this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
50 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10181 readers
155 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Kind of oversimplified when railways and public transport is grouped under infrastructure when it could as well be in the climate protection category
Railways and public transport are grouped under infrastructure because even if climate change was not an issue, public transport is infrastructure that's good for people and the economy. There's plenty of statistics to support the idea that good public transport infrastructure has a wide range of benefits, including improved economic growth, that pre-dates climate change by decades, and will still be the case long after climate change is fixed. The Victorians didn't build railway lines all over Europe because trains are better for the climate than cars. :)
I just wanted to make clear that if someone were to read this with malicious intentions to discredit this as not doing much for the climate at all that it's not as easy as just looking at this simplified pie-chart