Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities • Hacker News Board

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#61

Post by olivermarks » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:41 PM UTC

My sister and her husband were keen cyclists in London, despite constant bike theft and falls due to terrible road condition but they now have artificial knees and a bad back respectively and can't cycle. My sister in particular is incensed about the road blocks put up all over London that have resulted in several local deaths as emergency vehicles can't get through to attend to heart attacks etc.

In dense urban areas those fit enough can cycle as they do in China and other Asian cultures but there is a concern in the west about weather conditions practicality, hilly terrain etc. I get that lots of global warming worriers love cycling but there is a practical element to this that is all too often ignored

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#62

Post by umeshunni » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:41 PM UTC

helicalspiral wrote: post #21

twiddling wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because most US cities are not compact and flat as Copenhagen

ebikes, though a bit more expensive, make getting over the hills in even SF doable

SF is a very compact city (7 miles across)

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#63

Post by cameronh90 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:41 PM UTC

jtdev wrote: post #11

Cycling to/from work, grocery stores, etc. is completely infeasible for 6 months of the year in approximately 1/3 of the United States. In addition to seasonal infeasibility, much of the U.S. is rural... good luck commuting 15 miles each way to work.

15 miles is not that far. 45 minutes with a US (20MPH) e-bike. Average commute is 30 mins each way. And that's time you don't have to spend at the gym now.

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#64

Post by com2kid » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:42 PM UTC

helicalspiral wrote: post #21

twiddling wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because most US cities are not compact and flat as Copenhagen

ebikes, though a bit more expensive, make getting over the hills in even SF doable

I'm not willing to spend thousands on an ebike while living in a city where I expect my bike to be stolen at least once a year.

(and all of my bikes that were stolen, were stolen out of locked garages!)

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#65

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:42 PM UTC

BitwiseFool wrote: post #45

vcanhoto wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Dutch would disagree with you pretty much with every single point. Except the last one, maybe.

That's great for the Dutch but I don't live in the Netherlands, I live in Texas. All of the above are absolutely concerns - especially in the summer.

[deleted]

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#66

Post by aeturnum » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:42 PM UTC

CabSauce wrote: post #10

That's great. Assuming the following: - Your commute is sufficiently short - You have facilities to shower and dress at work - You have sufficient time to shower and dress at work - You don't have to bring kids or sizable cargo - Weather is sufficiently good - You're sufficiently healthy

I think you're approaching this from the wrong direction (the article's framing doesn't really help). It's about how we allocate funds at a high level, not that every city needs to have an equal amount of cycling. From a climate change perspective, we care little about where we take cars off the road.

So while it's true that Siberia won't ever be bike-first, we should understand that each person we can get to transition to biking is worth 10x the carbon reduction of getting them to transition to an EV. It will also be harder! But the 10x heuristic should help us think about how to balance the increased difficulties against increased benefits.

Also, this is a transition that will eventually involve everyone. There will always be people who can't cycle and we need to maintain room for them to be full participants in a non-petrochemical-based economy. This makes low-carbon personal transport like cycling even more valuable in the context of needing to allow people with more limited mobility options access (they will need the parking spaces we increasingly hope to move away from).

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#67

Post by the_duke » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

CabSauce wrote: post #10

That's great. Assuming the following: - Your commute is sufficiently short - You have facilities to shower and dress at work - You have sufficient time to shower and dress at work - You don't have to bring kids or sizable cargo - Weather is sufficiently good - You're sufficiently healthy

Ebikes mostly solve 1, 2, 3 and 6 on your list.

They are quite fast, require very little physical effort, and have a small fraction of the energy consumption of a car.

And you can still get the health benefit by investing as much muscle work as you want to.

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#68

Post by jtdev » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #41

jtdev wrote: post #11

Cycling to/from work, grocery stores, etc. is completely infeasible for 6 months of the year in approximately 1/3 of the United States. In addition to seasonal infeasibility, much of the U.S. is rural... good luck commuting 15 miles each way to work.

If it’s doable in Scandinavia I’d say it’s doable in the whole US too. It’s not comfortable some days, but it’s doable (disclaimer - I don’t do it even in nice weather but I pass a lot of people with my car that do).

Short urban commutes in winter are not an issue (or shortish commutes in Scandanavian high density population areas)... it's the idea of long commutes in rural areas and/or long commutes in rural areas during winter that is not just inconvenient but actually quite dangerous.

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#69

Post by acwan93 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

There's a demonization of cyclists in general if you live in an American city. Until this stigma goes away, which will usher in infrastructure and mentality changes, this will not occur.

City councils believe cycling is recreational, not for commuting or for "real" use. I mentioned this about getting my LA suburb to actually embrace Class II bike lanes previously, and there's simply no political will.

Simply put, it's sexier to put EV charging stations than bike lanes as a form of virtue signaling.

Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

#70

Post by miahi » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 6:44 PM UTC

vcanhoto wrote: post #32

CabSauce wrote: post #10

That's great. Assuming the following: - Your commute is sufficiently short - You have facilities to shower and dress at work - You have sufficient time to shower and dress at work - You don't have to bring kids or sizable cargo - Weather is sufficiently good - You're sufficiently healthy

The Dutch would disagree with you pretty much with every single point. Except the last one, maybe.

They do have a lot of advantages: a flat country, good infrastructure for cycling, cool climate. That means you don't sweat on the way to work so you don't need showers and to change clothes.