Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

ryanblakeley.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 117 posts

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#11

Post by woodruffw »

explaininjs wrote: post #9
woodruffw wrote: post #7

On top of roadkill itself, there's a reasonable (IMO) argument to be made that car-centric development is a big source of our looming water problems: the US has drained or redeveloped astounding amounts of natural swamp, marsh, and wetlands to make space for car-dependent living patterns. That means less water percolating into already over-stressed aquifers. It's a trite thing to say, but our grandchildren are going…

> much like we remember our grandparents for leaded gasoline and DDT What? I associate DDT and leaded gasoline with my grandparents not-at-all. Is anyone here really holding their grandparents feet to the fire over these?

I don’t literally associate my grandparents with leaded gasoline. It was meant to be metonymic.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#12

Post by alphanumeric0 »

tony_cannistra wrote: post #2

Road ecology is a very interesting and important field, particularly the modeling of animal interactions with road crossings - all very interesting and important. The rhetorical title is absurd, however, and I'd argue even Ben Goldfarb would agree with that. Habitat loss is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss, as a result of many, many drivers. You've heard of all of them. The presence and proliferation of…

"We're in the middle of this biodiversity crisis and extinction event that is human caused, with cars kind of at the center of it in a lot of ways"

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#13

Post by schiffern »

tony_cannistra wrote: post #8
woodruffw wrote: post #7

On top of roadkill itself, there's a reasonable (IMO) argument to be made that car-centric development is a big source of our looming water problems: the US has drained or redeveloped astounding amounts of natural swamp, marsh, and wetlands to make space for car-dependent living patterns. That means less water percolating into already over-stressed aquifers. It's a trite thing to say, but our grandchildren are going…

This is most definitely the case. It has also caused enormous problems for places where flooding was already a threat, by removing the natural buffering capabilities that places like wetlands have. In fact, a whole field (stormwater engineering) exists to mitigate this.

  > In fact, a whole field (stormwater engineering) exists to mitigate this.
I haven't checked in lately. How are they doing getting over the age-old "Drain! Drain! Drain!! Faster! Faster! Faster!" mantra?

This ethic of course only contributes to the problems of flash flooding, lack of buffer, lack of aquifer recharge, and (ultimately) alternating drought/flood cycles.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#14

Post by tony_cannistra »

schiffern wrote: post #13
tony_cannistra wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is most definitely the case. It has also caused enormous problems for places where flooding was already a threat, by removing the natural buffering capabilities that places like wetlands have. In fact, a whole field (stormwater engineering) exists to mitigate this.

> In fact, a whole field (stormwater engineering) exists to mitigate this. I haven't checked in lately. How are they doing getting over the age-old "Drain! Drain! Drain!! Faster! Faster! Faster!" mantra? This ethic of course only contributes to the problems of flash flooding, lack of buffer, lack of aquifer recharge, and (ultimately) alternating drought/flood cycles.

I don't really know. I live in Washington, though, and we sure have a lot of man-made storage ponds.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#16

Post by explaininjs »

woodruffw wrote: post #11
explaininjs wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> much like we remember our grandparents for leaded gasoline and DDT What? I associate DDT and leaded gasoline with my grandparents not-at-all. Is anyone here really holding their grandparents feet to the fire over these?

I don’t literally associate my grandparents with leaded gasoline. It was meant to be metonymic.

I don’t think dissolving the blame is particularly helpful here. A minuscule number of individuals had full control over the use and knowledge of the impact of leaded gasoline, and everyone else had absolutely none. For 99.999% of folks those people have no relation to their grandparents, and “blaming” an entire generation for the malice of a few is ill guided at best.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#17

Post by tony_cannistra »

alphanumeric0 wrote: post #12
tony_cannistra wrote: post #2

Road ecology is a very interesting and important field, particularly the modeling of animal interactions with road crossings - all very interesting and important. The rhetorical title is absurd, however, and I'd argue even Ben Goldfarb would agree with that. Habitat loss is the single largest driver of biodiversity loss, as a result of many, many drivers. You've heard of all of them. The presence and proliferation of…

"We're in the middle of this biodiversity crisis and extinction event that is human caused, with cars kind of at the center of it in a lot of ways"

I'm just not that compelled by that argument. If cars are at the center, then so are a hundred other things that are impacting biodiversity at least as much.

I'm really not trying to be a car stan here, I don't really care about cars. But focusing on cars is kindof a dumb distraction, in my opinion.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#18

Post by jokethrowaway »

There's an argument which comes up often when talking about a society without a central government: "Who will build the roads?"

Besides the simple idea of neighbours building and maintaining small roads, I argue that I wouldn't want the highway.

Between the ecological damage, the noise, air pollution, increased reliance on shipping things from far away vs buying local - are we really sure building the massive road network in the US was the best option? Consumerism may be good for the economy, but I argue it's not in our best interest.

Sure, I love the freedom to drive fast anywhere but at what cost?

And who knows, maybe if we didn't have a central entity redistributing resources in an arbitrary way and shaping the market, some entrepreneur would have worked on flying cars and skipped the road altogether.

Re: Are roads the biggest driver of ecological destruction?

#20

Post by woodruffw »

explaininjs wrote: post #16
woodruffw wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t literally associate my grandparents with leaded gasoline. It was meant to be metonymic.

I don’t think dissolving the blame is particularly helpful here. A minuscule number of individuals had full control over the use and knowledge of the impact of leaded gasoline, and everyone else had absolutely none. For 99.999% of folks those people have no relation to their grandparents, and “blaming” an entire generation for the malice of a few is ill guided at best.

Blame is your phrasing, not mine. I agree with your point about knowledge and agency; I think future generations will look back on us with disbelief and shock at our shortsightedness, not blame.
Post reply on HN