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

Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 969 posts

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#391

Post by rootusrootus »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #312
chriswarbo wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's like if Wall Street could tell the President of the US to take a hike An alternative take: If it turns out, by some legislative fluke, that a particular square mile of the US is not bound by all of its laws, it won't be long until Wall St companies start moving their headquarters!

This is kind of what happens in Las Vegas, but to a lesser extent than the City of London. Most of what we think of as "Las Vegas" is actually the unincorporated territory known as "Paradise."

That's pretty common, though? It's the whole reason the census has the concept of metro statistical areas. Phoenix, Portland, Seattle, all have this same effect to varying degrees.

But none of them have a rule saying the POTUS cannot visit with the Mayor approving, so there's that. And "City of London" is tiny compared to the rest of the London metro.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#392

Post by uoaei »

ovi256 wrote: post #320
judge2020 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no bubble, only a lack of desire to seek out knowledge about other lifestyles. The problems with car culture were not surfaced until the rise and dominance of the internet.

When people are accused of living in a bubble, it's usually because they show a strong universalist desire to expand their lifestyles to others, without consideration for the others' preferences. The opposite of humanist liberalism that was foundational for Western liberal democracies, or 'live and let live'.

If we taxed suburbs what they actually cost us as a society, no one would want to live in suburbs. The land use is abysmal compared to cities. Suburbs are effectively subsidized by the cities they are near, and those living in suburbs get off way too easy. That's a good thing if you have an extractivist, individualist mindset, but if we are to continue functioning as a whole society, something needs to give.

We love our farmers. Keep the fields going. But this business with allocating half-acre lots per 4 people (lots which are empty for literally 1/3 of the day) has got to end, or else local utilities should stop servicing those far-flung places. You want to be without the burdens of living in a society -- fine! Figure out water and power for yourself. It's easier than ever and there's still federal- and state-level rebate programs for renewables.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#393

Post by Maxburn »

I haven't done my research but from what I've gathered from news over the years hasn't London had very high car tax, tolls, super expensive gas, and just outright closing streets and eliminating parking?

So with a big enough stick and very little carrot anything is possible? Is that a win? Aren't we hearing that actual residents really don't like these "15 minute" cities?

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#394

Post by qikInNdOutReply »

trgn wrote: post #240
qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #27

Its fascinating, that even such a entrenched industry such as the car industry, can be banned from urban centers. There is hope for change yet.

It's amazing to see. The last ten years, the galvanizing project of every european city has been calming cars. I didn't really realize it until I was there the last few summers on vacation, and the difference is night&day with 10 years ago (Brussels, Paris big examples, many smaller ones too). Unreal, a truly positive transformation. It's one of those things, you just can "feel", although maybe hard to explain, I cer…

I wonder, why there is not dealds between land speculation and public transportation. One party buys fields from farmers, the other creates a privately financed railroad/subway out in the "new suburbs", shooting the areas value through the roof. Then build denser, better citycore, connected to the old citycore.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#395

Post by paganel »

alkjsdlkjasd wrote: post #66
raphaelj wrote: post #36

Somewhat unrelated to the article, but I live in a mid-size EU city and dumped my car for an e-bike a few months ago. Surprisingly, it hasn't been that hard (my GF kept her car, and I have a car-sharing subscription): Pros: - Immediately stopped having insomnia. Better feel overall; - about €300/month in additional disposable income. That's basically a free lunch everyday! - significantly faster if parking is taken i…

> - weather might make the ride unpleasant; As the Dutch like to say: there is no such thing as bad cycling weather, only bad cycling clothes. I would strongly recommond a pair of water/wind proof trousers to go over your regular trousers, if you don't already have some. This has lead to a much more pleasant riding experience, especially in winter. They aren't very practical on a regular bike as they make you uncomfo…

The Dutch have passable weather for most of the year, of course that it’s easy for them to say that.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#396

Post by alwaysbeconsing »

atchoo wrote: post #133
raphaelj wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my bike is insured, and I bought a recently released angle grinder-resistant lock [1]. My workspace is also fairly well located so that also helps. [1] https://eu.litelok.com/products/litelok-x1

Are you locking your bike to something angle grinder resistant when out and about? The last bike I had stolen was from an underground bike store, behind two armoured locked doors and locked to a permanent bike-rack embedded in concrete. Thieves didn't cut a single lock, instead they cut all the bike-racks and emptied the place.

As with nearly all security, nothing is perfect. You are just raising the bar high enough to lower risk to an acceptable level. Cutting an entire row of racks and hauling off all the bikes is a bigger, noisier, longer job, requiring more coordination, than taking one. It presents more risk to the thieves themselves, which means there are going to be fewer thieves willing or able to take it on.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#397

Post by loeg »

uoaei wrote: post #375
loeg wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Energy is proportionate to the square of velocity. So it's: Walking: 5 km/h * 70kg => 875 (although this is a very slow estimate for a walker) (please ignore the non-canonical units) e-bike: 20 km/h * 90 kg => 18,000 (I think your estimate for ebike mass might be on the low side at 20kg, but whatever) car: 50 km/h * 2000kg => 2,500,000 (and that's a fairly low speed for cars! Drunk drivers often drive faster than is…

Realistic estimates: Walking: 6kph, 70kg => 100J (0.02% of car) Analog bike: 18kph, 80kg => 2kJ (0.36% of car) E-bike: 25kph, 100kg => 4.6kJ (0.82% of car) Car: 50kph, 2000kg => 560kJ (100% of car)

Thanks. Just for the sake of fleshing out the speeding angle:

Car, 64 kph => 164% of car at 50 kph

Car, 110 kph => 480% of car at 50 kph

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#398

Post by jonahrd »

mellosouls wrote: post #384
jonahrd wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could probably count the number of times I've changed or showered after cycling on one hand, and cycling has been my main mode of transit for 10 years. When your trip is like 3km you don't even have time to work up a sweat, especially if you're limited to just going at the speed of traffic. (Yes, on my own I could probably ride faster, but I'm limited by car/infrastructure speed)

Sure, there are always going to be anecdotal exceptions ("parking isn't an issue for me, I just park on site"), but I think fans on either side can have quite rose-tinted views when assessing the pros and cons; I was just pointing out an omission in one of the examples.

I live in the highest density cycling city in North America (Montreal) and this is not anecdotal. A huge portion of my office cycle-commutes to work, and the vast majority do not shower. This was doubly-true before I worked at my current company, where there weren't showers, and still most people used bikes to commute.

At what point do anecdotes from people who actually live this experience day to day become more useful to listen to than theories from people who don't?

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#399

Post by rickydroll »

substation13 wrote: post #292
holoduke wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You live in a city bubble. I have three kids and live in a suburban town about 40km away from the nearest big city. No way i can live without a car. I do have bikes and use them often to bring kids to school. But many friends and family are scattered arround the country. Many places i go to with my kids can only visited by car. And i find a car often very useful during a period of reconstruction of my house or garden…

This is why cities are better for the environment. I don't think rural car usage has nearly as much negative impact as driving in a big city though, so this shouldn't be a strong policy focus. Awesome that the kids can ride to school!

I think the rural/city better for the environment is a bit of cherry picking of statistics. It's important however to respect what's good for each of us. For me, living in the city meant shitty health outcomes, spending way too much money on rent and food, way too many people trying to stick a hand in my pocket for entertainment etc.

For me a good life means dark skies, green trees, a chance of dying every time I go for a hike, and a garden in my backyard.

If you are a city person, that's great, fantastic and I hope that you can stay there but if you have to move out to suburban/rural spaces, don't bring the city with you. Leave the light pollution, the noise, and all those urban attributes in the city.

Re: Cyclists now outnumber motorists in City of London

#400

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

alkjsdlkjasd wrote: post #190
nonethewiser wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The damage is a function of mass and speed. Obviously walking < e-bike << car

To quickly do the calculations: Walking: 5 km/h * 70kg = 97 kgm/s e-bike: 20 km/h * 90 kg = 500 kgm/s car: 50 km/h * 2000kg = 28,000 kgm/s

it's worth noting that most collisions don't happen at full speed (and combination of velocity matters a lot).
Post reply on HN