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

441–450 of 764 posts

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

#441

Post by Johnny555 »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #231
dmm wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most dangerous part of a sidewalk for a cyclist are places where they intersect roads. Drivers just aren't expecting sidewalk users moving at bike speeds. Some areas have long stretches of sidewalk without intersections those are fine for cycling assuming they have little pedestrian traffic or are wide enough to pass safely.

This is pretty much my conception of when cyclists should be using the sidewalk instead.

These are also the areas that work great for bike lanes, a nice uninterrupted stretch of bike lane without cars turning into them.

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

#442

Post by msla »

Steltek wrote: post #290
Packofbezens wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dangerous must be removed from roads. There is a non-negligible amount of bikers skipping red lights, or using the sidewalk (forbidden in many cities), or even going the opposite way on one-way streets. The rationale in most cases is that a bike is not a motor vehicle and thus should not observe the same rules. This is a problem even in a scenario without cars, as it leads to collision vs. other bicyclists or pedestr…

Not to say that behavior is okay but you're comparing apples and oranges. Drivers kill tens of thousands of people a year. Bikes are responsible for Meanwhile, the driver who hit me (in a bike lane) defended himself to the cop by saying "it's hard to not hit bikers". He was not even given a warning. I had video evidence from a helmetcam.

> People citing misbehavior by some cyclists need to get some perspective.

And some first aid for being run down by a cyclist, sure.

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

#443

Post by Johnny555 »

It's funny how so may drivers will say "Stop stealing car lanes and turning them into bike lanes! Roads are for driving, not bikes!" and at the same time they'll complain that their "free" parking was turned into bike lanes because apparently roads are for driving and parking, but not bikes.

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

#444

Post by yardie »

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.

Those are potholes. A little 2-crew job. We're talking about roadwear. Where the actual asphalt grinds down to the expose the substrate. And in particularly bad cases the substrate breaks down and the road develops ruts. Potholes are a few hundred dollars in repair, roadwear is tens of thousands.

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

#445

Post by msla »

cuu508 wrote: post #238
temp8964 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jacket might be ok for small rain, but for heavy rain and thunderstorm? No. Employers expect employees to come to work every business day, and people expect business to open every business day, even under heavy rain and thunderstorm. Watch! Heavy rain/wind! Most people can't go to work! Most businesses are closed! Teachers can't go to schools! Nurses can't go to clinics and hospitals! What a ridiculous picture of a m…

"There is no bad weather, only inappropriate clothing." :-) If the existing materials are not good enough, perhaps we can invent more waterproof, windproof, breathable, warmer, cheaper etc. materials

> "There is no bad weather, only inappropriate clothing." :-)

Say that in a whiteout blizzard.

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

#446

Post by Johnny555 »

dmm wrote: post #94
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

Commuting by car has and creates lots of problems but all of these are ignored because cars are normal and bikes aren't. That's the biggest problem. For example, driving a car is necessary to be a full member of society in most places in the US. If you can't drive basic things like going to work, buying food, visiting family, seeing a doctor aren't possible or take 2-3x more time without a car. As a result people are…

This is the most important one. Most people would be happy biking 2mi/3.25km to work

2 miles is around the lower end of what I would consider bikeable, much less than that and I'd just walk.

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

#447

Post by physicles »

As an American who has been living in China for some years, I don’t miss the car-centric lifestyle one bit. But I don’t see a viable path to wide adoption in the US, especially since your choice of transportation is now part of the fucking culture wars.

For bikes to have real gains, you must somehow make cars less appealing. And while individual mindset is similar in China and the US — everybody really really wants cars now — the outcome has so far been different. Here’s my guess as to the reasons why, with the most important first:

- It’s super hard to buy a car here. The waiting time for a new number plate is something like 10 years (for the non-rich anyway). I’m so thankful for this — I can’t imagine this city with tons more cars. (You used to be able to jump the queue by buying an EV, but the waiting list for that has grown now too)

- Even after you buy a car, there are days when you can’t legally drive it, depending on the last digit of your number plate.

- It’s straight up annoying and expensive to drive to most places in the city. Traffic is terrible, and for short trips you’ll spend way more time and money parking than driving (its common for a 10 minute bike ride to be a 30-40 minute drive during rush hour). That said, the city does not seem interested in fixing this problem by widening roads, which I take as a win.

- There is bike infrastructure: not only are there decent bike lanes, but drivers are used to sharing the road with bikes. It’s not Scandinavia, but it’s way better than the US.

- There are shared bikes fucking everywhere, so it’s always an easy option. It’s super rare that I end up somewhere and cannot find a bike.

- There is zero tolerance for drunk driving. If you’re going somewhere to drink, that’s a trip you’re not driving.

All this said, even though there are so many bikes on the streets that they stack up at traffic lights like cars during rush hour, I feel like the number of bike commuters is 1-2 orders of magnitude less than the number of subway commuters. There’s a scale (population, and geographic size) at which you can’t just promote biking, you must invest in public transport.

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

#448

Post by mauvehaus »

moistbar wrote: post #410
rtlfe wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People say the same thing about winter in the Northeast. Then when they see how convenient and freeing it is to ride a bike, they quickly learn to deal with the weather.

If you're claiming that people will still ride their bikes to work when it's 20 F outside, you're incorrect.

If you're claiming that they won't, I'll happily be your counterexample. Buying a Brompton and riding 3 miles from the end of public transit to work through pretty much all weather in Boston was about the best thing I did for my sanity in all of 2019. Yes, on the snowy and icy days too.

I did a fair amount of bike commuting in Cleveland as well, though the drive was less hellish and I drove some of the lousier days.

The worst part of moving to Vermont, perversely, is that I get less exercise because it's a 25 mile one-way trip to the shop I work out of.

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

#449

Post by Tiktaalik »

globular-toast wrote: post #258

Only when cities completely ban car travel will cycling increase. Cars are currently first class road users. They get extra protection and sympathy from the police. All infrastructure is built for them with cycling infrastructure being laughable and often regressive. On top of that, most people are just too fat and lazy to cycle by choice.

Banning car travel isn't required for cycling to grow, but cars will need to give away some of their lanes to build first class separated cycling infrastructure.

You're right in pointing out that cars are "first class" road users.

It's unthinkable to many that a lane of a road could be taken away from exclusive car use and used to create a separated cycling lane.

It's incredibly challenging to restructure our road infrastructure more equitably. It will be a bigger challenge than pivoting from ICE to EV.

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

#450

Post by Tiktaalik »

jtdev wrote: post #330
estebank wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dutch+children+bike&source=l...

Using NL as an example here is a major stretch... NL has been designed around non motorized transport; it’s like using Venice as an example for why gondola based transit is a good idea for North America

You should google some pictures of NL in the 1970s if you think NL is "designed" around non-motorized transport.
Post reply on HN