Read on Twitter
Any time people propose an improvement to the way we do things, someone finds a funny corner-case and shouts "but SOMETIMES!!!" and tries to shut all progress down.
A parable that has parallels to current anti-LTN arguments:
A parable that has parallels to current anti-LTN arguments:
No change made to anything is ever perfect, but that does not excuse the status quo. We'll make big gains on things, and accept small losses as compromise. We do this all the time, but it's easy for opposition groups to make mountains of molehills.
In the case of that LED traffic signals video, the molehill was frost on the lens that no longer melted off due to the waste heat of inefficient incandescent bulbs. People earnestly tried to claim that we shouldn't use the longer-lasting less-expensive less-wasteful tech!
And so you get people who find funny corner cases in LTNs, like "if I drive from here to right next door, that's now a hojilliion percent more driving and thus pollution!!"
Of course, those trips are precisely the kind that shouldn't be driven.
Of course, those trips are precisely the kind that shouldn't be driven.
But also that's only focusing on the (entirely solvable) snow-on-the-lens-type problem, and ignoring all the other enormous problems the scheme takes care of quickly and cheaply.
Nobody would suggest we go back to expensive, constantly-failing, inefficient and dim incandescent traffic signals. That would be like putting coal fires back in our kitchens.
And nobody wants to remove their LTNs once they've had the same level of everyday experience!
And nobody wants to remove their LTNs once they've had the same level of everyday experience!
Incidentally, this thread came up in a chat elsewhere about bird deaths from wind turbines (which apparently paint jobs can sort out neatly, now), but also this joke: https://twitter.com/crazyunlikeafox/status/1317460840988217344
