I am lucky enough to live close to mackinaw island and it is as amazing as the picture says. For people who don’t know mackinaw island is an island in one of the lakes surrounding Michigan and it has banned vehicles (except for essential businesses like repairs). You’ve got a super walkable island, bikes everywhere, no one complaining about the no vehicles, horses everywhere too. It’s amazing and I wish I could have that in lower Michigan .
It’s actually so idealistic the houses for permanent residents on the island are ungodly expensive. Millionaires only get to live full time there.
Meh. Last time I visited it was just another overcrowded tourist trap full of generic souvenir stores and storefronts full of the same “local goods” found in every tourist attraction in the country, only instead of vehicle exhaust the main street smelled like manure and stale fry oil. The fort was neat, I guess, and the fudge was good (I mean, it’s fudge), but overall it was pretty underwhelming.
Without all the tourists it would probably be a pretty nice place.
So it’s kind of a trip that really is up to you how it goes. I went expecting tourist stuff off the boat and quickly just got a bike and zoomed around the island enjoying nature. I came back to the main town when I was hungry and having a ton of options was nice. I’d also really prefer the horse smells to cars, horse poop and all. I grew up with farms around me all the time so cow poop smell during fertilizer season is real normal to me. Also picking up like 5 pounds of fudge before I left was nice lol. Disclaimer: I went outside of peak season so maybe it’s different during the huge wave of tourists.
I went during off season with a group of friends and had the exact same experience. There were times we didn’t see anyone. Most people we saw were in the early mornings, those stopping by to shop and such.
That sounds ideal. I was with a family including small children, which meant we walked everywhere, and slowly. The kids easily grew bored with the historical stuff, which necessarily meant I couldn’t really enjoy it myself. It was not ideal.
Same. After moving to Michigan I saw Mackinac Island in every list of things to do in the state and so far it has been one of the most borings one
I love the UP and sleeping bear dunes (and the whole area around Traverse City) but the island just felt as a very generic tourist trap with horses and for some reason they think it’s the only place to get fudge 🤷
It's a bit different from a typical bus service - rather than having a set route it runs on a rough timetable, and picks people up from their homes if it's not convenient for them to meet the bus in the village itself. It's currently partially volunteer run, but is an interesting model for rural areas.
If the Tory member is going to argue that this will cost £millions to the economy, perhaps he could elucidate us with that evidence. I am a ROSPA and IAM trained driver, this speed limit change will not hinder progress in built up areas. It will definitely save lives and reduce pollution. In heavier traffic, ruzh hour, it will make not difference.
It’s still not the right way to go about it. If you want to make a 20 mph road, then build a 20 mph road - complete with traffic calming measures, as per the official recommendations. Just slapping a 20 sign on a road that feels like a 30 is only going to increase noncompliance (currently measured at ~85% for 20 roads). That’s not to mention traffic light systems that have been timed to 30 mph roads, these are never updated when the speed limit changes.
If you want people to change how they drive, then they need training, not altered roads. Hell, even just doing your ROSPA and IAM isn’t perfect, because if you don’t keep up your training you’ll develop bad habits over time.
this speed limit change will not hinder progress in built up areas.
Big assumption, one that doesn’t hold up. Travelling at 20 mph takes 50% longer than travelling at 30 mph.
It will definitely save lives
Possibly, in a select few areas. These areas should be identified and addressed properly, which may well save more lives.
and reduce pollution
The difference in fuel consumption between driving at 20 and 30 is negligible. The main economy difference is acceleration, and slowing down and accelerating for 20 areas increases fuel consumption. Hell, the government white paper on speed bumps mentions higher fuel consumption leading to fuel tax revenue as a benefit.
In heavier traffic, ruzh hour, it will make not difference.
Probably not, but that’s not the concern here. The concern is about impeding progression when there is no traffic and no good reason, ie an empty road through town in quiet times with few cars or people about.
I’m sure there are some areas that will benefit from a reduction to 20 limits, but a blanket change from 30 to 20 is just poorly thought out political pandering.
You can do the maths to work out percentages of a small number. Perhaps check the killed and seriously injured specs, and whilst online, the other technical assessments. Give me more than uninformed view to consider.
I can do the maths, but apparently you refuse to. You’re going by what you’ve been taught about speeding on the motorway, how 80 mph is really very close to 70 mph in terms of time. That doesn’t hold true between 20 and 30.
You’re not considering anything, you’re not arguing the points I’ve presented, you’re just trying to fight me. It isn’t working.
If you have evidence that backs up your side of the argument then please present it, like I have with the government’s compliance statistics. Don’t try to pass off the work for making your argument onto me.
Drivers cut their spacing as braking distances contract. Shorter gaps mean more vehicles can use the available road space, reducing standing traffic.
Filtering at junctions becomes easier too. It is far easier for motorists to pull into traffic travelling at 20mph than at 30mph. So junctions work more efficiently and queues reduce.
Motor traffic volumes decrease since slower speeds encourage active, sustainable and shared travel. Walking and cycling levels rose by up to 12% after Bristol’s 20mph limit[i].
Buses operate more efficiently. The reduced length of queues means that bus journey times decrease, and become more reliable. Buses become a more attractive alternative to the car.
Don’t really relate to 20 all that much.
The space in distance between moving traffic is irrelevant, the following distance expressed as time will always be the same (~2 seconds). The space between stationary traffic is the same in both 20 and 30 zones.
Filtering isn’t about speed, filtering is about technique. It’s about restraining your acceleration and leaving a bigger gap in front. It can be done at any speed - it’s what you do when entering a motorway at 70 mph. Reducing the speed limit does not teach people how to filter.
Bristol is a city, this post is about Wales as a country adopting 20 mph limits. I live near Bristol, and many Bristol roads need to be 20 - they’re too narrow and there’s too much going on (and that’s not to mention the potholes…). That isn’t true elsewhere in the UK, and certainly not throughout the countryside, even the countryside immediately outside of Bristol. However, even with the 20 limit, many of the roads in Bristol are not built suitable as 20 mph roads, and compliance in these areas is very low. Even buses do 30 in these places.
The efficiency improvement for buses is negligible. Drivers let buses out. Again, this incorrectly attributes reducing speed limits to training drivers how to filter and how to drive in traffic.
If you want 20 mph roads, then build 20 mph roads. If you want drivers to drive better, train them.
Just in general, can I ask what you’re hoping to get from this thread? I mean, you’re in the Fuck Cars community asking everyone to agree with you that today’s driving is okay, that there aren’t benefits from slowing down motor traffic and that we shouldn’t expect people to act legally. It seems a strange battle to choose.
I’m just calling out bullshit political pandering in a blanket speed limit reduction as what it is: bullshit political pandering that doesn’t even really achieve the goals it sets out to do.
I’m not against 20 limits, I’m not against increasing safety of vulnerable road users, I’m not against reducing the use of cars. I want those things to be done appropriately and effectively. This is not that.
That whole study is specifically aimed at 20mph. It does reduce speed but not exactly by 10mph. It’s going to reduce traffic time, casualities, pollution and increase walking and public transport use.
There is a lot to like and for the places that it doesn’t apply people can always put up a sign for 30. Ideally this is supported by traffic calming measures but that’s a longer more costly.
If they put up a ton of 30 signs then it probably would be alright. Eg, the main road through a village or town could stay 30, while the main high street and side roads would all be default 20. But that requires more than just a change in law to say “what was 30 is now 20”, and they don’t seem to be doing this. They’re expecting financially strapped local councils to go through a process of assessing and assigning 30 limits themselves, at their own expense. It likely won’t happen in most places, they simply can’t afford it.
Also, if you want to refer to that blog post as a “study”, we should look only at its sourced claims.
Motor traffic volumes decrease since slower speeds encourage active, sustainable and shared travel. Walking and cycling levels rose by up to 12% after Bristol’s 20mph limit [^1]
This is specifically about Bristol, a city with narrow roads.
Smoother driving with less wasteful braking and acceleration cut fuel use by 12% in Germany after 30kmph (18.6 mph) limits were implemented [^2]
I’m sure Germany have implemented speed limits efficiently, but the UK has a history of compelling local councils to implement traffic measures that increase fuel consumption and thereby increase fuel tax revenue. Regardless, Germany have not changed all of their 50 kph zones to 30 kph, like this law proposes.
The Department for Transport’s speed / flow plots are in the COBA (Cost Benefit Analysis) manual - Vol 13 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. This computer programme shows that urban traffic flow improves at lower speeds [^3]
Urban traffic flow. This law covers everywhere.
The FREEFLOW project by the University of York, City of York Council and others… Slough experimented with this successfully in the 1950s on a single arterial road. [^4]
This experiment was from 1950.
Shared Space also enjoys claims of shorter tailbacks and congestion. The concept relies on cutting traffic speeds to around 20mph or less for ‘eye contact’. Traffic experts Ben Hamilton Baillie and Phil Jones state “tailbacks of traffic during peak periods have also reduced. It seems that the ambiguous junction provides improved capacity for traffic and fewer delays than traffic signal control systems.” [^5]
Urban design, referring to handling specific zones of congestion.
None of these points apply to changing the national speed limit for Wales from 30 to 20.
The concern is about impeding progression when there is no traffic and no good reason, ie an empty road through town in quiet times with few cars or people about.
The thing is, nobody plans to crash their car into a pedestrian. So how does it keep happening? One reason is from people driving faster than they should because they wrongly believe a road is empty. Slower limits help with this, because when drivers are going around with incorrect beliefs about whether roads are empty or not, there is more time to react and less energy to cause injury
I can’t disagree with anything that you’re saying here. All I can say is that there is always a balance to be struck between road users - pedestrians, cyclists, cars, everyone (even animals).
So how does it keep happening?
It happens because road users aren’t properly segregated. If you look at large construction sites, they have barriers everywhere and it’s generally extremely safe. They still have fatal accidents between vehicles/plant and people. The only way to be completely safe is to be separate - but that isn’t reasonably practicable everywhere.
My issue here isn’t with 20 mph roads. My issue is with a blanket change of all 30 mph roads to 20 mph, without making those roads suitable for 20 mph. Maybe some of these roads already should be 20 mph, but many aren’t and shouldn’t be, and the ones that aren’t will encourage further noncompliance everywhere else.
On my run today I saw a hawk dead in the rode. I felt bad because it was right next to a park in my town where he probably lived. He was just doing his thing hunting mice and bam no more hawk.
A lot of apartments in Europe have a communal garden, or you can simply rent a plot of garden nearby for larger projects, or use your balcony for small things like herbs.
Idk what you mean with plumbing windows/basement second levels but there would be an underground garage where you can charge your EV
You also don’t rely as much on solar panels because apartments are already so much more energy efficient. They are cooler in summer and warmer in winter
So buy more land and it’s potentially a distance from your house. Communal gardens are good in theory but in practice they are far harder than just having a garden with a nice wee raised bed. Need some lettuce pop outside and get it. Unlikely you’ll bus/walk drive to the communal to grab a few leaves of something.
There wouldn’t be no. Maybe in more modern builds but all the flats I’ve rented have been 100s of years old. No ability to change interior and no luxury parking garage. Barely any parking.
If you own a house you can do what you want with it. Want to build a basement, crack on. Want to get double glazing, put in grey water. Sure. Can’t do shit in a building without building getting involved.
Fuck knows where you’ve live but no. Maybe modern ones are but old ones are freezing in winter, poorly insulated and hod awful in summer.
I’d rather live in a city or town with mixed use development, walkable neighbourhoods and functional public transport instead of suburbian nightmare pictured in #1.
There’s also townhouses that are a good compromise between urban density and home ownership/garden usage while still being more energy efficient than standard family homes.
Bullshit. Townhouses are the epitome of corporate shite. You clearly have never been to a townhouse or have some kinda stake in them.
Townhouse with zero garden and 3 to 5 where a single house used to be. Done don’t even have parking. All the negatives of a flat without any benefits. Clearly you are a shill for a dystopian nightmare. Do you perchance live in one of these monstrosities? Maybe you’d be happy for the plevs to live in a shanty town but as long as they are separate from your house ?
It is so weird reading this thread when I live in a flat and have basically non of the issues any of you’re describing. I know it’s a cliche but I honestly think this is just a US vs Europe thing, where mid to high density housing here is actually built to be, you know, good, where as in the US everything is poorly constructed with no amenities so you just think all of those things are intrinsic qualities of that type of housing lol. Kind of sad.
Right. Well regardless non of the significant problems you have I have experienced so I don’t think they’re intrinsic properties of apartments/flats/high-medium density housing.
I’m disregarding them because as I say they’re not intrinsic properties of that type of housing. I prefer living where I do now than most of the actual houses I lived in because they had no garden space, but that doesn’t mean intrinsically houses don’t have outside spaces. When people are advocating for more higher density housing they aren’t talking about building them in the worst possible way I don’t think.
I won’t claim apartments are for everyone. There’s no denying that you just cannot have the kind of yard that a detached or semi-detached house offers. At best, some apartments or neighbourhoods have community gardens and it’s also more common that you’d have access to broader parks (which you can’t garden in, but you can enjoy city managed gardens and generally have more space for activities).
I personally don’t find privacy a concern with well made apartments. Well made ones have good sound isolation. I don’t usually hear my neighbours. But admittedly not every apartment is well made.
You can buy apartments (usually in the form of a condo), so you can make certain kinds of improvements. Yeah, it’s not quite the same level of customization (like windows as you mention). You certainly can make plumbing changes (e.g., if you want a nicer bathtub), though there may be some reasonable rules to protect the rest of the building from being flooded if you don’t use a licensed professional.
Many modern apartments do have places to charge EVs. You’ll probably pay extra for them, but they’re likely to become the norm for every parking space as EVs become more prominent. But one of the biggest boons of apartments is not needing a car in the first place! With detached homes, you simply can’t have everyone close enough together for efficient public transit. With apartments, you can live in desirable areas and close to high frequency transit stations without having to be rich.
Some newer apartments do have solar panels. I wouldn’t be surprised if most people saved money on electricity with apartments, though. Home solar panels take a while to break even. Newer apartments usually have central boilers and chillers, which massively reduce the cost of heating and AC, which are very energy intensive.
Again, I won’t claim it’s for everyone. Some people really are better off dealing with the downsides of having a house (which typically will mean being far away from everything and either having to drive or having mediocre transit). But I would argue that for most people, the downsides of apartments are simply worth it. How many people actually want to change plumbing or windows? How many want to garden (beyond the amount a balcony allows)? Don’t forget the benefits, too. Stuff like living in more desirable areas (especially where you no longer need a car – that’s a massive expense removed), having amenities like a gym, pool, or rec room, if renting, not having to deal with maintenance, and better views.
I’m also not sure how well off you are, but honestly, for many people of my generation, the only way they can afford a place to live is with either an apartment or living in undesirable areas. Detached homes in the cities people want to live in are straight up out of reach for many younger people. Or as John Oliver put it in an episode about HOAs:
“Our main story tonight concerns home ownership, so if you are under 35, honestly, this story isn’t for you,” Oliver said. “It’ll never be for you. You will never own a home. Sorry, that is the deal that you made when you decided to be born after 1988.”
so if you are under 35, honestly, this story isn’t for you
I realize it’s supposed to be a joke, but just reminding you not to take this at face value. Friends of mine making 60k a year have afforded a house just fine through my state’s first time home buyer’s program (guaranteed a loan on your first home at low rates and little down), and I’m likely buying one next year. It’s not all doom and gloom.
I won’t claim apartments are for everyone. There’s no denying that you just cannot have the kind of yard that a detached or semi-detached house offers. At best, some apartments or neighbourhoods have community gardens and it’s also more common that you’d have access to broader parks (which you can’t garden in, but you can enjoy city managed gardens and generally have more space for activities).
Topless sun bathing? Letting my dog out to the garden. Working from home in the garden. Have a bbq. These are possible at local parks but with some planning and then requiring a vehicle for this purpose. Also local parks can be closed and they can be commandeered for events. Usually in summer months. Not ideal.
I personally don’t find privacy a concern with well made apartments. Well made ones have good sound isolation. I don’t usually hear my neighbours. But admittedly not every apartment is well made.
Houses can be secured with fences and bushes. Trees grown and other measures. Apartments are what they are. Maybe you could get sound proofing.
You can buy apartments (usually in the form of a condo), so you can make certain kinds of improvements. Yeah, it’s not quite the same level of customization (like windows as you mention). You certainly can make plumbing changes (e.g., if you want a nicer bathtub), though there may be some reasonable rules to protect the rest of the building from being flooded if you don’t use a licensed professional.
Obviously you’d need to get approval but yes you lose a lot of customization.
Many modern apartments do have places to charge EVs. You’ll probably pay extra for them, but they’re likely to become the norm for every parking space as EVs become more prominent. But one of the biggest boons of apartments is not needing a car in the first place! With detached homes, you simply can’t have everyone close enough together for efficient public transit. With apartments, you can live in desirable areas and close to high frequency transit stations without having to be rich.
Unfortunately we don’t really get as many options for modern blocks. I’m talking about current available stock and what about rural living. Not everyone wants to be city centre based. I’d prefer to have the complete opposite.
Some newer apartments do have solar panels. I wouldn’t be surprised if most people saved money on electricity with apartments, though. Home solar panels take a while to break even. Newer apartments usually have central boilers and chillers, which massively reduce the cost of heating and AC, which are very energy intensive.
Having something large would be very beneficial and having solar would be fantastic but it likely wouldn’t be big enough to power the whole building. This is definitely a pretty positive boon. Probably make things like plumbing and heat more efficient with smaller footprint.
Rural zones would be the complete opposite but with off grid capabilities like septics tanks solar and composting. You’d have a different smaller system at work.
Again, I won’t claim it’s for everyone. Some people really are better off dealing with the downsides of having a house (which typically will mean being far away from everything and either having to drive or having mediocre transit). But I would argue that for most people, the downsides of apartments are simply worth it. How many people actually want to change plumbing or windows? How many want to garden (beyond the amount a balcony allows)? Don’t forget the benefits, too. Stuff like living in more desirable areas (especially where you no longer need a car – that’s a massive expense removed), having amenities like a gym, pool, or rec room, if renting, not having to deal with maintenance, and better views.
Absolutely. Some people will absolutely benefit to this kinda system but as stated it’s not for everyone. No options to grow your own food, in this scenario you are entirely reliant on others. Something I hate. If I have control then I can improve or destroy my life. Been forced to be reliant on others is a complete disaster. Have you been outside? The level of entitlement and selfish is obscene. Once one turns the others likely will turn and the ecosystem stops working. Communes are a thing but they are pretty small.
I have a home gym( few weights bench and squat capabilities) don’t need anything more. I prefer dealing with maintenance as I’m in control. I can buy good quality and make sure it’s correctly fitted and I’m the one maintaining it. I think for a lot they are happy to have someone else deal with this but it’s usually cost affective and so that can come back to bite you.
I’m also not sure how well off you are, but honestly, for many people of my generation, the only way they can afford a place to live is with either an apartment or living in undesirable areas. Detached homes in the cities people want to live in are straight up out of reach for many younger people. Or as John Oliver put it in an episode about HOAs:
I’m incredibly poor and likely will buy a house soon. A house I will hate and resent until my dying breath. I don’t know your generation but I’m 32. Incredibly privileged to live with my partners parents. Rent here is 2k plus a month for 1 bedroom. Was evicted from our last rent because we bought a dog. Was worty it but lost my job and had to relocate because of it.
I will live in undesirable areas because it’s all I will be able to afford. I joke that all we can afford is a shack somewhere but that is our lot in life. Gotta love where the jobs are and fight developers and “investors” to get something.
“Our main story tonight concerns home ownership, so if you are under 35, honestly, this story isn’t for you,” Oliver said. “It’ll never be for you. You will never own a home. Sorry, that is the deal that you made when you decided to be born after 1988.”
Community supported agriculture (CSA), community gardens/allotments.
No privacy
I guess this sentiment stems from US-American toilet stalls, but apartments have walls and doors. I heard HOAs, neighbours are very good at privacy in suburban housing.
No ability to get solar panels.
‘Balkonkraftwerke’, roughly balcony power plants, are solar panels that can be installed to a regular outlet given the right electricity meter.
No room for improvement.
Ugly version: No hurry, landlords do that to you.
Slightly better version: House community decides consensually.
Better version: Housing cooperative helps you within limits.
No EV charging.
a) Likely untrue, especially with newer buildings. b) Likely unnecessary, because there’s little need due to bicycles, public transport or car sharing and all services within short reach. Electric bicycles, cargo bicycles exist.
Do car sharing allow dogs ? Babies that spit up or require changing? No. No they don’t. All for a car less future but that’s not now.
I want a garden I can sit out in when I’m working from home. Do you understand dogs ? Children? Don’t want have to trapes down tona local park with other people. Wanna sit outside in my garden with my trees plants and whatever with my tits out.
Privacy in my own space to play music and chill the fuck out. Not a local park, especially ones that are closed when events are on. Nope. No thanks.
Literally never seen a community garden working. In theory sure, in real life. Not a chance. As above.
Privacy isn’t just noise. It’s actually not having people inside your home. So you can play music or whatever and a person doesn’t complain. Not taking a shit. Walking about topless or naked without people all around you.
A balcony solar panel will power fuck all. Maybe a few hours as the sun hits just right and then what ? You are entitled to your opinion as am I.
You seem to be living in a utopia which would makes this apartment vs home moot.
I use car sharing primarily for cargo (vans). I don’t know much about the life with children, but I see plenty of parents with young children in public transport.
Community garden/Allotment
Maybe I didn’t explain it right. This is what I meant. Those come in very different sizes, structures and rules (In some you can even live, but not register). It is mostly possible to install or grow visual protection.
Balcony PV
It is possible to install energy storage, but yes, a single balcony is unlikely to have more than 1kWp. I don’t have a balcony, but I’d install a balcony PV, if I had one. Apartments are more energy efficient, but not that much.
Nudity, Music
I’m mostly nude when I’m home, so I get wanting to be have a space to be free outside. For all I know, visual protection clashes with many HOAs, or not?
Apartment neighbours probably see and hear each other less than suburbanites, depending on the age of the building and its inhabitants.
Not hearing or seeing other people even when you go onto the street is a bit of a rich request. Maybe I didn’t understand.
Yes there are plenty parents that use public transportation. Now I don’t have any. Point blank. Zero. So how does that work ? Public transportation is the future but currently it takes you to a few places. If you aren’t going there then you’re screwed.
Yup I know what am allotment is. My argument was that they aren’t near you. They are away where homes aren’t. Do you need to commute to them. You can’t really walk with compost seedlings plants equipment. Also depends on distance. Great idea but complicated in real world situations.
Pv on a balcony will generate heehaw. A single cell what 400 watt array. Can only be used when sun hits it just right. Great idea to charge a phone or something but bugger all else.
Fuck hoas. Nothing else to add to that. I see no one where I live. Pleasant. Very much enjoy the solitude and not dealing with people standing outside my house. Especially with my nudity dog and working from home.
You’ve never lived in a subterranean basement apartment that doesn’t even have windows, have you? Fucking terrible but at $3,000 a month that’s all I can afford.
From these comments it seemed like no one actually read what these are for? It actually makes a lot of sense to use existing, underutilized railway to deliver loads that would not require full train setups. This isn’t really a cars/trucks thing and I do blame Arstechnica for writing that shitty headline.
Yes, however, a lot of these rail lines have been needlessly abandoned and replaced with road shipping. Road shipping isn’t really cheaper, they just get to put $10 of operational cost on the taxpayer for every $1 they spend. You’re basically subsidizing artificially cheap shipping. Rail is the single most efficient means that we have of moving just about anything, but it’s not as heavily taxpayer subsidized, and therefor not stonks. The correct answer would be to put those $10 of operational cost back on long and mid haul trucking companies and rebuild our freight rail networks, which, even without switching to electric trains, would significantly reduce emissions, make our roads safer, and drastically reduce long term maintenance costs on our highway infrastructure.
Not sure if you are saying that this is what we should be doing because that is what the article is suggesting. Using rail in a more efficient manner, not roads.
Road shipping isn’t really cheaper, they just get to put $10 of operational cost on the taxpayer for every $1 they spend. You’re basically subsidizing artificially cheap shipping.
Could you explain this? Is it because taxes pay for roads?
Like YIMBY said, the short answer is yes. The long answer is that there’s a complicated network of subsidies, write-offs, and car-related maintenance, bureaucracy, and clean-up that is supported by the taxpayer and doesn’t pay for itself. It’s not just repaving roads, which has to happen more and more often as vehicles get heavier and faster (road damage increases quadratically as vehicle weight increases), it’s also paying for highway patrol to enforce road safety, paying for first responders to clean up accidents, paying for other maintenance to prevent wildfires and clean up roadside litter (even if you use prison crews, it doesn’t cost nothing), paying to maintain other road-related infrastructure like signs and guardrails, as well as the multitude of oil and gasoline subsidies that become more and more important as we become more and more reliant on tractor-trailers to haul goods.
The ten dollars spent by taxpayers for every one dollar of operational cost actually applies to driving cars, I suspect that the cost to taxpayers for long haul trucking is quite larger.
Heavy vehicles are the only thing that can put any meaningful wear on roads and streets, due to the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law that says that the wear on the road is a function of the fourth power of the mass of the vehicle over the number of axles. A car puts 160,000 times as much wear on a road as a bike does, and the step up to heavy transportation vehicles involves a similarly massive jump. Every time a heavy truck moves a shipment over our roads, there is a real cost that we have to pay in maintenance that has no equivalent for personal vehicles.
The biggest reason why companies use trucks instead of trains is that you can fill a semi truck and send it off a lot quicker than you can fill a whole train. I think rail cars capable of individual operation would work great in place of semis, because you get all the benefits of the smaller size, but you could also link them up into full trains for efficiency when possible.
This is the second article I’ve read about someone getting trapped in a Tesla. It’s a shame that a lot of people will opt to blame the user when this is obviously a stupid design decision by Tesla.
The manual release is what most people grab by accident in the Tesla Model 3/Y, it is generally more obvious then the electronic release and doesn’t require any power to the vehicle.
It’s tricky because you’re not supposed to pull it except in emergency (i.e. dead battery). There’s a door release button that lowers the window slightly since they’re frameless windows. Pulling the manual release has a small chance of damaging the window if you push out before it’s had a chance to lower.
My family has owned Camaros my entire life. I was brought home from the hospital as a newborn in an '83 Camaro, took my driver’s test in a '96 Camaro. Both had mechanical door latches, both had frameless, manual windows. Both survived nearly 20 years of service without having to wind the windows down slightly every time you open and close the door. If Chevy could do it for decades, why can’t Tesla?
I’ve also been in cars that had mechanical door latches that slightly lowered the windows when the door handle was pulled. I’m guessing that’s still not fancy enough for an idiot like Musk, so we get the above system.
This whole thing of engineering problems that we have to half-assedly solve just shouldn’t be legal. The DOT should not have approved this design. The electronic door latch is too prone to failure, and the mechanical backup release is too obscure. This would require training. "The front edge of the window switch group is also the backup latch for the door. It isn’t labeled as such and doesn’t resemble any door handle or lever a typical driver would recognize in an emergency, but that’s what it is."
Most EVs I’m aware of have a 12V lead acid battery that runs all the body systems; the lights, radio etc. because regulating the propulsion batteries down to a noiseless 12 volts for the computers and radios and such is a bit of a pain. This should also prevent body systems such as radios, lights and door locks from failing should the driver fail to recharge the car and run out of range; sure you can’t move but you can put on the hazard lights, raise/lower the windows or indeed open the silly electronic doors. You’re telling me Teslas don’t have this feature?
Jeez, that’s even worse than I was expecting. I was expecting an unlabeled lever somewhere, but this isn’t just unlabeled, but also looks like it isn’t even obviously a lever!
And never mind the rampant spread of bedbugs and disease, being exposed to violence and sexual assault, risking being arrested simply for angering the bus driver, being made late to work or even missing it entirely because of bus breakdowns, route changes or cancellations, or any number of problems that are more easily rectified with an electric car or a bike
Yes, they are inherent issues. You can’t control who goes on that bus and therefore can’t guarantee the safety of passengers. You can’t control whether buses break down or if the routes will change or not, so you can’t guarantee riders will get to work on time, if at all. And in many cities, bus service is so poor that jobs will not hire people who ride the bus for those reasons.
You also can’t stop people from spreading bedbugs and disease, and we all saw how well you reacted to that during covid.
Accept that you’re just wrong on this. No matter how much you want buses to be a viable solution, they just aren’t.
Normal people don’t live in your strawman world of mental conjurations. Civilized countries already have great public transportation infrastructure working for hundreds of years.
Headline should be : Hertz rending Teslas now, definitely not a terrible idea and average Americans not good at pulling levers that aren’t incredibly obvious
Giving someone a car with less than 90 miles of range and limited charging options without included adapters is pretty shitty. Definitely a bit of user error, but if you’re renting out EVs they need to be close to fully charged. Having to find a charger and wait for the car to charge right after you pick it up is pretty shitty.
Yeah, I get dinged if I return a gas vehicle with less than 3/4 tank, and yet Hertz is handing out EVs with under half a charge?? That’s some major bullshit.
Imagine a rental car that needs 8 hours of downtime to rent it again. Now imagine being management at Hertz and the fact they don’t even understand THAT much. Imagine how dumb the average American is and now think about the fact 1/2 of them are dumber than that- can’t find a door handle and are unashamed of that fact.
Downtime isn’t an issue if you allot enough cars to always have your rental fleet in rotation. Have 55 total for every 50 rental cars. Have level 2/3 chargers to cut charge time/etc.
Lots of ways to make it a non issue, but Hertz doesn’t care. They will just fuck up instead and bill you for it unless you can get a lawyer or the national news involved.
It also doesn’t take more than 30 minutes to charge it from empty to 80%.
It probably takes a good chunk of that time just to do the paperwork.
Handing out/driving away from a charger at 80% is standard practice and fine. Starting at 40% at the home base is unacceptable. It’s such an easy problem to solve.
That’s charging from empty on a level 2 charger. A DC fast charger can charge it in 15-30 min.
Having one or two fast chargers at a large hertz probably makes sense for emergencies, because people probably are usually returning them mostly charged.
Some people are really stupid. Like seriously when it comes to every day functions many people struggle. Especially when it comes to vehicles, some people just know that there is on and off and forward and backwards… never take anything else into account. It’s because of this that flying cars would be a disaster, you can’t have these things breaking down all the time or running out of gas. I’ve seen people literally lock themselves in vehicles before, never change their oil, put antifreeze in the washer fluid canister, drive on a flat until the tire ripped apart, evevtually fell off and had to buy a new rim. Some people should really not be allowed to drive without passing some sort of “basic knowledge about vehicles and what to do when something goes wrong” course.
Some people should really not be allowed to drive without passing some sort of “basic knowledge about vehicles and what to do when something goes wrong” course.
And yet we hand out drivers’ licenses like candy because the alternative is being trapped at home with no bike or transit infrastructure.
I mean, the article does say they had never used an EV and rented a gas car but got given the Tesla anyway. I don’t think that’s a basic knowledge thing. They weren’t trying to drive something that they were unfamiliar with. Why would they know how the charging works?
There hasn’t been much of a reason for someone who doesn’t drive an EV to know about charging, which is very different from filling up a car with gas. And heck, every gasoline car uses the same gas nozzle, which isn’t the case for Teslas. Plus gas stations are never more than a stone’s throw away, which is more than can be said about EV chargers (let alone Tesla compatible ones).
Rental companies should try putting some stickers inside the vehicle which indicate where the manual door release is. It wouldn’t cost much and would at least save people unfamiliar with Teslas from getting trapped like this.
The driver and passenger manual door releases are literally in the most intuitive spot (in a Model 3 and Y at least, I haven’t been in an S or X to compare myself). So much so that I have issues with most new passengers trying to use that instead of the actual button that’s out in the open and very conspicuous on the top of the door arm rest, to open the door on my 3.
Even if someone is oblivious enough or has never opened a variety of car doors in their life to think of where a manual lever might possibly be located, and not find it on the door, it’s not that hard for someone to just Google it with the magic box we all carry now in our pocket/purse.
Even then though, how does someone run out of charge completely without noticing? The damned vehicle works just like an ICE, it tells you when it’s low. If you’re navigating somewhere it will even tell you whether you need to charge on the way, or if you need to slow down because you don’t have enough charge at a higher speed to make it. For fuck’s sake, it will even navigate you straight to the closest charger, you just have to tap okay on the screen. The article says they ran out of charge while searching for a charger. 80 miles of range when they picked it up… And they used it all searching for a charger… The car has a button on screen to show all nearby Tesla chargers. Any Hertz location renting EVs will be for sure within 90 miles of a Supercharger. This is 100% on the driver, sorry.
So many articles regarding EVs just give stupid people a free pass for having no common sense, instead shifting blame to the vehicle or a company instead of just calling a person out for being an idiot.
Even if we ignore EVERYTHING in the vehicle itself that will help you charge the car… How hard it it to pull out your phone and search for “electric vehicle charger”. I’m sure the first result is going to be Google or Apple Maps telling you how to get to a charger.
Even if we ignore that and just talk about not being able to get out because the battery is completely dead… The manual door release is in a normal spot where many other non-Tesla vehicles put their door latches. It’s not hard to find, nearly every first time passenger in my Model 3 tries to open the door with that instead of the normal button to pop it open automatically so it clearly is an intuitive location.
I’m sorry, apparently expecting a person to be able to type “car charger” into a search box, or either taping on the charger icon on the display or tapping on the navigate search bar and then “charging” to show nearby chargers is apparently too much to expect of someone with a driver’s license.
They couldn’t use a normal charger because they didn’t have an adapter. Apparently no one told them that they needed to find a Tesla charger. And did Tesla run out of color when they created that door knob? I wouldn’t even try to pull on that part of the button cluster.
They couldn’t use a normal charger because they didn’t have an adapter.
There really isn’t a “normal” charger since there are several different standards that have been used both in the US and worldwide. If you really want to go there and try to get pedantic about it though, the “Tesla” charger is now the North American Charging Standard. The standard that everyone is switching to, where other manufacturers are going to be providing adapters to their existing customers with old CCS plugs since new models will use the same Tesla connector and those old chargers won’t work on the new models going forward anyway.
Apparently no one told them that they needed to find a Tesla charger.
They also apparently didn’t think of looking for anything on the screen inside the vehicle itself that will literally navigate you to the closest charger either. Or look anything up on Google on their phone about it either. They just let the battery completely drain while driving around without trying to do anything to find a charger it seems.
Okay, I know this is going to personally offend you, but stupid people are allowed to have a life and do things in public. People with cognitive or executive disabilities are also allowed to rent a car. People with ASDs, people that come from an anti-tech religious family, people who have difficulty transferring knowledge from a familiar domain to an unfamiliar one even though it seems like it’s trivial to you – all sorts of people are allowed to use commercial services and expect reasonable accommodation. Honestly, I don’t even understand half the shit you just said, and I wouldn’t expect someone who’s never been exposed to an EV and is stupid etc to be able to deal with it on the fly while other stressful shit that happens when you travel is also going on.
Anyone who thinks even minor changes to a common user control system are easy should watch the average user when given a phone with a new OS for the first time and told to change a setting (lifetime iOS user -> android or vis versa).
I love my Tesla… but it isn’t clear to new drivers where they can and can’t charge, without some research. I can easily see someone assuming it works like a gas station and that they are all interchangeable.
How can you claim it’s not clear where to charge?This may have been true years ago with older interface versions, but not in the current interface. At least not on the Model 3/Y with horizontal screens. Not sure how the S/X with the vertical screens and separate dash cluster change the interface. But the vehicle in the article is a Model 3.
Even if you ignore the dedicated supercharger button on the right of the map, which can be hidden, the screen literally shows the navigation search box ALL the time on top of the map. When you tap on it one of the top suggested options is for charging, even without having to type anything in, and shows you all the nearby superchargers.
Things that are intuitive for you are obviously not intuitive for people who have to watch a bunch of YouTube tutorials to understand how the car works.
I think it’s probably the case of it being intutive for them now that they’ve used it. Once one gets used to a process or device it becomes intitutive for them. So it can look strange when people who aren’t familar with said device are struggling. e.g. riding a bike is easy once you know how. At least that’s what it looks like to me.
Even if you are completely right about everything being as simple as you say, nobody wakes up and says “gee, I’m going to be stupid/self-destructive/neurodivergent today and cause myself a lot of pain.”
The answer is to use it as a case study to improve the design or perhaps provide a leaflet, QR code to a PDF, or a laminated card to assist renters with controls that are safety critical or unique to the vehicle
That’s honestly not an issue 99% of the time unless you WAY outside civilization. That still leaves he entire Tesla supercharger network to use, which is and mapped directly into the car’s navigation interface and automatically used by the vehicle to let you know when and where to charge.
If you’re using the in-car navigation it will automatically include stops at Superchargers as needed to reach your destination. It even notifies you if you’re navigating to an area outside outside the range of the supercharger network based on your current charge level.
Even if we assume they totally ignored the in-car navigation on the big screen smack dab in the middle of the damned dashboard… Google maps includes EV charging info now for all the major charging networks.
Tesla’s software does A LOT to help prevent you from running out of charge. The only way it happens is if you ignore it all, or there’s a hardware issue with the vehicle, which doesn’t seem was the case here.
You’re right. That’s exactly why the manual release in an intuitive place where many other vehicles have their handles. It’s not hidden or behind some sort of panel or anything. It’s right there.
I’d like to say “oh, I see, thanks!" But that isn’t where any vehicle I know of has a handle. Every other car I’ve ever seen has them horizontally on the door, not where the power window controls are.
These are the most common things people shit on. If you don’t like Tesla I totally get it. Some of the quality issues and design issues are obnoxious. The CEO is very publicly an asshole manchild. There’s plenty to hate. Yet somehow it’s always the same 3 talking points of:
Doors are hard.
EVs can run out of power
EVs can catch fire
Each of these is immediately revealed as silly when you use one or even just Google people talking about their experiences outside of all the headlines complaining about doors. The vast majority of people need less than a few seconds to figure out the manual release, most do it by accident and the car tells them to stop. The car actively tries to get you to charge it with increasingly dire warnings and mitigations as you get closer to zero. EVs catch fire less often than gas cars.
Or maybe the damn door release should work regardless of power? I shouldn’t need special training to get out of a car in an emergency. Making an interior “manual release” that is hidden just seems like dangerously negligent design.
I have trouble believing any engineer was part of that decision. The default is always human safety. Hotel doors electronic locks will disengage during a blackout, elevators will stop in place rather than introduce a new risk by moving the humans further, your seatbelt is still uncomfortable and will always be and keep you alive, if an industrial machine senses danger the solution is too cut power to anything that moves.
Electricity is less reliable than a human, and if the human is dead it won’t matter how the door is opened.
Then why single out this specific company? I get that their public leader is being controversial and doing stupid/terrible things, but it’s more helpful and honest to talk about actual problems with their vehicles, such as the data privacy issues that have been uncovered over the past ~year. This artificially decreases their standing when compared to their competitors, and those guys really don’t deserve this benefit.
Hertz shouldn’t have gone with Tesla for EV’s. People not driving EV’s and are renting want something as similar to their current car as possible. Both my leaf, and my current Kia Niro operate mostly like an ICE. The torque is different. The acceleration is different. But the biggest difference is the shifter and that is still simple enough that you could figure it out in about 30 seconds. Other than that it’s a normal car. Anyone can get in and drive it. They don’t need to worry about figuring out the touch screen crap or how to turn on windshield wipers like a lot of people need to figure out with Teslas. Tesla’s used to be the pinnacle of EV’s but now they’re cheaply made, over teched out garbage.
Technology Connections is a YouTube channel hosted by a guy who explains various electronic gadgets, new and old. He had a series on analog TVs, he’s talked about VCR’s both VHS and Beta, (fun fact, beta failed because it was objectively worse) he had an episode on auto turn signals, and even an ancient juke box. It’s worth checking out.
I’m probably at least average intelligence and rented a tesla recently because it was what was available. I’ve never driven one before and was so frustrated with the experience.
As a renter, you only have the key fob which has a really vague drawing of how to use it that only makes sense after you figure it out. I had no idea you had to press it against the door column to lock/unlock it. How is that intuitive? why wouldn’t it be against the handle?
Had to sit and watch YouTube videos in the car to figure out how to do everything. It was really unclear how to easily turn off the car and the only way I could figure it out was diving into the settings menu to find a shutdown button, only to accidentally turn it on again as I’m leaving.
The manual door release is designed to be discreet! THE MANUAL DOOR RELEASE IS DESIGNED TO BE DISCREET!
Like, I get it that a person who buys the Tesla will take the time to learn it, but it’s a terrible rental experience. Especially when a lot of the tutorials are catered toward people who have the car tied to their phone, which you can’t do as a renter.
I wouldn’t say the women in the article are blameless, but it’s definitely not “adjust the mirrors and you’re good to go” like every other rental I’ve had.
The more I learn about those cars, the more I’m convinced that no thought at all went into their design beyond “hey that’s cool” (if even that, it probably was more along the lines of “hey, that’s cheap”).
I still don't really see what's cool about it other than: it goes really fast when your battery is charged. I guess some people are blinded by the big screen, but the whole interior looks like a concept car that was never ment to be released that way. It's all cheap tricks an gimmicks
fuckcars
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.