Recent comments in /f/UpliftingNews

DeTrotseTuinkabouter t1_j687rnl wrote

I'd say it differs. First of all: you don't have to bike. We stil have cars. We have buses. We have trams. Etc. Thinking that you are left out of society if you don't bike is a very odd notion. Biking is simply nice and convenient.

In terms of accessibility the Netherlands is not as good as for example the USA is in some matters - their disability act is really great. Having said that: one benefit in Amsterdam is that it's a compact, walkable, bike-friendly city. And I reckon that often lends itself well to being disabled. You don't have to worry about driving somewhere, you can just walk (or roll) to the supermarket. But no personal experience!

For parents it differs what they do! Often they'll still have a car for some stuff (cars in general are common, just less necessary). But you can also put your kid on your bike with you, there are special bike seats for kids that you can put on your bike, very akin to a car seat. And bakfietsen (bin bikes) are very popular for parents with young children. You just put the kids in the bin. Kids also learn to bike from a young age.

2

DeTrotseTuinkabouter t1_j6871iu wrote

Our new towns, cities and neighborhoods also have great biking infrastructure. So nothing to do with being old.

As for happening elsewhere: it doesn't have to happen everywhere. But there are tons of places in the world that are perfectly suitable for biking and have very lacking infrastructure. Heck: even if it is just for the months without snow.

1

AutoModerator t1_j686pbg wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

tritikar t1_j682hbm wrote

Also I think you have misunderstood me.

I don't mean run out of energy as in "have zero energy available to us". Of course I realise that's not what you meant. I mean run out of energy as in "no longer have enough energy to maintain our current level of modern civilisation". Which correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's what you are suggesting will happen to us within the next 200 years?

1

tritikar t1_j680x7m wrote

No we won't. I mean temporarily sure the cost of energy will increase until it reaches a point that it makes the expenditure required to develop the infrastructure for other erergy options economically viable.

After that, near limitless energy that is far cheaper to generate than the current paradigm.

2

WikiSummarizerBot t1_j67z3ia wrote

Closed wing

>A closed wing is a wing that effectively has two main planes which merge at their ends so that there are no conventional wing tips. Closed wing designs include the annular wing (commonly known as the cylindrical or ring wing), the joined wing, the box wing and spiroid tip devices. Like many wingtip devices, the closed wing aims to reduce the wasteful effects associated with wingtip vortices which occur at the tips of conventional wings. Although the closed wing has no unique claim on such benefits, many closed wing designs do offer structural advantages over a conventional cantilever monoplane.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

2