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

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

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 764 posts

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

#531

Post by xputer »

vishnugupta wrote: post #236
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.

> But it doesn't require major investments. Having lived and cycled in Amsterdam to me it did seem like a major investment. Sure if one were to design a greenfield city then it’s not a big deal. But to pivot a car centric city to safely accommodate cyclists is a major change. The city residents have to go through the transition process which isn’t going to be fun. I’ve seen it done half ass way in India and US which…

It doesn't have to be expensive. In Ghent they recently did it on a budget: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEOA_Tcq2XA

The principle is simple: In designated spots, prevent through traffic for cars while allowing bicycles to go through. This massively reduces car traffic on those streets. In Ghent they did that by simply placing obstructions on the road that only bicycles can maneuver around. Once more people are cycling, you'll have increased political will to spend money on more ambitious infrastructure such as in Amsterdam.

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

#532

Post by geoduck14 »

browningstreet wrote: post #523
geoduck14 wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen various threads promoting bicycles - and my life style is SO different that I can't conceive of using bikes and getting rid of my cars. I drive 6 miles to church. My kids are in the minivan and can't ride bikes yet. We also have stuff with us: diapers, water cups, snacks. My work (before WFH), is about 7 miles away. I could bike - but I take kids to day care, and they can't bike. Also, I can't wear "athleti…

I lived in the Dutch suburbs and everything you say can’t be done on a bike were pretty normal there. I think people think bikes don’t work because they’re thinking about the problem, as opposed to trying through the problem.

Ok, I'll bite. How do I get my family to church? 4 kids between 1 and 6. 6 miles from home.

It would be nice if we didn't smell when we arrived.

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

#533

Post by u801e »

michael1999 wrote: post #228
TulliusCicero wrote: post #159

Earlier 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.

You can maintain throughput and accommodate even more people on bikes if they just ride on the streets themselves rather than confining them in narrow bike lanes. A general purpose traffic lane can accommodate far more bikes than any bike lanes possibly could.

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

#534

Post by yourmom2 »

nightski wrote: post #512
digital-cygnet wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

How many people want to live in dense cities without any means of escape? It sounds miserable to me. But I live in a really small city (< 250k) and drive maybe 3-5k miles a year (mostly to our cabin in a neighboring state) and bike a LOT. It's kind of ironic I am pretty far from your utopian dense dream yet largely living it.

> t's kind of ironic I am pretty far from your utopian dense dream yet largely living it.

it's not ironic, this statement makes no sense.

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

#535

Post by yourmom2 »

nine_k wrote: post #471
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…

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…

> be pretty fit and take a shower when you arrive

oh no unsolvable problems

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

#536

Post by u801e »

uoaei wrote: post #382
TulliusCicero wrote: post #223

Earlier 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…

> Another way to help retrain motorists' expectations is to do better to keep up with traffic.

Whether a cyclist can maintain 20 mph or just 10 mph isn't going to make a difference to the motorists. But taking the lane by default will train them to change lanes to pass like they would when encountering any other slow vehicle.

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

#537

Post by u801e »

cogman10 wrote: post #315
moistbar wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

My near misses have never been at intersections or due to missing hand signals. My near misses have been because some idiot decides to hug or even drive in the cycling lane (usually while texting) or when someone parks a car in the cycling lane forcing me to move into the road (with cars being incapable of waiting for me to get around the idiot that decided to park in the cycling lane). Those are instances of followi…

Cyclists encounter problems at intersections because they're in the wrong position. They should be in the lane that serves their destination so that same direction traffic didn't have to cross their path when making a turn. For example, when proceeding straight through an intersection, the cyclist should be to the left of right turning traffic and directly in line with traffic going straight.

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

#538

Post by blix »

digital-cygnet wrote: post #530
nightski wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people want to live in dense cities without any means of escape? It sounds miserable to me. But I live in a really small city (< 250k) and drive maybe 3-5k miles a year (mostly to our cabin in a neighboring state) and bike a LOT. It's kind of ironic I am pretty far from your utopian dense dream yet largely living it.

I'm not sure I fully follow "I am pretty far from your utopian dense dream yet largely living it", but I think there are two potential points of disagreement: 1) Living in dense cities is not for everybody, but given that large and (at least pre-covid) growing majority of people in the developed world do choose to live in cities, I think it's safe to say that there is a very sizable demand. For an example of the bene…

The pre-covid world is kinda over. Density has very clear downsides that have never been more apparent. I don't know how often you do the train + car rental thing, but the friction is much, much higher than driving (especially if you have any sort of gear like you would for skiing). Not everyone wants to be so contricted both in freedom of movement and in living space.

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

#539

Post by abrahamepton »

geoduck14 wrote: post #532
browningstreet wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in the Dutch suburbs and everything you say can’t be done on a bike were pretty normal there. I think people think bikes don’t work because they’re thinking about the problem, as opposed to trying through the problem.

Ok, I'll bite. How do I get my family to church? 4 kids between 1 and 6. 6 miles from home. It would be nice if we didn't smell when we arrived.

Here you go; fits 4 kids easily and is electric so you won’t smell bad: https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-electric-cargo-b...

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

#540

Post by megablast »

nightski wrote: post #512
digital-cygnet wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

How many people want to live in dense cities without any means of escape? It sounds miserable to me. But I live in a really small city (< 250k) and drive maybe 3-5k miles a year (mostly to our cabin in a neighboring state) and bike a LOT. It's kind of ironic I am pretty far from your utopian dense dream yet largely living it.

I’ve never owned a car. But somehow I’ve traveled all over my country and the world. And Australia isn’t small. It’s crazy, I know.
Post reply on HN