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

571–580 of 764 posts

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

#571

Post by noja »

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,…

Is parking possible on both sides of each apartment block (re: your blog post)?

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

#572

Post by Ma8ee »

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,…

If they started to charge the same for parking and street space as for any other property in places like NYC, the problem would disappear rapidly.

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

#573

Post by pjmlp »

I love cycling, on the Summer, no way I am arriving completely wet facing blazing rain, icy roads or snow.

Not my thing.

As for public transportation, that is a great option, when it isn't a single bus every hour, taking 1h 30m to destination, which can be done in 30m with a car.

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

#574

Post by adrianN »

FpUser wrote: post #546
TheTrotters wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 som…

Car centric infrastructure forces people to own cars.

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

#575

Post by adrianN »

908B64B197 wrote: post #513
zip1234 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Problem is: automobile owners chose their houses with these subsidies already accounted for in their budget. Remove them and suddenly it's impossible for them to stay in their home. Oh, and they can't move closer to the city center: removing the subsidies just made houses that are centrally located impossible to afford for them.

So, spread the change out over a number of years, say 15 or 20. Building public transport won't happen over night either. People can't expect their living situation to stay the same forever, societal change requires personal change too.

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

#576

Post by mrshadowgoose »

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…

Most humans enjoy being comfortable. Costs (financial and ecological) ignored, it's safe to say that a large portion of the population would choose to proceed quickly from point A to B in the comfort of a private enclosed vehicle.

Obviously this desire needs to be balanced with environmental protection, practicality and accommodation of those who legitimately want to cycle or walk. There are a few technologies coming down the pipeline that should help achieve a compromise between all of these:

-mass electrification of vehicles

-pervasive small-diameter tunneling: The jury's still out on whether this can be done cheaply enough, but if this works out, it completely solves the urban scaling problem. Passenger vehicular traffic in cities can be pushed down into the ground, freeing up existing space for cyclists and pedestrians. Parallel tunnels can be trivially added when specific routes require additional capacity.

-self-driving vehicles: Self-driving taxi services would reduce the demand for personal ownership of vehicles, thereby reducing the total ecological burden.

I'm in complete agreement with you that automobile-oriented transportation, as implemented today, is completely awful. That doesn't mean we should reject the human element, and force people to do things they don't want to, when technological progress can allow us to satisfy those wants responsibly.

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

#577

Post by adrianN »

fooker wrote: post #424
selectodude wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today roads are partly paid for with gas taxes and sometimes vehicle property taxes. Which is hilarious because road damage squares with the weight of the vehicle and bike lanes would need to be repaved maybe once per century.

Any place with a seasonal temperature variation needs significant road repairs every 2-3 years, if not more often.

The bike lanes in my city are often left basically unmaintained since the seventies and are still usable. They are of course not as nice as freshly paved.

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

#578

Post by pjerem »

Laarlf wrote: post #314
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…

I look at European city centers where cars often times get thrown out now and: they don’t agree. Profits were way down even before COVID. Even if you offer people the option to not use their car, they will avoid it. No form of transportation will ever be as pleasant to use. Cars don’t make cities unpleasant, cities themselves are unpleasant. No matter if cars exist or not. Bikes, pedestrians and cars must be properly…

I have an anecdote about this.

In my somehow big city (1m habitants in France), they wanted to create a train line between my city and another one. As every infrastructure projects in France, the project eventually had years of delay (maybe 3 or 4).

So at the due date, no train line. But the trains (about 20 of them, IIRC) were acquired and stored somewhere.

So we had those trains without rails. Somehow, local politics decided to let them roll temporary on an existing national train line.

Nobody anticipated it, but all cities with a train station on this old line started to gain a ton of attractiveness. The real estate prices and population on those cities raised by 30-40% in 2 to 3 years.

People were just happy to live countryside while being able to move to work without cars. And that’s totally reasonable since with this high numbers of trains, this line is now able to have a 20min frequency.

Eventually, local politics decided to let the trains indefinitely and just buy 20 more for the new line. Which of course, added delay :D

——

I have a great car. But I think any mean of transport is really more pleasant than car. The only problem is they are not always all as optimal as a car. But it’s an infrastructure problem. Public transports without rails is as optimal as your car without a road.

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

#579

Post by jamesblonde »

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.

Cargo bikes for the 2 adults. It's the norm here in Stockholm. Well, 4 kids is not the norm. But 2 kids in a cargo bike is the norm.

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

#580

Post by megablast »

luckylion wrote: post #170
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.

> The issue is taking away even a tiny fraction of car space basically triggers some kind of political road rage. How do you take "a tiny fraction" away from a street that has one lane in each direction to build a dedicated bike lane? Make it a one-way street and just kill traffic? It's not as simple as you make it out to be. Don't infer motivations, I don't own a car and ride my bike everywhere. It's mostly a money…

One way streets.

Killing traffic is good.

Post reply on HN