![2016-10best-cars-lead-photo-664005-s-original[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/E9fqCaT.jpg "2016-10best-cars-lead-photo-664005-s-original[1].jpg")
How would a world have developed without the discovery of petrol/oil/cars in general? Could it still be advanced in the way we are today?
>>47794894
Plastics would probably not have developed to anywhere near the same extent.
Electric vehicles and related technologies would probably be more advanced than what we have now.
>>47794934
would coal be the most prominent power source (prior to nuclear, solar anyway)
I am mainly trying to develop a world that is as developed/more developed than now, but has no cars, but I am just trying to think of how people would get around without them, and how the world would be different to ours if oil and cars didn't exist - since it would affect a great deal of industries and development.
>>47794993
>but has no cars, but I am just trying to think of how people would get around without them, and how the world would be different to ours if oil and cars didn't exist
Public transportation, in the form of street cars/metros/subways and the like maybe? Or maybe day to day travel inside a city would be via golf cart type vehicles like some beach communities have, with intercity travel handled by trains.
A big major difference would be in air travel. No petroleum products really puts a damper on air flight. No air flight means the intercontinental freight and passenger transport network would be vastly different. Unless you are talking much more advanced than we are currently.
>>47795228
I was definitely thinking trains or similar for intercity, and inside p much just walking or perhaps trams.
Air travel would probs not exist - maybe blimps? Regardless I think most freight would be via train/ship now, or at least that's what i'm aiming for.
The very first automobiles were steam powered, and electric cars were popular as well until petrol priced them both out of the market.
A more interesting problem is that without oil we loose pretty much every physical thing in modern society: plastics and chemicals are entirely oil based, even our food has petrochemicals in everything from the pesticides to the preservatives.
>No, James don't! It's not worth it.
>>47794894
We start with slave labor, then move onto the Industrial age with burning coal (and if not coal, wood).
Railways would still exist, given that you can make a wood or charcoal powered train. It's not as easy as a coal one, but still worth the cost.
With the discovery of electricity, Trains get switched onto it pretty fast, and the coalburning cars switch a bit slower.
"Hybrid" cars that can run on an overhead powerline in a city, or (slow) combustion intercity, are common.
This, of course, assumes nobody patent trolls the entire process. Looking at you, Edison.
>>47794993
>I am mainly trying to develop a world that is as developed/more developed than now, but has no cars
You're trying to develop a world without personal transport machines?
The "muh guns muh children muh nightclub shootings" faggots win. Only instead of muh guns, they come for muh cars. Do you know how many people die in car accidents every year? Far more than guns.
You just need a bit of the ol' overbearing government that bans useful (but potentially misuable) technologies. Possibly at the request of some faggot who profits from trains or horses, and has paid off politicians to support him.
>>47795443
Electricity was discovered well before the industrial age you dingus.
Heck the only reason the industrial revolution wasn't solar powered was trade sanctions and a sudden dramatic drop in the price of coal.
>>47795278
>maybe blimps?
Maybe. The issue, as I see it, is that petrol fuels and engines, give really good power to weight. Without that, even blimps would have to give up a lot of cargo capacity to have coal or steam engines. There's a good reason flight didn't become a thing until after we had the internal combustion engine.
Now if you have solar power and electric motors, then a blimp turns in to a better proposition. As it has a huge surface area to mount solar collectors.
>>47795523
There were also plans to power all of Europe with solar energy in the early 1900s, until the plant had to be disassembled for scrap after a certain war broke out.
>>47795481
Though note:
If you're putting players in this world, and your justification for something is "Patent trolling corporate fatcat in league with corrupt bureaucrats who has a mass of 'muh safety ban it pls' faggots as minions, then your players are very likely to try to topple the whole thing.
>>47795523
Huh. Did the Industrial folks know some method of converting sunlight to power more efficient than we have now?
Do they use one of those giant convection towers? Those things are awesome.
>>47795551
Is that just giant mirrors reflecting sunlight to heat water in pipes?
>>47795588
Yes. That particular plant was steam power but with heat from the sun.
>>47795588
Not mirrors, just regular white smooth material since they don't have to be as accurate as a mirror, while silver and glass are relatively expensive compared to painting tin white.
But yes, that's a solar plant and it works by heating a transport fluid (water). Works surprisingly well too, but needs a huge surface area.
>>47795481
Since this is a pretend world, the way it comes to be does not involve millions of years of dino's etc. getting turned into organic fuels, hence the lack of oil - an overbearing gov. might work for some parts of the world but somewhere logically, someone would want personal transport of some degree - cars being the most obvious. I just need a reasonable reason to not have them exist/not have the desire or capability to develop them. It's harder than I thought.
>>47795396
That is fascinating. I wonder how a lack of plastics would affect technological development. I suppose now we have plastics from things like corn starch but its not exactly the same as plastics made cheaply from oil.
>>47795540
Would solar power have developed, without the discovery of plastics? If so, perhaps I could have relatively modern technologies powered via solar power, though sadly that doesn't solve my car issue.
>>47795720
Even without petrol, electric and steam cars were popular well into the last century.
The thing that made cars poplar aside from cheap petrol and a legion of returning veterans with money to blow, I think, was industry lobbyists and/or corruption.
Runabouts weren't terribly popular in urban areas until laws were passed to shove pedestrians off of the streets, allowing cars to travel quite fast across town.
The word jay in jaywalking means bumpkin or redneck, implying that a person walking on the street is an ignorant retrogrouch who needs to get with the times.
Even after that, trolleys and light rail were the primary means of urban transportation until the automotive industry bought all the rails and tore them right out of the roads.
Sounds to me like the easiest way to avoid cars is to just make energy production to bulky to be reasonable for mass produced automobiles. Have everything done by trams and trains
>>47795991
It's a shame, really.
You can use alcohol to fuel vehicles and turn the byproduct into plastics
>>47796232
'murca.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-I8GDklsN4
>>47796348
This
Also vegetable oils
Both are nearly as cheap to produce as gasoline and diesel. You'd still have cars everywhere and they'd be almost exactly the same.
>>47799284
/are/ vegetable oils as cheap to produce? if so, why do we even use fossil fuels? if they are equally efficient?
I find it a little bit hard to believe tbqh senpai, but perhaps you are correct.
>>47799502
>why do we even use fossil fuels?
Lobby
>as cheap to produce?
Depending of the crop used, it would require a huge volume of the stuff regardless I think; and you'd have people bitching that you could use the land used to feed people instead of feeding the industry.
>>47799502
Vegetable oils aren't anywhere near as efficient, although the Diesel engine was originally designed to use peanut oil.
Ethanol is slightly better, modern engine computers can squeeze more oomf out of it and the by-product of alcohol is brewer's grain, an excellent livestock feed.
>>47794894
Yes. They just rely on railways more.
Ww1 played a big part in the focus on cars and petrol.
Urban planning and society would be a bit different, built around train stations instead of highways. It makes for pearl necklaces or spider webs looking maps.
Chemistry would be different, but as others anons have stated you can make plastics out of other things.
Sugar beet would probably be everywhere.
