▲ 165 ▼ GM Admits It Needs Hybrids Again: 'We're Not Tone Deaf' (www.motor1.com) submitted 1 month ago by Mustachius_Grumpius@thelemmy.club to c/technology@lemmy.world 93 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] daggermoon@piefed.world 26 points 1 month ago (14 children) We need electric trains. That's what we need. Fuck cars. permalink fedilink source hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) they already are, its FAST rail trains we need. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago High Speed Rail is all (as far as I know) electric. Much of Europe has electrified lines, about 60%, which carry 80% of traffic. I guess you are from Trumpialand, so I feel your train pain. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (7 children) The main reason public transit is what it is in Europe is because of how WW2 ravaged the continent. Maybe WW3 will do the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 child) Never heard that theory but it makes sense. I just assumed they were denser and liked digging tunnels more. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago That’s a contributing factor. Their land mass, topography and general population density benefitted it highly as well, but the need to reconstruct their cities provided two problems that needed solving - fix the previous infrastructure and get the workers from outside the demolished zones into them. Trains existed for a lot of things already so it made sense to keep pushing them into the city centers. It was an inexpensive and reliable solution. permalink fedilink source parent [–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) And that means what? I'm not familiar with that theory, but Europe has been building a robust public transit network since the early 20th century. The wars only slowed progress. Most Subway systems, rail networks, city buses, etc were quite strong already in the 30's. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago They had it, but WW2 did so much damage (WW1 contributed to this too) and the need to move workers around cheaply and reliably to rebuild gave them an opportunity to improve public transit and make it the primary focus for transportation infrastructure. Build the transit route into the communities or commercial areas, then rebuild those zones around it. By the 70’s it was fully modernized and a primary focus from governments. Without that destruction it may have just been city centers like North America does. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) ww3 involves nukes, i doubt very much infrastructure was left by the time it ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago Perfect opportunity to build from scratch. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago We better get flying trains after this one permalink fedilink source parent [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago* (3 children) All trains are pretty much electric. Perhaps you mean we need trains with batteries or fed by grid electricity directly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children) They meant move away from diesel-electric and I think you know it, this is highly pedantic even by railroad nerd standards. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Most people don't know this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] oscarmeyer82@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I agree with you, I recently explained it to a group of engineers and techs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) they already are, its FAST rail trains we need. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago High Speed Rail is all (as far as I know) electric. Much of Europe has electrified lines, about 60%, which carry 80% of traffic. I guess you are from Trumpialand, so I feel your train pain. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago High Speed Rail is all (as far as I know) electric. Much of Europe has electrified lines, about 60%, which carry 80% of traffic. I guess you are from Trumpialand, so I feel your train pain. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Creegz@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (7 children) The main reason public transit is what it is in Europe is because of how WW2 ravaged the continent. Maybe WW3 will do the same. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 child) Never heard that theory but it makes sense. I just assumed they were denser and liked digging tunnels more. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago That’s a contributing factor. Their land mass, topography and general population density benefitted it highly as well, but the need to reconstruct their cities provided two problems that needed solving - fix the previous infrastructure and get the workers from outside the demolished zones into them. Trains existed for a lot of things already so it made sense to keep pushing them into the city centers. It was an inexpensive and reliable solution. permalink fedilink source parent [–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) And that means what? I'm not familiar with that theory, but Europe has been building a robust public transit network since the early 20th century. The wars only slowed progress. Most Subway systems, rail networks, city buses, etc were quite strong already in the 30's. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago They had it, but WW2 did so much damage (WW1 contributed to this too) and the need to move workers around cheaply and reliably to rebuild gave them an opportunity to improve public transit and make it the primary focus for transportation infrastructure. Build the transit route into the communities or commercial areas, then rebuild those zones around it. By the 70’s it was fully modernized and a primary focus from governments. Without that destruction it may have just been city centers like North America does. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) ww3 involves nukes, i doubt very much infrastructure was left by the time it ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago Perfect opportunity to build from scratch. permalink fedilink source parent [–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago We better get flying trains after this one permalink fedilink source parent
[–] holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago (1 child) Never heard that theory but it makes sense. I just assumed they were denser and liked digging tunnels more. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago That’s a contributing factor. Their land mass, topography and general population density benefitted it highly as well, but the need to reconstruct their cities provided two problems that needed solving - fix the previous infrastructure and get the workers from outside the demolished zones into them. Trains existed for a lot of things already so it made sense to keep pushing them into the city centers. It was an inexpensive and reliable solution. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Creegz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago That’s a contributing factor. Their land mass, topography and general population density benefitted it highly as well, but the need to reconstruct their cities provided two problems that needed solving - fix the previous infrastructure and get the workers from outside the demolished zones into them. Trains existed for a lot of things already so it made sense to keep pushing them into the city centers. It was an inexpensive and reliable solution. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) And that means what? I'm not familiar with that theory, but Europe has been building a robust public transit network since the early 20th century. The wars only slowed progress. Most Subway systems, rail networks, city buses, etc were quite strong already in the 30's. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago They had it, but WW2 did so much damage (WW1 contributed to this too) and the need to move workers around cheaply and reliably to rebuild gave them an opportunity to improve public transit and make it the primary focus for transportation infrastructure. Build the transit route into the communities or commercial areas, then rebuild those zones around it. By the 70’s it was fully modernized and a primary focus from governments. Without that destruction it may have just been city centers like North America does. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago They had it, but WW2 did so much damage (WW1 contributed to this too) and the need to move workers around cheaply and reliably to rebuild gave them an opportunity to improve public transit and make it the primary focus for transportation infrastructure. Build the transit route into the communities or commercial areas, then rebuild those zones around it. By the 70’s it was fully modernized and a primary focus from governments. Without that destruction it may have just been city centers like North America does. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) ww3 involves nukes, i doubt very much infrastructure was left by the time it ends. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago Perfect opportunity to build from scratch. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Creegz@lemmy.world 1 point 3 weeks ago Perfect opportunity to build from scratch. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago We better get flying trains after this one permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago* (3 children) All trains are pretty much electric. Perhaps you mean we need trains with batteries or fed by grid electricity directly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children) They meant move away from diesel-electric and I think you know it, this is highly pedantic even by railroad nerd standards. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Most people don't know this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] oscarmeyer82@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I agree with you, I recently explained it to a group of engineers and techs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children) They meant move away from diesel-electric and I think you know it, this is highly pedantic even by railroad nerd standards. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Most people don't know this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] oscarmeyer82@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I agree with you, I recently explained it to a group of engineers and techs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 child) Most people don't know this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] oscarmeyer82@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I agree with you, I recently explained it to a group of engineers and techs. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] oscarmeyer82@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago I agree with you, I recently explained it to a group of engineers and techs. permalink fedilink source parent