started appearing in the early 19th century, long before than cars?
It takes time to come to the realization that a lot of what we do is inefficient because that’s just what people are used to doing. Some towns survive solely due to coal mining, and they see it as an existential threat if it were shut down. Nuclear power also takes very knowledgeable individuals, years of planning, and many resources to get started. Coal is cheap, dirty, and primitive.
and makes steel.
Use hydrogen for that (using coal creates 1.5 tons CO² per ton steel). Green steel needs no phosphor and sulfur too, making it stronger.
Nuclear also isn‘t even a good energy source. Way too expensive and the waste is a problem for millenia. Renewables + hydrogen/battery/mechanical energy conservation is simply superior. Fusion would be cool too
Nuclear is a great energy source. My state (Illinois) generates over half of all its energy from nuclear. France is a great example of a country that maximizes the potential of nuclear energy. The waste is not a problem if it’s stored properly. The much bigger problem are carbon/methane emissions which are fucking our climate right now. Also, nuclear waste can be reprocessed to make it less volatile and radiotoxic, but that requires an advanced application of technology.
Batteries and solar absolutely yes, we need to be scaling up battery technology as fast as possible, particularly sodium-ion batteries for static energy storage from solar power. The biggest problems with wind/solar is the actual storage of the energy. No wind? No power. No sun? No power. That’s why you need batteries, and battery technology has only gotten good enough in the past couple years.
Scaling up hydrogen is very difficult, it’s extremely volatile, and can realistically only be used in large scale power plants because transporting hydrogen is extremely expensive. Fusion could be good, but it’s still being worked on, and who knows how long it’ll really take for us to have a practical implementation.
France only pushed for nuclear, because they need an excuse for the costs of their nukes and nuclear submarines. The disadvantages of high cost and nuclear waste remain.
if it’s stored properly
For millennia, which we can’t do yet.
nuclear waste can be reprocessed to make it less volatile and radiotoxic
Which needs energy.
France’s 80 years of nuclear waste takes about the space of an Olympic swimming pool and half.
In a millena, it’ll be 150 swimming pools, and that’s assuming we haven’t found a way to repair/reuse/recycle it in 1000 years. Or not decided to just yeet it on the nearest inhospitable planet via railcannon or something.
Nuclear waste is a non issue.
If it’s such a non issue, how come we still don’t have a single long term storage facility for spent nuclear fuel in the world? After more than 70 years of nuclear energy production.
“If it’s not an issue, how come we haven’t built a thing to solve it”
Yeah, that must be the reason why the United States pay half a billion dollars of tax payer money each year to the utility companys to compensate their failure in finding a suitable storage location.
