Updated: Mar 5
When it comes to vehicles, the main conversation is how to reduce emissions. Hybrid cars, electric cars, busses, trains, bikes, and scooters are all viable options to help people get from point A to point B with fewer carbon emissions. While this is certainly progress, especially considering the massive weight oil companies have over our economy and politicians, it’s still mostly in the category of less bad options.
Sustainability is the midpoint between destructive and regenerative. When we rip open the earth’s crust in search of oil only to spew it into the atmosphere through our tailpipes, we are destroying the planet. There is absolutely zero evidence that this course of action benefits anyone or anything except employers and oil companies. By reducing emissions, we are certainly becoming more sustainable, but sustainability is an extremely modest goal. That is, if we fail to achieve it, what we have won’t last because it is unsustainable.
To actually cross the sustainability midpoint, we need to think beyond less bad solutions. For example, we talk about replacing gas powered cars with electric cars, but we don’t talk about replacing cars with trees that actually absorb carbon.
I know what you’re thinking. James, I can’t get to work in a tree. And that is undoubtedly true. But consider this. How many cars actually use the street you live on every hour? Even in cities as bustling as New York City there are countless streets that only see 1-2 cars per hour. We’ve designed places that are hostile to people in favor of a couple cars driving by every once in awhile. Now who’s being absurd?
The truth is, we don’t need cars nearly as much as we’ve been conditioned to think we do by slick advertising and poor street design. 95% of car trips are under 30 miles, and the average car trip is less than 6 miles.