I ride a bike, around 2000 miles/year and I'd love to be able to spout the statistic their claiming. But please, /they are also stating that driving a car 10KM has the same carbon footprint as sending 800 emails. That kind of claim makes the whole article suspect.
Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
401–410 of 764 posts
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#402> colleagues and I reveal that people who walk or cycle have lower carbon footprints from daily travel, including in cities where lots of people are already doing this. Not to disagree with the broader point, but I think it's worth distinguishing "travel" from "transportation". I don't have a car, and I bike and walk for almost all of my daily personal "travel". But, I think this also makes me more willing to use del…
I routinely take my ebike to the pharmacy, get takeout, even some groceries. I have cheap pannier bags that can hold a couple bags of groceries: https://banjobrothers.com/products/market-pannier
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#403Cycling is not only good for the environment, but for cities in general. During the last confinement, when car traffic completely stopped, I realised that cars are the single biggest reason why living in the city can be unpleasant. People may not realise it consciously, but when they move out of the city, what they are looking for is a place with not as much cars driving around. Cars destroy cities by making a viciou…
It still boggles my mind that, with a 15% car ownership rate, how NYC not only still allows cars, but subsidizes them with absolutely free parking on city streets. The real estate price for a single parking spot in NYC must be astronomical.
If you go to any community board meeting, you'll hear old people rant for hours about how their cars are essential and bike are destroying the city. And for some reason, this is who politicians listen to.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#404Well I wish cities would also make the infrastructure accessible to other muscle-powered vehicles, like skateboards, longboards, scooters, inline skates, etc. Personally I very strongly prefer longboards over bicycles for commuting (it's more fun, you can just grab and carry it, both of your hands are always free when riding, etc) however there's just so many things that are fine-ish for bikes or pedestrians, but rui…
Would you consider it to be more dangerous than riding a bike? I'm always amazed by how skaters are able to stop or "hit the breaks" where there are none.
Small wheels are easily caught in potholes. Think eScooters wiping out.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#405Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#406Earlier quoted context omitted.
It still boggles my mind that, with a 15% car ownership rate, how NYC not only still allows cars, but subsidizes them with absolutely free parking on city streets. The real estate price for a single parking spot in NYC must be astronomical.
If you go to any community board meeting, you'll hear old people rant for hours about how their cars are essential and bike are destroying the city. And for some reason, this is who politicians listen to.
Community board meetings in general are a problem that nobody has found a great solution to. Oddly enough, the pandemic has caused most of these to go virtual, which has nerfed a lot of the power of the highly motivated old people with too much time on their hands.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Your lawful right on roads in both cities is that you may occupy any traffic lane at any time on a bicycle. Be sure to ride in the center (maybe even slightly to the left) to avoid encouraging those behind you to try to squeeze by. Motorists are used to cyclists being slow because of this overly cautious approach that novice cyclists take to riding bikes on roadways. Another way to help retrain motorists' expectation…
>A more long-term, better solution would be to redesign infrastructure either to keep cyclists separate from motor traffic
That's what I'd propose. Carving up the already scarce roadways to try and squeeze in a "safe" lane for cyclists is going to make it far more dangerous for both bikes and cars. Bike lanes that run above the street would be far safer.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#408Earlier 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.
To put it bluntly; Your car is too big.
I drive a Nissan Juke when I go to the city. If you consider that a big car, I don't know what to tell you.
EDIT: Since I can't respond to the comment below me, the Juke is slightly taller than a Mini Cooper and about as long and wide. I literally can't find a smaller car that I'd be comfortable driving on the highway.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#409Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> 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.
I think that is massively underselling the disruption to traffic. Depending on the city and the traffic patterns, hundreds of thousands or even millions of people could be commuting into a city on a given day. Reducing the car throughput on a significant portion of roads will cause backups to spread across the road network, affecting thousands.
Maybe switching to bike lanes can be a net positive, but it all depends on the commuting patterns of people living and working the city. Then again, maybe if car commuting is made painful enough, it will accelerate shifts in commuting patterns.
With careful planning the interests of vehicle commuters and cyclists can be balanced for maximum benefit, but I think in the long term changing zoning and development strategies will be what's needed to really make the shift.
Re: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also cycling in 100+ degree weather is rough in Texas, Arizona, etc
People say the same thing about winter in the Northeast. Then when they see how convenient and freeing it is to ride a bike, they quickly learn to deal with the weather.
If you're claiming that people will still ride their bikes to work when it's 20 F outside, you're incorrect.