Somehow? Shouldn’t this say “Much older cities around the world have more modern elements than cities like Los Angeles and New York because they were razed to the ground during the world wars and rebuilt in modern times.”?
Somehow? Shouldn’t this say “Much older cities around the world have more modern elements than cities like Los Angeles and New York because they were razed to the ground during the world wars and rebuilt in modern times.”?
Oedo line too. And Fukutoshin like.
Blackfriars is over the Thames. I don’t think there’s a US station that is as creative in use of space.
Not to speak of the overground or DLR.
I think it’s just trade offs. The US gives individual power, those other places give state power. Former excels in certain places but provides veto when you achieve steady state. So things stall here.
Notice that in things which can be done with individual power, like developers making housing developments in Texas, outcomes are good.
They tried to replace a level crossing with an overpass in my city, arguably good for everyone. Well, they did argue it, and it didn't happen. Even though there is already a train line there, apparently an overpass was too much infrastructure for them.
If it's solely in regards to public transit, I think this is largely due to cultural differences. The US still has the remnants of an individualistic frontier mentality. I don't know, but tend to think it's not by coincidence, that the better public transit systems tend to be near the eastern seaboard.
A century ago, most American cities had some kind of tram system. And the cities were connected by railroads - actual passenger trains. People were sold the idea of automotive independence. That notion was completely manufactured for our consumption. We didn't have the bureaucracy in place to keep mass transit in place, so when people used it less, it lost money and was largely torn out. Without bureaucracy in place to give people time to think, we're stuck with the swift wisdom of the market.
When I lived in Seattle, I was half a block from an old commuter line that's buried in asphalt now. The city just installed "innovative" light rail a few blocks away. Progress! /s
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/7/8562007/streetcar-history-demis...
Basically anything you’d normally see in a Not Just Bikes video…
It’s not cultural btw. It’s corporational. It’s corporations which are driving these things - which don’t seem to have as significant of a voice in other countries.
A lot of “cultural” things are corporations at work. This is a very small example…
Most people prefer gas stoves because they are better for cooking than electric. They are generally considered better for cooking because they burn hotter than electric. It's been a long time since I've worked in food service, but I can't remember a single kitchen using electric stoves to good with and for good reason. This was when gas was much more expensive than it is now and I doubt the natural gas lobby has much influence on those choices.
And of course, modern induction electric elements are better in every way as long as you don't mind throwing out all your cheap alluminum pots
In what sense? Both have BTU ratings to determine their capacity. Just for kicks, I looked at a few units online at a mid-range price point of about $1500. The gas ones had 18-20 kBTU burners and the electric were around 10 kBTU burners, so the gas has considerably higher output. As you say, gas is basically instantaneous once the flame is present while electric has a lag, so it's going to take longer to get to that capacity for the electric. Maybe your point is that electric transfers heat better? I couldn't find any sources on that. Add to it that the colors of the flame/heating element as a general rule of thumb for temperature, the gas is higher on the temperature spectrum.
So really it is the gas lobby that is fueling this resistance to the switch. I myself used to buy into the cooking with gas was better because of all the media, my partner, and so forth. But the truth is - cooking with gas sucks for the most part. The newer induction ranges with temperature sensors and what not are actually better. And no waste heat and no toxic fumes except for what you’re cooking.
Honestly - I’m a big convert. I just need to move into a non-rental so I can install 230v induction instead of having to use 120v stuff. (Which is still good but obviously 5000w is much better than 1800w)
And if we compare shit electric to a gas stove then yeah - gas is better. But once you start using decent induction… it’s not really a problem unless you like to move your pan around a lot and even then - you can learn a different technique to get a similar effect.
The newer induction ranges are awesome. But they are very expensive by comparison to a comparable gas range. For an average person, they are probably out of range (ha) in terms of price point. Add to it that your existing cookware may not work with it, and it's a deal breaker for a lot of average people. For someone like a landlord, they will almost always go with the cheaper option. If I was renting and had the choice between an cheap electric range or gas, I'd always prefer the gas. I hope the tech progresses enough to bring the price down to be competitive in the future.
It's a lot like the discussions around heat-pumps. I love the ideas of heat pumps in homes. But I also realize the initial sticker cost is too much for people to bear. When natural gas prices have been as low as they have been in the last decade, it's hard to blame people for selecting a natural gas furnace.
I love the more efficient options, but I do think people don't always recognize they are, to an average consumer, a luxury and a hard sell when they are just trying to make ends meet. That's partly why some of the talk comes across to some as elitist and it hurts the ability to convert people.
In this case one I'm glad to support.