• kakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      If we’re naming modes of transportation that pollute, it would be remiss not to point out the worst one: ships.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        On the contrary: ships are the third-best one when you consider greenhouse gas emissions per ton-kilometer of cargo moved, which is the metric that matters. They only pollute a lot as a category because there is so much fucking shipping going on. (Reducing that is also an issue, but one for a different thread.)

        The only things better are bicycles and sailboats (because they use no fossil fuels at all). Even trains are less efficient, although in the long run they have the advantage of being possible to electrify and run on renewables.

        Granted, the other pollution (not greenhouse gas) from ships is terrible because they use the cheapest, nastiest fuel. But as bad as that is, it’s still a much, much lower-priority concern than climate change.

        (TBH, what we really need are nuclear cargo ships.)

    • pot_belly_mole@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t understand your logic. Say SUV’s were on average 50 % worse emitters than regular cars. Now when picking a car you face the choice of emitting 1 unit or 1.5 units of emissions, for basically the same service. If we look around, these kinds of choices are everywhere. Transportation, food, housing, electric power. Often the difference is even bigger than 50 %. Being consistent in choosing/forcing/promoting the better alternative results in a HUGE difference. Of course, if you look at one decision, it’s not decisive. But transportation and cars definitely are a major factor.