this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
360 points (99.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

13776 readers
752 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
toaster@slrpnk.net
grue@lemmy.world
Toaster1@lemmy.world
360
Major cities around the world (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by sixeyo@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A recent study of mode share (the % share of transportation trips by car, transit, walking, biking etc) relative to city size and income levels in almost 800 cities in 61 countries.

Data corresponding to 794 cities, with a combined population of almost 850 million people, is used to model the vast heterogeneities in the way people move in cities.

Some urban areas rely heavily on cars, with less than 10% of their journeys on alternative modes of transport (either walking, cycling or Public Transport), whilst in other cities, less than one in four journeys are by car. Among the 794 cities, 22.4% of the journeys are Active mobility, 26.2% are Public Transport, and 51.4% are by Car.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412024001272

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mittyta@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

c/dataisNotbeautiful

It took me 5 minutes to identify which line aligns with which axis

[–] drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is a standard type of graph:

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yours is labeled in a much clearer way.

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 7 points 3 days ago

Totally agree, the graph in my eyes is pretty clear it is the labeling that is shitty because it tries too hard to be clear. There is the letters of each point (A, B and C) which get the largest heading, but because they are only one letter long they do not appear as the main information. Then there is the description of each axis as second heading acompanied by symbols that do not really add anything, and then the discription of each point as a third heading which just float around in a random spot. Chaos.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Loam drives more, whereas clay either walks or takes the metro?

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 2 days ago

clay is just as likely to drive as to catch public transport

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

Disagree, I really enjoyed the design and presentation of this graph.

[–] MummysLittleBloodSlut@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 days ago

I was there in the trenches of the soil wars. They were made of loam.

[–] humble_boatsman@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Neat how all that data just fit nicely into a triangle too.

[–] TommyJohnsFishSpot@lemy.lol 13 points 3 days ago

This is a pretty standard way of showing proportions between 3 things; it wasn't invented for this graph specifically.

[–] mittyta@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Yes, I agree, that when I got this, it does become useful

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I am stuck in the hellhole known as the US and I hate cars.

This article confirms my rage, thank you lol.

[–] CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

In the US, walkability is a luxury. Being able to afford to live in a walkable area is expensive.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You might like Mackinac Island...

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Wondering what European city that is just south of the "Dhaka" text.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It's a shame that the source didn't publish raw data

[–] lemeteque@slrpnk.net 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Humanius@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I'm not sure if the question "How do you travel to work?" paints a complete picture.

I live in the Netherlands, and like many fellow countrymen I commute to work by car because it is the most convenient option. But other trips I make on a daily basis are usually either on foot or by bike, and if I go somewhere in the weekend I regularly take the train.

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago

personally i didn't find the car to be the most convenient option, you have to look out for speed (lest you get fined), other drivers, need to find a parking spot, and so on... eh, I prefer public transit. Or going by foot. And on bike it's also easier to park somewhere.

But yeah, it doesn't exactly paint a whole picture because most people vary with how they travel.

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago

Exactly what I was gonna point out. I travel my transit to work, but my wife uses the car just because it’s super convenient and closer. But on 50% of trips together we transit and 40% is car, and 10% is walking to our local breweries or bars.

I think this is only work data, which isn’t a great picture.

[–] jinxedID@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Reading through the paper, I think this is the raw data https://github.com/rafaelprietocuriel/ModalShare/blob/main/ModalShare.csv

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ugh I already have too many projects and too little free time but making that chart interactive sounds cool...

[–] jinxedID@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Turns out you can find interactive visualizations of the data here https://citiesmoving.com/visualizations/ 🎉

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 3 points 3 days ago

How about that sub-saharan city where 90% walk everywhere, also an outlier.

[–] Humanius@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

~~My guess would be either London, Paris or Berlin~~

Edit: I think I misunderstood which data point you were referring to

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Two more images from source (tap for spoiler)

[–] birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Only 4% in Utrecht using public transit? Seems farfetched. Probably that is referring rather to those who only ever use public transit. Most use both bicycle and public transit.

[–] huppakee@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

It's not '% of people' but '% of journeys', so according to the data 1 in 25 journeys is with public transport. Still feels off to me, but could be they've tried to avarage the data according to the population and if it would for example include teens and elderly it would make a lot more sense already. I'm also not sure if they allowed for journeys with multiple modes of transport, if you for example cycle to the trainstation take a train and then walk to your destination will it count for 3 journeys (which would lower the % of journeys by car) or would it count as one (with public transport being left out of the count, artificially raising the % of journeys by active transportation)

[–] teft@piefed.social 3 points 2 days ago

I live in a large latin american city and i’d say this is correct. Society at large here doesn’t seem to have a preference in people moving. We have great public transport as well as great bike lanes in addition to our normal streets and roads.

[–] Siegfried@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Latinamerican results are comparable to European best cities... surprisingly good

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 days ago

And they're barely trying. Latin American countries invest most of their transportation budgets into car infrastructure, even though the minority of citizens uses it. Why? Because Latin America.
Imagine what they could do if there was any political will.

[–] Eiri@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

That implies that even Montreal doesn't go below 50% car use. I honestly didn't expect that. Everyone knows it's dumb to try to even get a car into the island.

[–] mereo@piefed.ca 6 points 3 days ago

Maybe with the new upcoming REM lines, car usage will decrease.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Drop into street view at a random intersection in Montreal and chances are you'll be able to see more cars than people. This is sadly still true for most cities in the western world, outside of their central business districts. We don't like to spent time in places where there are lots of cars so we bias ourselves, but most places still do have lots of cars.