Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities • Hacker News Board

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#271

Post by modzu » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:08 PM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #105

modzu wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hopefully carbon fiber continues to get cheaper, because having a lighter bike really does make a difference on climbs. that said, anybody can go up a hill in a low enough gear(!), but psychologically it can still feel like a lot of work to pedal so much and go up so slowly. so part of it is learning how to ride. for that reason i agree hills are a (surmountable) barrier to entry and probably hillier places have less…

Carbon frames have significant drawbacks compared to metal frames, especially for everyday bikes. Sure, the weight reduction matters when you're racing, but carbon frames don't stand up very well to the bumps and scrapes of a bike commute. If you crash a metal frame, it may bend a bit, and if it's unsafe to ride, it's generally immediately obvious. A carbon frame can look perfectly fine, but suddenly snap at an inopp…

i generally agree with you, but i also think it's a little more complex --

carbon fiber is extremely strong for its weight -- if you have an accident that is going to render it unsafe, you are sure likely to know. its true you can bend a steel frame back into shape (not so much with aluminum), but steel also rusts, and with anything the quality of the build matters (what do the welds look like, is it lugged, etc)

in any case im talking about a future where carbon is cheaper and replacing it doesn't cost the equivalent of a college degree

if anyone wants to read far too much about this stuff, ya gotta read sheldon brown:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-materials.html

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#272

Post by Spivak » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:08 PM UTC

village-idiot wrote: post #13

CloudYeller wrote: post #5

In most cities, especially in America, there's a vicious cycle: 0) Cycling is dangerous because there are too many vehicles on the road 1) There are so many vehicles on the road because everyone knows it's dangerous to cycle 2) Go to 0 Breaking out of that loop requires building safe infrastructure for cycling, like indestructable cement dividers between bike lanes and vehicle lanes or no-vehicles-allowed-in- days

And creating the infrastructure is wildly unpopular, because typically it involves either taking lanes away from cars, or slowing them down. The initiative to reduce car-pedestrian collisions in LA has stopped because the drivers put pressure on politicians to stop slowing traffic down. Advocates are implying (and sometimes outright saying) that a few dozen deaths a year are an acceptable price to pay for a shorter c…

> Advocates are implying (and sometimes outright saying) that a few dozen deaths a year are an acceptable price to pay for a shorter commute.

Why are you implying that this is faulty reasoning? I mean traffic deaths would be virtually eliminated if the speed limit across the board was 15 mph. But I know I would rather drive 65 because the risk is worth it -- and over a large population that increase in risk turns into real tangible deaths. Same with any risky behavior that we all engage in every day.

Let's do the back of the napkin calculations, take Columbus Ohio as the example of an everycity. Columbus had in 2014 750,000 commuters and say your average person makes $25/hr ($55k annually).

Say you were able to shave on average 1 minute off their commute.

($25/hr) * (1hr/60m) * (1m) * (2 trips/work day) * (261 work days/yr) * (750,000 people/trip) = $163,125,000/yr

How does a few dozen lives compare to $163 million dollars of value? Is slowing down traffic worth it?

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#273

Post by always_good » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:12 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #73

xapata wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all. I just put on my balaklava and some knobby tires. It's not that bad with the right clothes. I wouldn't walk around in Boston winter without my face masks either.

> I'm genuinely curious: do you wear glasses? How do you keep them from getting fogged up/iced over when riding in the winter? Don't waste your time. Pro-cyclists are the most biased and privileged people I've ever met. Just get on your bike, it's so easy! forgets that some people have bad knees . All you need is some goggles when it rains! forgets that people wear glasses . Just wait for the snow to be cleared! forg…

I don't understand this reasoning.

People use this same logic when others suggest eating healthy and exercising.

"And if someone works three jobs and has ten kids? Hmmmm? Then what?? Gotcha!"

Begins to reek of someone using the condition of others to rationalize why they themselves can't be bothered to do something. Not to mention the fact that you're more privileged in a car than on a bicycle.

Cycling really does attract the same nonsensical aggressive reactions as eating healthy and exercising.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#274

Post by ng12 » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #222

oftenwrong wrote: post #94

A city that is bike-friendly is good, but a city that is walking-friendly is better. The bicycle is a great way to exceed "walking distance", but why should that even be necessary in day-to-day life? It is easily possible to build a neighbourhood where three generations of a family can live, work, attend school, shop, and more within walking distance. Walking is the simplest, most universal, and most natural mode of…

More people can walk than can/will ride a bike. Many old people avoid biking due to poor balance and strength, but can walk without issue. Biking allows you to move without moving your full body weight across your for and ankle. Bicycles are great for people with lower body joint issues. Three wheelers work great for people with balance issues. Tokyo is a testament to the power of bicycles to increase mobility for al…

Not to mention if your city works well for bikes it tends to also work well for mobility scooters and wheelchairs.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#275

Post by mmirate » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:14 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #99

jbob2000 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this weird thing that happens in northern climates where all the bikers and scooter riders magically disappear sometime around October and don't reappear until sometime in April. I can't figure out why this happens, we should really aim to understand that before we push bikes and scooters on half the human population. I don't think it's the car lobby that causes this disappearance.

There's also these things called "clothes" humans have been using to protect themselves from the elements for quite a while. Humans walked across Siberia with little more than animal skins. I think most can handle a 30 minute bike ride when it's a bit chilly.

Sure. But in other geographies, what kind of clothes can possibly protect from 96-degree heat and 100% humidity?

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#276

Post by village-idiot » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:15 PM UTC

apathymannequin wrote: post #192

village-idiot wrote: post #9

Anyone who's believed that the key to sustainable futures is simply swapping out ICE for electric motors simply is being wishful at best, willfully difficult at worse. The biggest problem I have with electric cars is that they continue to encourage low density low efficiency suburbs with hours long commutes into the high density cities. This is economically unsustainable, roads are expensive, and will only get worse…

Well, can I at least have an EV on my bicycle for commuting? To me the biggest challenge once cities get cars off the road is to deal with motorcycle traffic (assuming they're not in a city where cars were always secondary to motorcycles). That allows a wider range (distance from transit) of commuters to avoid fully-powered vehicles. Ideally I'd love to see more of these bicycle silos, both attached to transit hubs a…

Oh yeah. EV bikes are awesome. Far more space efficient than cars (although less than buses), and producing very little extra road wear compared to regular bikes.

I think there’s a quiet bike revolution going on right now, EV bikes went from exotic and home made to common practically overnight. I’m excited to see how this will change our society.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#277

Post by brightball » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:16 PM UTC

village-idiot wrote: post #190

brightball wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is that not having children en masse as a group goes against biology. It's happening in a lot of places too. https://www.businessinsider.com/do-it-for-denmark-ad-campaig... It's not shaming to point out a thing is happening or that it a thing is biologically necessary to further the human race. You're welcome to call it anything you want, but there's a lot of "shaming" that's gone in the other direction a…

Okay, then I’d argue that having 2 kids goes against biology. And that moving to a suburban home and schooling your kids rather than working them in the field is unnatural. That is after all, how humanity worked for a few Millenia.

If people don't reproduce, people stop existing.

You're arguing for the Amish.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#278

Post by city41 » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:16 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #228

screye wrote: post #28

A 2 key points about well designed bike lanes that aren't bought up enough are: 1. raised / structural separation between the road and bikes path. 2. bike paths can be used for just about anything that is not a car/motorbike or a pedestrian. Skaters, skate boarders, mopeds and bikes can all share a common separated path way. I have tried biking in Boston and it is a nightmare. Bike Lanes marked on the road are taken…

Bike paths used by pedestrians are "mixed use trails" that are basically for recreational use. Someone cycling with a purpose to get somewhere, and especially if they have good physical ability from doing a lot of cycling, will tend to stay away from such. Doing your regular 35-40 km/h on these is crazy, and if you can go fast, why would you use a path where you can't do that. While these trails are nice (obviously,…

I think saying they don't do anything for commuting is a bit extreme. Not all bike commuters are also serious cyclists. For many commuters, a mix use trail is far better than a road.

I used to live off of a mix use trail and could ride my bike on it to work. I now have to ride on the street, and given the choice I'd take the trail any day.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#279

Post by weberc2 » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:21 PM UTC

village-idiot wrote: post #234

weberc2 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You definitely don't need winter tires; all-season tires work just fine. And an ice scraper (or even a shovel) isn't a burden for motorists. Also, winters in Copenhagen are probably quite a lot warmer than many places in the U.S. (the lowest average monthly temperature is barely below freezing!). Quite a different story from Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis, or Des Moines.

Yeah, you actually need winter tires. All season tires are garbage.

I’m guessing you’re not accounting for wear. I can’t tell the difference between my all seasons and winter tires, but the performance gap between summer tires and all seasons (in winter conditions) is enormous.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#280

Post by unethical_ban » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 7:22 PM UTC

oftenwrong wrote: post #94

A city that is bike-friendly is good, but a city that is walking-friendly is better. The bicycle is a great way to exceed "walking distance", but why should that even be necessary in day-to-day life? It is easily possible to build a neighbourhood where three generations of a family can live, work, attend school, shop, and more within walking distance. Walking is the simplest, most universal, and most natural mode of…

I live 12 miles from work. I live closer to work than 75% of my colleagues. Some live 30+ miles away.

The bars and hangouts my friends visit are all over town. And for the things nearby: Would I rather spend an hour walking 5 miles to a park or restaurant, or 12 minutes with good bike lanes?

In the south, you don't want to stay out long unless you're ready to sweat. 10 minutes at a casual biking pace is several miles, 10 minutes walking is a mile, maybe, and with less wind for the energy expended.

I hazard a guess that you're from a northern coastal area, or Europe.