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?

  • drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    72·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know how to explain this to you this without resorting to crayons but let me try to put it succinctly:

    Low dB are still dangerous to health if they are constant and over a long period of time.

    You don’t have to reply, I know you disagree.

    • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.comEnglish
      22·
      2 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·
        2 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.