Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#431

Post by Vrondi »

Freak_NL wrote: post #390
stronglikedan wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No helmet While I don't think they should be required, I do think they should be worn. I've had a low-speed spill where the helmet saved my head considerably - I hit the pavement so hard my glasses were flattened out. You fall much faster, even at low speeds, and you fall much farther from a bike, than a pedestrian would fall.

It's a matter of risk assessment. The chance of a healthy adult cycling in the Netherlands getting a head injury that would have been prevent by a helmet are so incredibly low, that making it a requirement would have a detrimental effect on the collective health of Dutch society due to slightly lower uptake in cycling. For elderly and young children a helmet may make sense, due to the significantly higher risk of suc…

Such sanity simply doesn't exist in the over-protective culture of the USA.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#432

Post by wool_gather »

aidenn0 wrote: post #419
brnt wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Dutchman who's lived in a few places abroad, the cycling 'problem' is quite simple: it needs to be the norm. No helmet, because neither do you require them for pedestrians. You can cycle in all weather, just as you would walking (a hard mental one, my non-Dutch partner can't get over the idea cycling is for sunshine). Public space design must start with safe (no sharp turns, looking at you France!) and separate…

I live in a very mild clime, but still don't bike when it's rainy. What do you suggest gear-wise for bicycling in say 5-10C but wet? I have a 30 minute bicycle commute that I'd like to do more often. A typical waist-length jacket leaves most of my body wet, but a longer jacket is awkward to bike in. If it's over 10C, I can just wear shorts that don't absorb water, but under 10, it gets quite uncomfortable.

Cycling pants. You shouldn't have too much trouble finding waterproof pants to go with your jacket. There are some that fit over other clothes (which also provide a lot of insulation if it's cold) and some you wear as if they were regular pants. You can also get shoe covers.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#433

Post by triceratops »

Fricken wrote: post #120
fourneau wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a regional statement, not disconnected. The reality is that many people in North American live far from their workplaces and some of us live in areas of extreme cold. This is where 15m of exposed skin can result in frostbite. We bundle up, but by cycling we’ve turned the commute into an unnecessarily dangerous adventure. The same applies to cities further south: a non trivial amount of days are extremely hot and…

I live in Edmonton, North America's northernmost major city. I've been cycling year round for about 15 years. It went down to -42 in February, and I was out riding. I've never had frostbite. I've still got all my fingers and toes. Although it isn't enough fingers and toes to count all the people I've known personally who've been killed or crippled in car accidents.

Mad respect my friend.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#434

Post by wool_gather »

willis936 wrote: post #376
jacobparker wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Biking isn’t safe enough to not wear a helmet Could you explain why you think that? That’s a pretty general statement. Are you imagining city biking here, or something more like racing in the country-side? Some data about how this is dangerous could be convincing: https://youtu.be/Boi0XEm9-4E count the helmets. Just to be clear, I’m not against helmets (I wear one, as is custom in my country).

No, I don’t have the data on hand or the time to hunt down studies that may well not exist. That shouldn’t keep people from knowing what they know. City biking regularly gets up to 15 mph. No I don’t have a citation. Falling over the handlebars is likely when coming to a sudden stop. Brain injuries are not going to be rare occurrences in such cases. No I don’t have a citation.

Can you say whether you are yourself an active cyclist?

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#435

Post by triceratops »

big_chungus wrote: post #428
tjr225 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a goofy argument. > What gasoline taxes are bikes paying to use the roads? Bikes can't pay taxes, neither can cars. People that own them can, and most cyclists I know also own a car. So if you're attempting to stipulate that people that ride bikes don't pay taxes on the infrastructure that they use, you're wrong- at least in my experience. In any case, bicycles cause far, far less damage - maybe even 0 d…

This is a goofy response. > bicycles cause far less damage... to the roads used by motorists This only holds true as long as bicycles are a small amount of traffic added on. It's like the SMS bands with telcos: a small bit of auxiliary slack being used for something else. If bicycles become a large part of the traffic, there will still be an impact. Even if the bikes don't tear the roads up much, elements and natural…

Road damage is proportional to the 4th power of the weight of the vehicle.[1] The average bike's weight is about 1/100 that of the average car (unscientific method of searching "weight of average bike" and "weight of average car"). So you'd need approximately 100 bikes to cause the same impact as 1 car! And 100 bikes can transport 25x more people than 1 car.

> everyone living densely-packed into the stereotypical SF or Seattle city.

I don't think you need that much density to encourage biking. Even a city with a lot of townhouses, 3-4 story apartment buildings (for the yuppies), and no parking minimums for businesses ought to be dense enough.

https://www.denenapoints.com/relationship-vehicle-weight-roa...

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#436

Post by renjimen »

rsj_hn wrote: post #240
flexie wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind the weather in Copenhagen where the amount of people who bikes every day exceeds the amount of people who take public transportation every day by around 50% (1). Weather in Copenhagen is rarely very cold or very warm. But Copenhagen weather is not "startlingly good all year-round". It rains quite often and temperatures are often close to zero or sub zero. And it's windy all the time. It even snows a few…

Holland is the densest nation in Europe, but still has substantial farmland, so the urban parts are very dense. It is flat with a mild climate, and the entire urban areas combined would fit into an area smaller than New York City. This is somehow a reproducible model in your mind. Then there are real economic and social trade offs that need to be seriously discussed. Historically the beautiful, walkable, lovely human…

Some really interesting points, thanks.

As others have pointed out it's definitely a combined approach to increasing both public transport as well as cycle infrastructure. Electric bikes give you quite the range, which may compare with the average car commuting distance in many cities. Taking public transport from the suburbs and then getting on a bike within the city centre is also very common here in Copenhagen. Heck, even driving to a train station, to take the train/bus, to take the bike, can often by faster than driving with bad traffic.

So while I agree that the car gave people the freedom to keep their job and buy a home, I don't think that argument holds given a decent public transport network and cycle infrastructure.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#437

Post by triceratops »

briandear wrote: post #166
socialist_coder wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A mom with three young kids in tow Ha! Go see how they do it in Europe. Bike trailers, extra seats in the front & back, built in cargo decks, longer bikes; there are lots of fancy ways to load a lot of kids & cargo onto your bike. And don't forget that kids can ride their own bikes too! My kid was riding a bike with me to daycare at 3-4 years old. Your thinking is too car-centric!

But why? It takes a long time to get kids helmeted up and they don’t ride very fast. Not everyone has the leisure to ride bikes everywhere. My kids schools are 10 miles from home and 5 miles from each other. Even with a dedicated bike lane, it would still take dramatically more work to drive. Then, if it rains.. I have to worry about it rain gear for everyone. Then if one kid gets sick at school, I’m supposed to ride…

You don't ask a 3-year old to ride their bike 5 miles. You put them in a trailer or child carrier. On an electric bike that ride will take about 25 minutes. Considering rush-hour traffic, that's often faster than driving.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#438

Post by kalenx »

gpm wrote: post #375
brnt wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, acceleration may be non-linear (bikes accelerate 0-10 faster than anything else, which is why sometimes in NL bikes may wait in front of cars before stoplights[1]). Top-speed and weight are also important factors in whether or not it would be smart to mix. However, this results in a matrix of separated lanes that is impractical ;) Finding a good compromise (such as [1]) I think is a better idea. Lowering car sp…

> bikes accelerate 0-10 faster than anything else As a cyclist, I don't believe this claim for a second. When a car starts moving at the same time as me, it's faster than me from the start. Which makes sense, it has more horse power per unit mass. Often I do start moving first, because I think I'm less likely to get right hooked if I do so. But that's a result of paying attention and having my for on the "accelerator…

The relevant metric is the torque at low (or 0) RPM, not the (horse) power.

I do agree that a good electric car may start faster than a cyclist, however.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#439

Post by vkou »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #414
Freak_NL wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of risk assessment. The chance of a healthy adult cycling in the Netherlands getting a head injury that would have been prevent by a helmet are so incredibly low, that making it a requirement would have a detrimental effect on the collective health of Dutch society due to slightly lower uptake in cycling. For elderly and young children a helmet may make sense, due to the significantly higher risk of suc…

In almost every other context in which risk of physical harm comes up the overwhelmingly dominant opinion is that forgoing any means of reducing that risk is a non-starter more or less regardless of cost. Anyone suggesting that risk and cost/benefit need to be assessed is received about as well as someone proclaiming god doesn't exist in the middle of a church circa 1500. As a safety heretic I fully agree with you th…

And yet, drivers and passengers of automobiles are not required to wear racing helmets, or five-point safety belts - nor are all cars factory-equipped with breathalyzer ignition interlocks - or speed governors which limit a vehicle's sustained maximum speed to 63 mph.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#440

Post by brnt »

aidenn0 wrote: post #419
brnt wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Dutchman who's lived in a few places abroad, the cycling 'problem' is quite simple: it needs to be the norm. No helmet, because neither do you require them for pedestrians. You can cycle in all weather, just as you would walking (a hard mental one, my non-Dutch partner can't get over the idea cycling is for sunshine). Public space design must start with safe (no sharp turns, looking at you France!) and separate…

I live in a very mild clime, but still don't bike when it's rainy. What do you suggest gear-wise for bicycling in say 5-10C but wet? I have a 30 minute bicycle commute that I'd like to do more often. A typical waist-length jacket leaves most of my body wet, but a longer jacket is awkward to bike in. If it's over 10C, I can just wear shorts that don't absorb water, but under 10, it gets quite uncomfortable.

Personally I use acceptance ;) Which I think is an important ingredient that most Dutch citizens learn as they start cycling to high school regardless of weather: it won't always be pleasant. In the rain I'll get wet, no biggy. At work I won't be the only one putting a coat and shoes on the heater to dry. Some discomfort is present in all modes of transport, this is the one I chose to put up with.

I also use a raincoat with cap and rain pants, which should fall over your shoes. However, I only use this in heavy rain, because with light rain I get wet anyway from my own sweat (wet rain gear usually does not breathe enough for me).

Then there is the rain radar [1], but is probably not available for your locale ;)

[1] https://buienradar.nl

Post reply on HN