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

#221

Post by olivermarks » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:30 PM UTC

mprovost wrote: post #101

olivermarks wrote: post #61

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 area…

People dying because ambulances are delayed by low traffic areas in London is a myth started by the Daily Mail. There’s no evidence of it happening. In fact the ambulance services support these schemes. [0] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/13/covid-bike-a...

https://soundcloud.com/privateeyenews/page-94-the-private-ey...

15 minutes in, Private Eye has been covering LTN's for a couple of years now

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

#222

Post by moistbar » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:31 PM UTC

papertokyo wrote: post #207

moistbar wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you've ever driven in an American city, but those streets can barely fit a single lane of car traffic in some cases. Philadelphia in particular has streets so narrow that the line of parked cars along the side is enough to basically block the whole street. It's already incredibly uncomfortable to drive on those streets, so I don't get why you're so surprised that people would be angry about further in…

The majority of streets in American cities are massive. Single lane streets are generally slower traffic so separated cycle lanes aren't necessary...just some markings to remind drivers that cyclists might use this part of the road. Paris has a lot of those.

The bike lanes in the east coast cities I've been to aren't safe for cyclists and do nothing but take up breathing room for drivers. It's not uncommon to see a bike lane disappear after 50 feet because there was no space to continue it.

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

#223

Post by TulliusCicero » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:31 PM UTC

alex_g wrote: post #220

moistbar wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like someone who's never driven in a city. City streets are narrow and extremely uncomfortable to drive on as it is.

This reads like you're someone who's never cycled in a city.

Seriously. Driving in NYC or SF can be obnoxious and frustrating, sure...but it virtually never feels downright life-threatening, the way biking can very frequently feel.

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

#224

Post by lovegoblin » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:31 PM UTC

samcheng wrote: post #142

I'm surprised at all of the anti-cycling sentiment here. It's really a better mode of transportation than the car, in certain situations. It's healthy, relaxing, good for traffic and the environment, and convenient for short trips. The article isn't saying that you need to ditch the car for a bakfiets, just that you can have a significant positive impact by doing SOME of your trips via bicycle. Remember that most car…

> I'm surprised at all of the anti-cycling sentiment here.

Given how profoundly anti-bicycle North America in general is, I'm actually surprised it's not a lot worse.

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

#225

Post by moistbar » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:32 PM UTC

alex_g wrote: post #220

moistbar wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like someone who's never driven in a city. City streets are narrow and extremely uncomfortable to drive on as it is.

This reads like you're someone who's never cycled in a city.

On the contrary, if you act like a car, using the same streets as the cars is quite safe in my experience. I've safely cycled with a cello on my back by simply following the rules most cyclists claim to follow but ignore: stopping at stop lights, signalling when I'm about to turn.

You know, looking out for my own safety.

EDIT: If following the same rules as everyone else is too much to ask, maybe you should just stay off the road no matter what you're driving.

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

#226

Post by BitwiseFool » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:33 PM UTC

stfp wrote: post #151

BitwiseFool wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood why bicyclists can't just use the sidewalk for most of the commute. I get that it becomes impractical in dense areas where people are actually walking but most of the roads I travel along have vacant sidewalks.

You should try it?

I used to do this all the time growing up. But I assume times have changed because it's illegal now.

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

#227

Post by avianlyric » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:33 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #35

Switching from gas to electric is something I can do all on my own. Switching from gas car to cycling is something that would require major investments from my city and developers. Both are noble goals, but let's not let perfect be the enemy of good. Switch to electric now, and also encourage new roads and new developments to be bike friendly, so that switching to a bike is something that will be viable in 20 or 30 y…

It’s worth noting that this is an article written by a U.K. author, and mostly references European cities.

While obviously the same principle applies in the US, achieving higher rates of cycling in Europe is substantially easier, both politically and practically, in Europe than the US. Europe is significantly more compact cities, and public transport is usually very good, additionally many European cities have already invested heavily in cycling infrastructure.

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

#228

Post by michael1999 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:33 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #159

stfp wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it doesn't require major investments. It's really minor investments compared to other infrastructure projects. The issue is taking away even a tiny fraction of car space basically triggers some kind of political road rage.

They're minor investments practically, and major investments politically. As you say, for many motorists, giving up space on even some roads to cyclists is treated like some sort of war crime. There's very much of attitude of, "we can't just have a majority of the road space -- we need nearly all of it!"

It can be a real winner politically, depending on the electoral boundaries. Roads have such limited throughput that a new bike lane might inconvenience only a few hundred people in cars, while opening up the city to thousands of people on bikes. Once politicians figure out that calculation, it can go very quickly.

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

#229

Post by analog31 » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:34 PM UTC

twiddling wrote: post #186

analog31 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view, the most striking feature of the Dutch solution is that it's not a type of bike, but a transportation system developed over a span of years within a specific niche of climate, terrain, population density, and so forth. Cargo bikes came after the system was already up and running. Moving any specific component of that system to another niche might help a little, and I'd welcome any progress, but is not a s…

I actually have a picture of my Opa delivering bread in the 1920s with a cargo bike (bakfiets) in the Netherlands.

That's really cool. I had no idea they went back that far.

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

#230

Post by mjevans » Wed, Apr 07, 2021, 7:34 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #185

stfp wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it doesn't require major investments. It's really minor investments compared to other infrastructure projects. The issue is taking away even a tiny fraction of car space basically triggers some kind of political road rage.

Cycling is suited to distances of a few miles. Within a few miles of a sprawl house there are only other sprawl houses. The mix and layout of buildings and uses also needs to be overhauled so that putting reasonable numbers of hours/calories into a bike gets you somewhere useful.

In the US we'd be better off refactoring cities with a goal of 'Caves of Steel' (Asimov), which would put far more within biking and walking distance as the core of the city expanded outwards.

This seems likely to work better in areas that aren't as geographically constrained. Seattle, for example, has far too much water around it and industrial areas near that. It'd be a good one-shot conversion though.