Live data from Hacker News

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

theconversation.com

541–550 of 764 posts

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

#541
post #477

I used to live in Europe, and a bicycle was my primary mode of transport. That was when I was a single man with no children. However, I can't see how I could possibly use a bicycle for really any transport at all today. Advocates of cycling, I would be genuinely interested in how you would logistically achieve a typical weekend day in my life, which might consist of: - Transporting myself, my wife, my daughter, my do…

Personally I'm not a cyclist, but I would order most of that stuff on line and not spend tons of time schlepping my entire family+dog on exurban shopping adventures. One huge side benefit of COVID has been that the big box stores in Australia have finally started doing deliveries; the only thing on your shopping list that I would do in person is clothes (which usually need to be tried on).

Partly it's because I live in a city with rubbish traffic on weekends, so a weekend like you describe would be full of crawling traffic and hunting for parking spots.

Having a weekend like you describe - which I remember more from other cities - is something that you can do because of the ways cities are designed (big box stores!). Not wanting to be a moral scold, but a lot of cycling advocates would just say "spend your weekends differently". That's not what I'm saying - and elsewhere I complain that a lot of cycling advocates seem to assume everywhere is already set up like Amsterdam in terms of population density and flatness. However, spending every weekend piling into a vehicle to schlep around big box stores is a choice, just like living in some dense area and cycling everywhere in a cutesy whole-family cargo bike.

You use the word 'need' a lot, even for stuff like "breakfast at a cafe" ('mom: we have breakfast food at home', as the meme goes). A lot of this stuff is choices.

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

#542

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.

It sounds like you bike for most of your transportation in your city? That's what "anti-car" people (speaking as one myself) want: to emphasize infrastructure that enables and encourages that. The "anti-car" thing isn't "ban cars entirely in all cases", just "stop assuming everything needs to be car-first at the expense of every other modality".

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

#543
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The political cost within a democratic society is a reality and a real cost you have to contend with if you want to reshape how public roads are used. So, yes, the cost is high compared to switching cars.

The political cost is largely from losing lobbying $ from car companies (and possibly construction companies).

Yeah, clearly the car companies are lobbying cities hard?

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

#544

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…

While I appreciate the contrarian view, it’s not either/or. Cars are a wonderful thing and facilitate independence and long distance travel. Electric cars are even more wonderful things. And Bikes are wonderful for active transport and but not a substitute for cars

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

#545

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.

Assuming you have a partner, each adult has two kids on their bike (one front seat, one back seat). At 6 the eldest can even cycle by themselves if you push. I'm Dutch and this is completely normal here.

I used to have this bike with an extra front seat and regularly cycled places with 4 kids (4-7) by myself (pushing one on their own bike): https://kokfietsen.nl/image/cache/data/Azor%20Catalogus/069-...

But then again, this country is really flat.

Edit: with kids 6 miles is a stretch, not that it's super hard, but you'll often be tempted to just take the car. If you upgrade to an e-bike that temptation will be a LOT less.

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

#546

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.

What do you mean “no means of escape?” There are trains, buses, taxis, bikes, rental cars etc. To me owning a car seems much more miserable!

>"To me owning a car seems much more miserable!"

Well you are free not to own it. Nobody's forcing you.

Actually my main mean of transportation in Toronto is bicycle myself (well I work from home for the last 20 years anyways).

I also own car (van actually) and it gives me great and hassle free degree of freedom. If I am in a mood and I often am I can jump in and in few hours be in complete wilderness swimming in some godforsaken lake. Or if I need to grab some heavy stuff and bring it somewhere which happens rather often. And I do not need to arrange / wait for anything. Just get in and go.

So no. Screw that dense car free living. To each their own.

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

#547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Nice! I want one.

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

#548
post #514

I've downloaded the study on which the premise of this article is based and, as usual, it's assumed that the energy needed to move a bike has no carbon footprint, while in reality it has. Specifically on an European diet(~1.5-2g CO2/kcal) a cyclist is responsible for ~27g CO2/km, which is not negligible and puts cycling on par with public transport. I don't believe cycling to be a solution here. It's said that 25% of…

A lot of Dutch people live in suburbs and work in cities, that explains the bulk of car traffic. If you look at trips within cities though, the bicycle has a much larger portion. In Amsterdam 38% and in Groningen 57%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_the_Netherlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen

Comparing distance travelled is not really a useful metric in my opinion. Virtually no one is going to ride their bicycle 20-30 miles to work each day, when many people will happily travel this distance by car. It's for the short <5 mile trips that you want to incentivize people to take a bike instead of a car. That's where you have the most to gain in terms of making your city a more pleasant space to be.

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

#549
post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - 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…

It’s not about shaming people, it’s just about pointing out possibilities and offering solutions. Whenever this topic comes up people love to bring up contrived edge cases and dismiss biking completely.

“It doesn’t work if you have an emergency during a blizzard, so therefore you should never bike”

“It doesn’t work for a single mother with three jobs so nobody should do it”

“We haven’t completely rebuilt the entire urban infrastructure into a biking utopia and achieved perfect economic justice so therefore nobody can bike”

Nonsense. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Not every single person needs to bike and even those that do don’t need to bike all the time for every trip. That doesn’t mean there isn’t tons of low-hanging fruit to turn lots of bike trips into car trips.

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

#550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 signi…

Each person that's on a bike is not in a car. And bike path throughtout is much bigger.

Potentially. Sometimes a bike commuter is someone who would've taken the bus or subway to get to work.

That said, it still depends on commuting patterns, road topography, etc. Some cities have a majority of workers driving in from distances that would be impractical for most people to bike. Making a big shift to bike lanes without making other changes to reroute and accommodate traffic would just cause gridlock and frustration for most.

If shifting city centers to being bike centric is done on a longer timeline then capital improvements and redevelopment can be done to support it in a way that makes it more efficient for everyone. Some cities can do that on a shorter timeline based on current constraints, others would take longer. Ultimately I think it's the right direction to go in.

Post reply on HN