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

#501

Post by zip1234 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:14 AM UTC

digital-cygnet wrote: post #484

Tiktaalik wrote: post #436

Switching to electric cars from ICE cars is continuing to do the wrong thing and make the wrong choices, but doing this wrong thing a bit better. It's still the same status quo, woefully terrible and unsustainable transportation model. Automobile oriented transportation doesn't scale, is a huge waste of resources, and perpetuates unsustainable, ultra expensive and resource intensive sprawling urban development patter…

In my experience, most people really do not understand how fundamentally unsuited cars are to solving urban (or dense suburban) transportation problems. Without really staring at the underlying geometry, it is hard for laypeople to understand that automobile-centric development patterns are by-and-large incapable of producing the kind of human-scale, dense, walkable areas that are (1) instinctively pleasing to be in,…

Nice blog post. It really does come down to just how big cars are and how much space they take up. A car in motion takes up a ridiculous amount of space factoring in stopping distance.

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

#502

Post by fishywang » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:16 AM UTC

physicles wrote: post #500

fishywang wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is bike infrastructure: not only are there decent bike lanes, but drivers are used to sharing the road with bikes You other description matches quite well to Beijing so I assume you are living in Beijing, but this one doesn't quite match from my experience. Yes there are technically "bike lanes", but Beijing drivers really treat them more like "ramps" that's use to get on and off the main road, or even "shortc…

Totally agree, drivers don't respect cyclists' right of way at all, and the bike lanes are often clogged with parked cars. But the bike lanes are still useful, and in places where a bike has to go into the road to go around a car, the cars _expect_ this. I don't have much good to say about the drivers around here, but they're definitely used to the road being filled with cyclists, e-bikes, and grandpas on their 三轮车.

>the cars _expect_ this

I think that had much more to do with drivers driving much more defensively, because there's so much more chaos on the road. For example in the US you can mostly expect drivers to drive within their lanes, while in Beijing it's more like half half that they drive in the lanes or on the lines.

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

#503

Post by zip1234 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:18 AM UTC

digital-cygnet wrote: post #489

nine_k wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxis, small delivery vehicles, utility cars, cars and trucks for countryside use, and various trucks for city and highway use can all be electric, with all the benefits of EVs. If you want public transit be more popular, build denser cities. E.g. on Manhattan using the subway is a no-brainer, and you are rarely more than two (long) blocks from a subway station. In some more remote parts of Brooklyn, you often cannot…

There's a chicken-egg problem at play, though. We can't build denser cities because we need to build 4-lane roads and parking; we can't get rid of these roads and parking because people need cars because the city isn't dense enough yet. It's certainly solvable on the many-decade timescale by smart, consistent city and state governments, but it's going to be a gradual slog of incrementalism (e.g., see all the changes…

Step 1: stop subsidizing car travel. Make automobile owners pay their way--to include negative externalities such as noise and pollution.

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

#504

Post by selimthegrim » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:20 AM UTC

supertrope wrote: post #497

Dylan16807 wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not like driving is a sweat free experience at 38C. It is if your car isn't a junker.

38C is very hot. You'll be sweating in 5 min. Parking garages are generally not air conditioned. Cars don't cool down from 50C quickly. The sun stills shines on you through the windows.

I had to drive an old Toyota through Llano Estacado at 44C when the fan and the AC had conked out. There was a lot of sticking my head out the window and dousing with water.

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

#505

Post by bluGill » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:21 AM UTC

garyrichardson wrote: post #426

bluGill wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the city you should be close enough to the store that you just get the days groceries as you go by. The lack of affordable 2500sq ft apartments is the big failure. It doesn't cost that much more to build them, and so rent shouldn't be any more than a house payment ($1500/month!). If that doesn't exist it is because zoning won't let them build it. (or more likely they can, but why do that when you can get more $$$…

Where I live the numbers your suggesting would be amazing! In Vancouver proper, Average 3 bedroom house price is $2.1M. A townhouse or condo of that size is $1.5M. Your typical house payment is going to be much higher than $1500/month. Rents are probably in the $3K+ range -- I don't actually have data on this. Lots of factors there. I don't think zoning is one of them as there is constantly land assemblies and razing…

The cost of building a new house that size is about 200-250k. Everything else is land value. Note that I was taking about apartments ,when land value us as high as you say that supports tall buildings to divide the land costs between more units.

The mountains don't help, but nobody is building the apartments people want to live in.

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

#506

Post by perrygeo » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:23 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #368

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

> - 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 can address these by planning where you live and work to make it so. These are not immutable facts of nature you have no control over. If your work doesn't have a shower, maybe a nearby gym does. > - You don't have to bring kids or sizable cargo There are solutions fo…

> "planning where you live"

Not too many people can make that decision on the sole basis of their preferred mode of transport.

The rational decision for most people is "live where you live because you have things keeping you there" - good, bad, job, family, friends, responsibilities, or otherwise. Given the choice between a) driving 25 miles for work everyday and keeping the status quo versus b) uprooting your family, changing jobs, and risking your savings to move to a new city ... so you can have the benefit of riding or walking to work?

These decisions don't happen in a bubble, there are tradeoffs. Sadly transport is rarely considered as one of them. The car is a convenient default. And while many people might consider riding or walking to work, they aren't going to unless systematic changes are in place to really tip that balance towards an urban/cycling lifestyle that's viable for more people.

Infrastructure, bike lanes, shower and bike lock facilities, etc. sure those might help.

But the real issue is that most adults (in America at least) are stretched so thin on time, forced by economic realities to take on multiple jobs and responsibilities that effectively makes owning a car a requirement to navigate the suburban hellscape safely and quickly.

To recap, things that have an impact and will help cities become vibrant net-zero communities - Economic reform so people can afford decent bike gear or a few extra hours for riding and maintenance - Cycling infrastructure so people feel safe and don't stink at work - Rebuilding entire city centers so people can do life without a car - Empathy towards people who still need to rely on a car because the transition to the above will take time

Things that will be completely counter-productive and discourage people from engaging with cities - Shaming everyone into your particular brand of urban cycling lifestyle because you think it would be good for them and they should just "make it so".

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

#507

Post by dheera » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:25 AM UTC

> We also found that the average person who shifted from car to bike for just one day a week cut their carbon footprint by 3.2kg of CO₂ – equivalent to the emissions from driving a car for 10km, eating a serving of lamb or chocolate, or sending 800 emails.

This is interesting, but might it be possible that at least some those cyclists ate 1 more serving of lamb (or other high-carbon meat) or chocolate than they normally would have because they biked? Or did they eat 1 more serving of mostly plant-based food?

Did they do an analysis of the amount of food consumed by the cyclist on the day they biked vs. the days they did not bike?

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

#508

Post by Dylan16807 » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:25 AM UTC

supertrope wrote: post #497

Dylan16807 wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not like driving is a sweat free experience at 38C. It is if your car isn't a junker.

38C is very hot. You'll be sweating in 5 min. Parking garages are generally not air conditioned. Cars don't cool down from 50C quickly. The sun stills shines on you through the windows.

You can start blasting cool air in your face almost immediately, and if the car is overheated you can roll down the windows and stand outside for a moment to purge the hot air. And if you only meant the first couple minutes of driving, I don't think that was very clear.

Remote start is cheap compared to the price of a car anyway, if it makes a difference.

Also the sun isn't significantly hotter in summer than in winter; it's not going to make you overheat.

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

#509

Post by dheera » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:27 AM UTC

fvdessen wrote: post #307

Cycling 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…

> We also found that the average person who shifted from car to bike for just one day a week cut their carbon footprint by 3.2kg of CO₂ – equivalent to the emissions from driving a car for 10km, eating a serving of lamb or chocolate, or sending 800 emails.

This is interesting, but might it be possible that at least some those cyclists ate 1 more serving of lamb (or other high-carbon meat) or chocolate than they normally would have because they biked? Or did they eat 1 more serving of mostly plant-based food?

Did they do an analysis of the amount of food consumed by the cyclist on the day they biked vs. the days they did not bike?

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

#510

Post by colinmhayes » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 2:34 AM UTC

rtlfe wrote: post #403

zip1234 wrote: post #384

Earlier 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.

Those are the people who vote.