this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
259 points (95.8% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) 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
[–] yata@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't necessarily wrong, it's just two different metrics meant to measure two different concepts.

[–] julianwgs@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Thanks for your comment. Not wrong in the sense that the data is wrong or faked, but that the metric is not useful. Especially when better metrics are readily available for that region. Can you name me one prediction or result which you can infer from the frequency of train travel other than „fun facts“? (I am actually really curious :) ). With the modal split you can for example calculate CO2 emissions or estimate needed capacity increases if you want to replace one mode with another and much more.

[–] kraxelkatze@feddit.de 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the number of trips says a lot about the role trains play in people's everyday lives, maybe even more than the kilometers travelled. Sure, that's not a "metric", but it does give us an idea if people use trains just for vacation a few times a year, or for their commute to work or other daily trips. For someone taking a train just once a year, even if that is for hundeds of kilometers, we know that they will use a different means of transportation for most trips.

[–] Jajcus@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Some trains may have the same function as buses or trams in other places (and metro... is metro a train here?), so the everyday commute of people in city A may not be that different than commute in city B, when first uses trams, and the second one has a local rail network with light trains. Actually the trains would probably have bigger negative impact on environment and life conditions in this scenario.

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

The environmental impact is gonna depend a lot on how the trains are powered. Some European countries are nearly 100% electric now. Others way less.

[–] cestvrai@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I really like when I can just show up at the station and jump of a train without the need to consult a timetable beforehand. Not sure what you can infer, but I value frequency!

[–] theoretiker@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That unfortunately is the other kind of frequency, an not the one depicted in the graph

[–] cestvrai@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Ah, right. I misunderstood the graphic…

[–] Spzi@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, absolutely a game changer. Maybe comparable to having your car parked in front of your house vs the need to rent a car for each trip.