> Note that public transports moving nearly empty doesn't waste much money: it's a common misconception.
Even if trains are VERY efficient they do not move at zero energy, nor they do not degrade while moving, nor their stations remains operational at no costs... Yes the capex is extreme BUT opex aren't better.
- with climate change cast urbanized areas need to change, perhaps not that drastically in the short term, but more and more frequently flooded areas need to be relocated and doing so in dense cities (let's say just NY with it's anti-floods protections skyrocketing costs) it's next to impossible. Given that infra needs to change, that's why we start pushing wireless satellite networks, small modular nuclear reactors, air short-range mobilities etc they are NOT economically sound, they are NOT safer, better than anything else, but once they exists they can operate in a changing world;
- with the green new deal it's clear that all existing buildings need to be demolished and rebuilt or abandoned, again not tomorrow, but let's say in 25 years terms. Rebuild a single-family home it's reasonably quick, cheap and easy. Rebuild a skyscraper it's another story;
- one thing it's clear: there is no real room for air-mobility in cities. AT MAXIMUM I can imaging intermodal stations where people arrive from outside and descend into a city public transport network witch leave a question open: those who live inside how can own something to go outside with their own means?
Try just to see advertisements: for instance here I see many about heat-pumps for heating homes typically depicted in snowy natural place, or to be fresh in summer, again in natural places. Even cars ads are in nature, even for most city-cars. Again that's means: artist can't imaging something nice in a modern city environment.
These are just few small breadcrumbs of examples why I'm convinced that in the future worlds cities will be sold as https://youtu.be/p-9X8Z2kJt8 while really be like https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/19/why-greeces-ex... to be used as factories/work camps for modern slaves where the development is done not for the well-being but just for moving workforce as needed, meat-based robots.
As a result: public transport is the sole option in dense cities and it's not done because it's nice but just a way to keep humans there to employ them.
Even if trains are VERY efficient they do not move at zero energy, nor they do not degrade while moving, nor their stations remains operational at no costs... Yes the capex is extreme BUT opex aren't better.
As a serious debate, not intended for sterile polemics, so please try to wipe all prejudice before skimming: https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/uam-full-... what do you think?
Personally I think:
- with climate change cast urbanized areas need to change, perhaps not that drastically in the short term, but more and more frequently flooded areas need to be relocated and doing so in dense cities (let's say just NY with it's anti-floods protections skyrocketing costs) it's next to impossible. Given that infra needs to change, that's why we start pushing wireless satellite networks, small modular nuclear reactors, air short-range mobilities etc they are NOT economically sound, they are NOT safer, better than anything else, but once they exists they can operate in a changing world;
- with the green new deal it's clear that all existing buildings need to be demolished and rebuilt or abandoned, again not tomorrow, but let's say in 25 years terms. Rebuild a single-family home it's reasonably quick, cheap and easy. Rebuild a skyscraper it's another story;
- one thing it's clear: there is no real room for air-mobility in cities. AT MAXIMUM I can imaging intermodal stations where people arrive from outside and descend into a city public transport network witch leave a question open: those who live inside how can own something to go outside with their own means?
Try just to see advertisements: for instance here I see many about heat-pumps for heating homes typically depicted in snowy natural place, or to be fresh in summer, again in natural places. Even cars ads are in nature, even for most city-cars. Again that's means: artist can't imaging something nice in a modern city environment.
These are just few small breadcrumbs of examples why I'm convinced that in the future worlds cities will be sold as https://youtu.be/p-9X8Z2kJt8 while really be like https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/19/why-greeces-ex... to be used as factories/work camps for modern slaves where the development is done not for the well-being but just for moving workforce as needed, meat-based robots.
As a result: public transport is the sole option in dense cities and it's not done because it's nice but just a way to keep humans there to employ them.