Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

antigone382

(3,682 posts)
Fri May 2, 2014, 05:59 PM May 2014

Continued dependence on highways will result in millions--maybe billions of people dying.

I have not followed the highway toll issue very closely, except to see that numerous DUers are dismayed at the effects it may have on lower income people. I take those effects seriously as well. But I cannot emphasize enough how deeply our entire economic and social system has to change for us to even hope to avoid absolute global catastrophe. Our dependence on the car is a major factor in the ravaging of our climate. I don't know whether interstate highway tolls are intended to address that reality--even if so, I certainly don't think they are a fully adequate answer--but I am desperately hoping that they will have an effect if implemented.

Much of the world is already experiencing unthinkable hunger, conflict, suffering and displacement related to climate change. We will face it here too. We are already seeing the effects of this in billion dollar weather disasters, in massive crop failures and the mass slaughter of livestock which has finally trickled down to exploding meat prices this year, in wars and revolutions all across the world that over and over again can be traced to energy that is increasingly expensive, and farm land that is increasingly scarce as weather patterns change.

Furthermore, whether it's popular or correct to talk about peak oil, the fact is that there is more and more competition for nonrenewable fossil fuel energy, and that increasingly destructive and dirty forms of that energy are being drawn upon to meet the demand. This will put even more pressure on the climate, as well as on our budgets as the prices inevitably rise.

By and large, a fossil fuel driven car culture has no way forward; it must be abandoned as close to immediately as possible. My interpretation of the given evidence is that we must be forced to do this. If there is a relatively painless way to encourage that cultural transformation, I simply cannot oppose it, despite the genuinely trying consequences I know it will have for me and for many others.

As a person who has lived without running water and shared rice with her dogs, I know poverty. I acknowledge that paying to use the interstate is a very difficult prospect for a lot of people. But imagine how much more difficult it is to live through your ancestral lands being carved up, your ancestral rivers buried and the fish that have sustained your people for thousands of years rendered poisonous so that the world can run on tar sands. Imagine how much more difficult it would be if the form of agriculture that has worked for centuries in your marginal climate can no longer support you because what was once arid but workable land is now fully desert. Imagine how much more difficult to flee the island which has been home to you and your ancestors as far back as anyone can remember, as it sinks inevitably beneath the rising waters. The U.S. has the highest *per capita* emissions anywhere in the world. We are creating this problem, and our failure to effectively address it so far is a grave crime to the rest of the world.

I regret I won't be able to participate as much as I would like to in this thread, because I only have Internet for limited times of day. Thanks for reading, though.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
1. I always think if you are saying we need to
Fri May 2, 2014, 06:03 PM
May 2014

stop doing something that is necessary to do, it isn't enough to say stop it you need to provide an alternative.
We will always need to get to point B from point A. So we are not going to stop using the freeway system. Never mind the need to move goods.
My alternative would be to invent cars and travel that does not pollute.

antigone382

(3,682 posts)
2. That is a good point, and usually I would do so.
Fri May 2, 2014, 06:08 PM
May 2014

A viable alternative is a difficult thing to wrap one's mind around, especially in a thread OP--I already feel like I bordered on something so long most DUers won't read it anymore.

Several books have been written about what we need to do, by peole much smarter than myself. Some time I will try to send you links to some of them and you can see what they have to say. I can tell you that for a living I work for an agricultural education program that teaches low income people how to sustain themselves with food they grow, prepare, and sell themselves. I think that's a start (hypocritically, I currently commute about 20 minutes to do it...but I'm looking for closer housing options at the moment).

 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
3. Except it actually isn't something that's necessary to do.
Fri May 2, 2014, 06:11 PM
May 2014

It's necessary because of cars and 70 years of car-centred development. But it's necessary, full stop.

The Easter Islanders needed to keep building those giant moai statues, too. And look how that turned out.

upaloopa

(11,417 posts)
5. What should take it's place?
Fri May 2, 2014, 06:17 PM
May 2014

It is easy to say stop. That leaves someone to figure out how to go from where we are to where you say we should be.

Response to antigone382 (Original post)

wandy

(3,539 posts)
7. Public transportation, or why we can't have nice things...........
Fri May 2, 2014, 06:49 PM
May 2014

Forgetting that 5 bags of groceries and a bicycle may not be a winning combination, sometimes you only need a car because their ain't no other way to get there.

Think America's Public Transit Sucks? There's One Group You Can Blame

The Koch connection: BRTs are cheaper than light rail systems and more effective than traditional bus service, but they require a dedicated bus lane and traffic signal priority. Understandably, some drivers are upset about losing a lane, and property owners are worrying about having a mass transit system run straight through their neighborhood.
But in this case, Tennessee legislators had notable supporters: the famously conservative Koch brothers.
The Tennessee branch of the billionaires' super PAC, Americans for Prosperity (AFP), has been behind the movement against Amp from the very beginning, and are even responsible for its inception.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/88053/think-america-s-public-transit-sucks-there-s-one-group-you-can-blame

This is the type of problem that needs to be fixed before we are able to worry about unnecessary pollution and conserving resources.
 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
9. I dunno.....getting rid of cars wouldn't really solve much of anything, TBH.
Fri May 2, 2014, 07:35 PM
May 2014

In fact, the majority of Co2 pollution comes from power plants alone, believe it or not. Jet travel is a (not so close) second. Cars contribute maybe 15% of Co2 emissions worldwide, and that's probably a highball estimate.

If we really want to get a good start on mitigating climate change, we need to get rid of those power plants and replace them with renewable energy ASAP; and get some carbon capture up there while we're at it.

hunter

(38,311 posts)
10. One way or another the automobile age will end.
Fri May 2, 2014, 09:58 PM
May 2014

We can do it on our terms, create pleasant pedestrian friendly cities, or we can let nature shut down our civilization and decrease our population in the usual manner.

"Alternative" energy schemes will not replace fossil fuels. The only way to quit fossil fuels is to quit fossil fuels.

JVS

(61,935 posts)
11. Electric cars will need the interstate as much if not more than current cars.
Fri May 2, 2014, 10:21 PM
May 2014

In fact, any future systems are likely to piggyback on the interstate system's foundation. If we were to abandon it, we'd be left taking airplanes for relatively short distances or just don't iving less efficient surface roads.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Continued dependence on h...