Can there be ecological transportation?

[Flytox]

Another element of the debate is the amount of movement per unit of area and time.

Even for a highly polluting transport, if this transport is very infrequent, the consequences are "derisory" on the scale of a country.

Problem = (number of polluters * number of trips) / Geographic space.

[manuxme]

Sorry for my non active participation, lots of taff and little time to connect

I think to treat this subject from the following way:

Respond directly to the answer with "NO", explain the why and how, and end with a "BUT" on a positive and optimistic note, with the Mulhouse tramway powered by renewable energies as an example.

So certainly in this example I do not take into account the manufacture of the tramway itself which certainly will not have been ecological.

I do not know if it is a good idea, what do you think, because again I do not know how to leave.

Thanking you for lighting my lantern.

[chatelot16]

bin you are very sad!

why say no from the start ... as much to say that the best for ecology would be that there is no man on earth?

especially from the SNCF which operates a system that could be the best

remember that the railroad was invented when the available engines were weak

with the current engine we could make very ecological trains ... instead of making them go at the speed of planes

the manufacture of your tram is it ecological: the ecological cost of an object is to be divided by its lifespan ... at the time when the wagon of the snscf lasted more than 50 years their ecological quality was unbeatable ... the current equipment has lasted too short is it the right way?

[the middle]

The sailing train
http://www.enerzine.com/3/4354+Le-train ... ique+.html

[Ahmed]

Chatelot16, when you write:

... do not forget that the railway was invented when the available engines were weak.

... I think you mean "when the available engines were of low efficiency ?.

@ Manuxme: Otherwise, there is a perfectly ecological mode of transport and, moreover, very widespread: walking (it would be unforgivable to forget it!).
Less well but sympathetic, the donkey with or without a team; the bike...
This for what is usual, now nothing prevents us from finding other possibilities, such as for example the very attractive ultra-ultra light train powered by passengers (pedals): technically nothing prohibits it (an airplane would be more hard! ), but the producer / consumer separation is an obstacle much higher than the technique: any solution which goes in the direction of the autonomy of individuals is ipso facto banished!

[chatelot16]

the low energy efficiency was not a problem: it was rather the low mass power which meant that the steam engine could not make a good road vehicle ... with the railway it runs better and despite its weight a steam engine could run fast

it was invented with horses before the steam engine: wooden rails, then cast iron

[dedeleco]

And above all, the steam engine does not start a quarter of a turn in one second, you have to heat the steam before, more than an hour !!!

Very rude, if you had to go back to the steam engine car !!

[Ahmed]

Very rude, if you had to go back to the steam engine car !!

I believe that there were tests in the USA of motorization vapor on automobiles: the starting was not instantaneous, certainly, but only took a few minutes, if my memories are correct (that does not mean that the vapor is the solution!).

[chatelot16]

there were steam cars at the beginning of the automobile ... but that was already the end of the steam: it was much more efficient than the classic locomotive 50 years before, and it seemed usable only because the first gasoline engine were bad

with the progress in mass power of gasoline engines the vapor completely disappeared from the automobile ... but continued for the trains which were very satisfied with the low mass power

the progress in output was not essential because at the time the automobile was a luxury: it was the performance that counted, the consumption did not bother people ... especially compared to the maintenance of the horses which cost much more expensive , that you have to house and feed even when you're not using it

in big cities the horses were not ecological at all ... the pollution by dung was worse than the pollution of the current air

[Did67]

If the question is "what ecological transport", you must first frame the problem by clarifying the abuse of "ecological" language.

Return to the definition of econology ...

Then, the questions generally hidden under this improper designation arise:

- the footprint: energy? other materials? [how much and where does it come from]; that can be linked to the question of "sustainability" or "renewable"

- generalization: such a solution accessible to an ultra-minority will no longer be so "great" if it is "generalized" to the greatest number [see the thread on bioethanol]