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

Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 595 posts

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#171

Post by bryanlarsen »

Saline9515 wrote: post #100
oblio wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be real here, a huge chunk of car traffic in cities is purely for convenience. Once that's reduced by say, 50%, everything becomes much better, but nobody gives up convenience voluntarily.

The problem is that, among casualties, you create an environment that is hostile for families and disabled people.

If there are fewer cars on the road, there is a lot less traffic, and driving because much easier for those who are car-dependent. Example: the Netherlands.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#172

Post by Zigurd »

flomo wrote: post #138
epolanski wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

In the USA, the working poor generally don't work downtown, and it's really the industrial areas where there is awful transit service. So cheapo used cars are a must for these folks. There is some awful HN bias here where young healthy well-paid tech workers live in some boogie part of SF/NYC/Boston/etc and enjoy the "car-free lifestyle" (and I've been there), without any idea how the other half lives.

A friend of mine is writing a history of the Massachusetts Hill towns. The Strathmore paper company plays a big part in that history the mill owners built housing for their workers within walking distance of the mills.

I also know of a tourism industry company that is buying up older hotels that are no longer competitive in the local market to use as seasonal worker housing.

There are solutions other than having someone drive a beater for 45 minutes to get to a low paying job.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#173

Post by AnthonyMouse »

masklinn wrote: post #134
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The improvement in air quality is overwhelmingly a result of banning diesel cars. It is, of course, possible to ban diesel cars rather than all cars. The people who live in the city don't want cars because it's the people who can't afford to live in the city who need them to get there.

> it's the people who can't afford to live in the city who need them to get there. What are you talking about. Paris's public transport reaches out 60km away from the city, and that's not including mainline trains (including high speed). The people who can't afford to live in the city have taken public transport to get there for 50 years.

The ones who live directly adjacent to a rail line weren't generally the ones in cars to begin with, unless they were the ones using a vehicle to actually transport something.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#174

Post by telotortium »

10-1-100 wrote: post #16
bri3d wrote: post #12

Worth noting that 50-60% of passenger cars in France are diesel, but Paris have been gradually banning older higher emission diesels (Crit’air 3, 4, 5) from Paris. Banning cars outright also works, of course, but I suspect a lot of the reduction can be attributed to getting particularly bad diesel cars out vs. the limited areas where cars are entirely restricted.

Also worth noting that with modern emissions standards (and transition to EVs), over 50% of handful particulates come from tires, brakes, road surface wear, and resuspended dust: https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/non-exhaust-particulate... I don't think there's any healthy level of private cars coexisting with humans in a city, without even considering the more immediate harms from crashes, etc.

> I don't think there's any healthy level of private cars coexisting with humans in a city

Concentrating humans together into a small locality, which is what a city is, will inherently have a significant environmental impact. Cities before private cars were still quite polluted, because transportation still has to take place just to keep the city running. Electric vehicles are the best-case scenario for truck deliveries, construction vehicles, and everything else you need to keep a city running on a day-to-day basis.

Moreover, you have to consider all cities in this analysis, not just posh, post-industrial cities like those in the US and Western Europe. Manufacturing has to take place somewhere, and logistics considerations imply that most manufacturing will be located next to transportation infrastructure. Just like any other economic activity, manufacturing benefits from talent clusters (a major reason cities exist), so manufacturing will tend to concentrate in cities as well, or at least the suburbs, which you can easily observe in China.

If you really hate air pollution, move to the country and be willing to sacrifice the advantages of cities.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#175

Post by sokoloff »

EasyMark wrote: post #117
epolanski wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

Suburbs are fine. We are in 2025, not 1925, there is no reason why work from home isn't an option for information workers and others who don't need to be physically on premises. You are completely ignoring how much that cuts down on traffic and would lower the cost of real estate, so more people who aren't millionaires could live downtown. We also have electric cars that have basically zero emissions, there is a tech…

I drive an EV. I am not under the mistaken impression that it’s zero emission (or even close).

It emits particulates locally and power-generation-related emissions at the fossil fuel plant that provides the majority of my grid power.

Is it better than an ICE? Probably. Is it “basically zero emission”? Nope.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#176

Post by flomo »

adrian_b wrote: post #150
flomo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the myth. Streetcars were actually torn up because busses were much cheaper, there was no conspiracy. The streetcars were also old and cold and ppl hated them. (I lived in a streetcar part of SF, and loved it, fwiw. But the only reason it's still there is a tunnel.)

Establishing a new bus service in an area where public transportation had not existed must be indeed much cheaper. However it is impossible for the operational and maintenance costs for a bus service and for the roads on which the buses go to be cheaper than for an electric streetcar, unless some prices are fake. It is true that I have seen enough cases where electric streetcars have been replaced by buses, but I can…

It's interesting, in San Francisco, the streetcars got too heavy for the old tracks so they replaced them with about 4 feet deep of concrete. That is actual infrastructure and not "fake". (along with all the stops and handicap ramps and etc. obviously, a paved street is going to exist either way.)

Bribes and the mafia may have been a factor[0], but that's how American cities do things.

[0] eg. https://www2.startribune.com/streetcars-buses-minneapolis-st...

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#177

Post by Saline9515 »

StopDisinfo910 wrote: post #147
Saline9515 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Paris, 90% of the metro transportation system isn't accessible to wheelchairs and strollers. Buses are overcrowded and slow. Who doesn't enjoy to see someone cough on their newborn while fighting for a space for their stoller ?

Buses are perfectly accessible in Paris. They are crowded but acceptably so for a city of 10 millions. It’s not fair to expect the collectivity to accept the externalities of cars so rich people can avoid some slight discomfort.

Paris is not a city of 10 millions, it has only two million habitants. And cars are not reserved to rich people, why would they be? I grew up in Paris, my parents weren't rich, we were living in public housing and we had a car.

Families are not second-tier citizens, and currently the public transports are not suited for them. On top of the other problems, such as the pleasure of having to deal with crackheads and various homeless people in the metro when you have a baby.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Paris

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#178

Post by itsmartapuntocm »

epolanski wrote: post #77
grg0 wrote: post #31

Cars in cities, let alone designing cities around cars, is one of the greatest tragedies of modern life.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

It’s all by design. Car dependent suburbs with no transit access make it easier to keep “undesirables” out of your neck of the woods.

Robert Moses infamously made great use of infrastructure and urban planning to reinforce redlining.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#179

Post by Zigurd »

EasyMark wrote: post #117
epolanski wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it's one of the biggest promoters of inequality. I am an European who studied at OSU in Columbus for a semester and it was absurd to me how on one side there was lots of work downtown, yet you could live 20 miles of it and it would take you two hours by public transport to get there, an odyssey. People without a car, insurance, poorer parts of the society were cut off from the job market for not having a way to c…

Suburbs are fine. We are in 2025, not 1925, there is no reason why work from home isn't an option for information workers and others who don't need to be physically on premises. You are completely ignoring how much that cuts down on traffic and would lower the cost of real estate, so more people who aren't millionaires could live downtown. We also have electric cars that have basically zero emissions, there is a tech…

Private cars are an economic sinkhole. They make no financial sense. My town in the exurbs used to have rail service and stagecoaches. The necessity of private cars is a marketing triumph. Not a choice.

Re: Air pollution fell substantially as Paris restricted car traffic

#180

Post by Saline9515 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #171
Saline9515 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that, among casualties, you create an environment that is hostile for families and disabled people.

If there are fewer cars on the road, there is a lot less traffic, and driving because much easier for those who are car-dependent. Example: the Netherlands.

Netherlands have as many cars as most the developed nations.
Post reply on HN