this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2024
388 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
59081 readers
3285 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- 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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why not just make normal public transit? Like school busses aren't a thing here so I took the regular bus to school like everyone else, it's a lot more versatile too since people can take it to more places.
School busses don't have adult strangers and other issues tied to them. They only go from people's homes to school and back.
What issues do adult strangers cause? And what are the other issues? Also legs work pretty good to get to a bus station, I hear kids have those.
The article talked a lot about school buses in rural areas. Mass Transit isn't a thing in most rural areas.
In urban cities, yes that's a feasible idea. Most people in the USA live in places where mass transit isn't feasible.
We are a nation of car drivers who bought into the dream of having a house on a large lot in the suburbs. Mass Transit exists, but in the burb it's generally a parking lot where you take a bus to your job downtown.
Yea, my whole point is that stick a bunch of bus lanes there instead of having a separate 2 times a day bus for children.
Most people in the US absolutely live in areas where Mass Transit should be an option. Like 80% of us live on either coast, and both coasts are basically just one continuous city at this point. Sure we call the areas different names, because that's where the city started, but the coasts are effectively two massive cities that should absolutely have robust mass transit.
That other 20% that inhabits the other 98% of the land in this country, yeah not feasible for mass transit outside of the bigger cities.
Best you start walking now. School could be a mere 60 miles/96K one way from your home, (even if you live "in town" it's still a 2 mile walk to school). Oh and the temperature outside is -35C this morning. Good luck! And yes, where I live that's how far we need to bus students due to low population densities. And also yes, the winter time temperatures do get that low - it's been around -15F/-26C every morning for the last 2 weeks. Toss in a nice amount of wind, and frostbite can occur in a mere handful of minutes on bare skin.
School buses also ensure all students arrive at the same time. Usually a 10 minute window. It also limits possible accidents, with young children in particular, crossing uncontrolled intersections in busy neighborhoods. Since school buses drop their passengers off at the door.
Lots of reasons to use school buses because not everyone lives within walking distance in quiet places or somewhere warm.
Schools is canceled if it's -20C for 1-6 grade and -25C for higher grades here, I'm assuming that is also a thing in the US. And I have walked to school at -25C before only to walk back because it was closed, I think I was in 3th grade. It's not some deadly arctic weather you make it out to be, just dress properly.
Also all of that is pretty irrelevant since I was saying you should have public transit that people can just use, including kids for getting to school, not that kids have to walk the whole way to school. Not just special busses children use twice a day.
That is not a thing in the US - there would be too much cancelled school in many of the northern states.
How? My country is like high enough on the map to be on the same line as central Canada and we get like a week or two of -25C or more plus some random cold snaps.
Also that's completely beside the point since my whole point was to have normal bus lanes instead of a school bus.
Shrug, I'm not a metrologist to be able to explain everything that goes into why it's normal to have -25C days in the winter here. Our cold snaps are down to -35-40C, not -25C.
I didn't respond to your other point for a reason. I only responded to your 'I assume this is a thing in the US' to correct your assumption. Do with that what you will.
Nope, school does NOT get closed here because it's too cold. If it did, we would seldom have a school day. A blizzard might have school be a couple hours late, icy road conditions will get school closed. But cold? Only once were all the schools closed when the windchill hit -75C about 15 or 20 years ago. It was unprecedented and caused a lot of controversy. And yes, we know how to dress properly here - it's below freezing 6+ months out of a year. But, while it's a mere -26C right now, the windchill is currently -35C. It's foolish to expect a 5 or 6 year old to wait 15 or 20 minutes in the open for a public bus or to walk a kilometer plus to school. Frostbite can happen in as little as 10 minutes to exposed skin. Dedicated school buses avoid those possibilities.
And due to the low population density, there is NO public transportation here. And we do need to bus some children 95km one way everyday. Otherwise they would need to travel well over 100km one way to the next closest school. The average bus route here is about 30-40km one way.
And if you REALLY want to save on transportation, you should keep all the children at home and just have them attend classes on-line. After all, we have the technology to do so, (and did so during covid). But be mindful of the tanking educational scores. Turns out children really suck at showing up for on-line classes..........
Not everyone lives in a nice warm place like you with all the amenities you personally expect to have.
that doesn't fix the toxic diesel pollution does it?
Did you know that regular buses also come in electrical variants?
Even more shockingly: So do trams and metros.
obviously electric buses would be the solution which is shockingly the point of the argument. How dense are you?
Less dense than thinking that public transport can't use electric vehicles, claiming that public transport wouldn't fix diesel issues.
who said that? Can you even read?
You:
OP there wanted to know why school buses instead of ordinary public transport buses, separate from any diesel vs. electric issue.
You then went ahead and said "nuh-uh if we don't have dedicated school buses we can't fix diesel fumes".
That's why you got downvoted, that's why my snarky retort got upvoted. You may not have meant it like that but that's how what you wrote reads to other people.
I never suggested we don't or do have dedicated school buses. My point is crystal clear: all diesel buses, school or otherwise, are toxic to humans. School buses are a bigger problem, directly exposing kids to these harmful particulates. It's astonishing how my simple point about electrifying public transport and or school buses, which I've repeated ad nauseam, gets twisted. People's preconceived notions or maybe their reading comprehension problems are skewing the real issue here. It's not rocket science, yet here we are, going in circles.
Neither do school busses since only kids take those. If like most people took the bus instead of drove that would help immensely even if it was the most polluting bus ever.
um wtf? We all wearing gas masks or something? You realise diesel fumes are toxic to people right? Kids catching buses spewing toxic gas is not a good situation. I think you're focusing on the climate changing issue of pollution and not the pressing issue, which is the toxic fumes that come from diesel buses.
What kind of weird busses do you have in the states? Most busses (And a large amount of cars) here run on diesel and have no such issue.
if you think that you're delusional mate.
Sorry... you think there is no issue with children breathing diesel fumes?
Probably not a good idea for them to suck on the tailpipe but diesel busses are like the most common type of bus and they don't pump the exhaust into the cabin. So unless busses in the US do that or kids like the taste of tailpipe I don't see how that is even happening.
Because they stand next to the bus and wait in a line to get on while inhaling the fumes.
Are you saying school busses in the US are like a fog rolling into town or something? Because I'm having a hard time picturing how kids can have enough exposure to diesel fumes the way you described it works or how petrol fumes aren't an even bigger issue since they are waiting near a car road. Also having regular busses would reduce petrol and diesel fumes they breath in while waiting anyways if it works the way you describe.
What is 'enough' exposure to diesel fumes?
Enough to be harmful. Humans get exposed to dangerous things every single day, even if you don't leave the house, it's just in a quantity to not effect you during a human lifespan.
And you know it is not enough to affect children how? Have you done a study? Because the National Institute of Health here in the U.S. did.
It's 2 decades old so I hope the US has gotten better busses in the meantime because modern busses don't have this issue:
"The study showed that a child riding inside a diesel school bus may be exposed to as much as 4 times the level of diesel exhaust as someone riding in a car ahead of it."
The level of harm in that study was around 30 potential extra cases of cancer per million kids, that is fairly low considering the harm added by just general exhaust fumes for those living near busy roads. Even the study itself shows that living near a road frequented by trucks is more harmful.
So my suggestion of just get public transit would be better remains mostly resolute, I would just add that use trains for cargo and not trucks.
Ok... how is a kid living on a farm 10 miles from the main road and 20 miles from city limits going to get on public transit?
Stick a bus stop somewhere in walking distance and run that route based on need. Like my parents live on a farm about 6km out of town and there's a bus stop right near the house that bus goes twice per day and adults can ride it too.
Where in walking distance? We have miles of unpaved road here with few homes on them and acres of farmland. I don't think you understand just how large the U.S. is.
If you live like 4 hours from the nearest settlement then you're fucked either way, school bus or not but those people are in the vast minority everywhere in the world. Walking distance is around 30 minutes on foot in my opinion. Busses work on gravel road, the road in front of my parents house was gravel until recently.
You're not fucked if the school bus, which is required by law to go to you, goes to you. Which is how it is now.
And it was -20 F / -28 C here a few days ago. You expect a six-year-old to take a 30-minute walk in that weather? Really?
If your kid needs 8 hours per day of commuting that should be some form of child abuse, school bus or no.
Here school is canceled for -20C for under 9th grade and -25C for higher in rural areas, that seems like a fair policy. Though I have walked to school at -25C in 3th grade I think and back because I didnt check the temperature, and that was walking about 40 minutes one way. It was fine, you just need proper clothing and if you live in these cold regions you know that.
Sorry... it's child abuse to live on a farm and have children?
It's child abuse to make your kid spend 8 hours of their day every work day on a bus. If you live in the ass end of nowhere find a better way to educate your kids, it's the price you pay for living away from civilization, like if I choose to live on top of a mountain I won't be expecting the postal service to climb 3 million steps to get to me.
Okay, how many hours a day should a child spend on a bus before they need to be taken away from their parents? And does that time include the time it would take for a six-year-old to walk down a gravel road in arctic weather?
The same amount a school bus or a regular bus needs to get you to school.
That's not a number of hours. You said four hours each way was child abuse. So how many hours does a child have to walk and ride a bus before it is child abuse?
Not sure why you hold my opinion on that in such high regard as it doesn't matter but I would say the commute by bus shouldn't be over an hour one way and the walk to the bus station shouldn't be longer than 30 minutes. That would be my ideal at least if I was making any rules.
Got it. My wife was abused and should have been taken away from her mother. She had a 90-minute bus ride, but she didn't have to walk through arctic temperatures because the bus was required by law to stop outside her house.
I'll let her know that her mother was terribly abusive to her and cut off all contact with her granddaughter.
Yea, you do that buddy.
Public transit would still be the superior choice to school busses.
Right, because public transit is required by law to stop at every child's house like a schoolbus. And it would take the same amount or more time because, and I'm not sure you know this, distances don't get shorter if you use public transit instead of school buses. So I guess kids on public transit are abused too.
Did I ever claim regular busses are faster? They are better because more people can use them, thus lowering the amount of cars on the road which reduces pollution more while not losing much or any utility for kids getting to school.
You seem weirdly upset with the off-hand comment I made that a 8 hour commute every work day would be child abuse. I'm not sure if long commutes cured your cancer or something but chill.
Huh. Why would I find a comment suggesting children should be taken away from their parents due to long bus ride times to be objectionable?
I can't imagine...