I was catching up on some older Scientific American articles and came across this one from March.
It's an article about the problems caused by car dependency, and it hits all of the important parts of a solution (zoning, regulation exceptions for SUVs, free parking, etc).
There are no surprises to anyone who has been orange-pilled, but it's still nice to see this kind of article in the more mainstream press.
One can usually find bs on their main page, e. g.:
'Superheavy Elements Are Breaking the Periodic Table'
'These Gray Whales Are Shrinking and Scientists Aren’t Sure Why'
@notjustbikes Is it true that most urbanists have better knowledge of cars than average regular drivers? There are so many things people are missing when they are driving, which makes me feel weird.
Your wonderful SUV-bashing video pushed me into a weird rabbit hole about what kinds of cars are in the streets and which kinds of driver behaviour are bad. Turns out there are so many mad people on the road that I was not previously aware of, some of them leaving signs in their cars that can be seen when the car is parked.
For example, I have seen more than one car with stickers on the rear windshield, or something is behind the rear windshield, mostly plushies. This indicates the driver is not using the rear view mirror. Outrageous.
'In the U.S., the costs of car dependency keep growing, far above the $12,000-per-year average expense of owning a new one.'
'Coast-to-coast, the cars and trucks we drive cause about 16 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.'
Of all GHGs? Only US?
'We can start by reforming zoning laws to eliminate low-density and single-family residential home restrictions in new developments and to add flexibility for stores and enough homes to support them.'
???