Degrowth

781 readers

1 users here now

Discussions about degrowth and all sorts of related topics. This includes UBI, economic democracy, the economics of green technologies, enviromental legislation and many more intressting economic topics.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

MrMakabar

257

#Degrowth does not require the end of all production, but a change in what is being produced... (files.mastodon.social)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by MrMakabar to c/degrowth

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Found here: https://mastodon.social/@breadandcircuses@climatejustice.social/112966284280235637

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] soloner@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I'm confused... Aren't there EV SUVs now? Why is he calling out SUV and not, say, pickup trucks? Even so, why say any specific car type vs. just saying ICE vehicles?

[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

I could be wrong, but I think there are other possible reasons SUVs were mentioned. I think having more walkable cities would part of (or at least adjacent to) the degrowth movement. As such, SUVs are kinda the poster child for the vehicle size arms race which makes roads less safe for pedestrians and cyclists.

I wouldn't be surprised to see pickup trucks on that list too, however they do have a somewhat more plausible use case.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

SUV

calling out SUV's specifically for multiple reasons - ICE SUV's are the worst, having the low fuel efficiency of work trucks, while being less safe than trucks or cars for passengers or pedestrians. EV SUV's are just taking the same problems - truck frames, lots of weight, poor visibility - and adding an EV powertrain to ameliorate the fuel inefficiency. But since they have to haul around all the extra SUV weight, they're at best a poor compromise instead of a large improvement.