this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2026
506 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
87390 readers
3836 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So the thing about trains is they need tracks. Building tracks involves a lot of carbon output. You need to make steel, you need concrete, you need lumber, you need gravel. You need to ship all of these things to wherever you want to build the tracks. You need to buy the land that you’re going to build the tracks on. If you want high speed rail, the tracks have to be very straight and have very specific routes. If you want to electrify the train, you need even more metal for wires.
All that infrastructure, versus just an airport. It would take a lot of math to convince me one is better than the other, here. Once we have electric planes (the tech is mature, you can ride zero emissions planes in Canada right now, we’re just waiting on FAA approval in the USA), I think the balance will be clearly in their favor.
I love trains, but I think there’s room for both trains and planes in an environmentalist future.
Just as soon as we get those carbon capture factories working!