this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
164 points (96.6% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] ekky43@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Right, forgot that Iceland, Greenland, and Faroe Islands are technically not part of Europe.

Edit: yes, I know that the Faroes are not on the other side of the Atlant, but they are far enough away to be annoying to build tracks to.

[โ€“] tal@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Iceland and the Faroe Islands are normally grouped with Europe, and Greenland with North America.

[โ€“] ekky43@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

Exactly! While Greenland and Iceland are geographically considered American (or half Amarican, half European for Iceland) , they are geopolitically considered European countries.

This means that a European rail, connecting all European countries, would need a rail to Greenland, which is on the other side of the Atlant.

Now, I'm not arguing against trains, they are a useful tool for the right job, but planes fill a different role (small load but high speed transport to hard-to-reach locations) that trains cannot fulfill in the same capacity. So instead of abolishing planes, we should try to force them to be more environmentally viable.

Thank you.