• @Cryophilia
    link
    19 months ago

    If money is the bottleneck, then it’s probably best to find more money

    Well I mean if you were the King of America, sure. But the money constraints are there because of political opposition, if we (democrats) could override that we would.

    From a time efficiency perspective, doing both would be best.

    I think this is where we disagree. Public transit projects are notoriously expensive and take a long time. Electrifying the existing infrastructure (roads and cars) is much easier.

    I think we might be coming at this differently. In my view, the environment is the primary goal, and efficient transportation is a secondary goal. I think you’re seeing them both as equal goals.

    It seems like we do disagree on the exact impact both options have

    It seems like you’re talking in good faith here, so I’d be willing to find data. But before I do, I want to suggest a simple thought exercise to you: if all vehicles are electric, isn’t that essentially a 100% impact? An equivalent would be 100% electrified public transit. The former scenario involves keeping the existing systems, just swapping to electric. The latter involves redesign of a majority of our infrastructure, AND electrifying. Doesn’t it sound like the latter option will be more difficult?