LogFAQs > #979575581

Wanglicious posted...

this approach i think is more fair, basically going too far in the other direction will end up hurting millions of people in way too many ways to count (food, gas, oil, transport, employment, air quality due to more cars, etc) because of concern of a freak situation. if there's a 100 ton boat floating along a port city that means the place is also receiving 100 tons of materials and there's no feasible way of doing this on land. so transport will continue no matter what and while you can try to minimize the dangers (another bureaucratic check could be more strict safety checks for any large transport) but you need a functional city and a way to get goods to different areas on land. to some extent the city could throw in a bunch of ferries to try to ease the transition but it's not going to be an easy decade.

Couldn't trains get the job done fairly effectively? It'd require a proper rail infrastructure, of course, but that has its own upsides like boosting tourism as well.