My original question was “How do we disincentivize the purchase of pickup trucks/SUVs” but then I thought it would be better to approach the larger problem of car dependency and car ownership. One option is, of course, to create public transit infrastructure and improve it where it already exist. This, however, doesn’t change the fact that some will still choose to drive. What would be the best ways to discourage people from owning personal cars?

  • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.comEnglish
    23·
    6 months ago

    Ahhh ok, because you asked so nicely.

    Nothing in the article mentions sound levels in the dangerous range.

    In fact, it can be sumed up with "This just in, traffic can be heard! More at 11!

    Around 100 million people are exposed to road traffic noise above 55 dB

    Drumroll Leeeeeeets check the charts!

    It basically says traffic can be heard in the distance.

      • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.comEnglish
        22·
        6 months ago

        Its easy to disagree with information that is wrong.

        You can listen to sounds at 70 dBA or lower for as long as you want. Sounds at 85 dBA can lead to hearing loss if you listen to them for more than 8 hours at a time. Source

        As I mentioned in my previous post about the subject, “Noise pollution” is (according to that article) defined as “unwanted” sounds, not dangerous. The “harmful” part, as it turned out, were simply distractions.

        Your article doesn’t define what they consider noise pollution nor any dangers ambient sound may cause. Before you claim any “danger to health”, you need to define what qualifies because we are both using these words very differently.

        • hitwright@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          6 months ago

          I’m pretty sure, the “danger for health” argument is not just hearing loss.

          For a simple example. Try sleeping in a room with noise level at around 70dBA. Your sleep quality will suffer to say the least. In a longer time you will develop insomnia like symptoms.