Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities • Hacker News Board

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

#451

Post by TulliusCicero » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:39 AM UTC

uoaei wrote: post #375

alex_g wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the only way to cycle safely in the city is to pretend you're a full sized motor vehicle, it sounds like you understand how ridiculous it is that the roads are designed for and devoted to cars.

I think this is the wrong framing. The correct framing is, each lawful user of a roadway has equal rights to occupying space on that roadway. As a frequent city cyclist, I take the lane early and often as is my lawful right, signalling unequivocally my intention and impending action to merge into the traffic lane. Most often I use this right when avoiding someone double-parked in the bike lane, or when turning left a…

And how well will that work for 8 year olds and 80 year olds?

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

#452

Post by TulliusCicero » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:41 AM UTC

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.

You couldn't be more wrong: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/22...

If you build the right infrastructure, people will ride it.

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

#453

Post by msla » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:41 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #368

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

> - 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…

> You can address these by planning where you live and work to make it so.

Yes. We can all afford to move to a dense urban center such that we'll never have to carry a few week's worth of groceries, or enough clothes for the next school year, or anything else which is hard to transport on a bike. Roads (streets, really) are always in good condition, and never icy or that special condition where there's a layer of ice with a thin layer of loose snow on top. Winds never gust to 70 mph, because it would be unseemly for a proud cyclist to fight a headwind on badly-plowed streets.

> Or your clothes are sufficiently good

I still idly wonder what clothing is equal to the task of a whiteout blizzard.

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

#454

Post by estebank » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

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

There's no natural law that says that NL had to be bike friendly. Within my lifetime it wasn't[1]. Paris wasn't a good place to bike in and that is rapidly changing[2]. There's no reason urban environments can't be bike friendly. Suburban environments, which are prevalent in the US, have one root problem: zoning for lack of density and land-use segregation. If locales were allowed to build up, public transport would be more efficient because it would service more people in smaller area, and if shops were intermingled with housing you would be able to walk to get groceries, instead of driving for 10 minutes to get milk or bread. A big problem is that because of land-use segregation all the jobs are in one place while all the people are spread out and for political purposes and historical reasons, urban environments cater to the mobility needs of people going to work, not those that live within cities.

[1]: https://www.fastcompany.com/3052699/these-historical-photos-...

[2]: https://www.francetoday.com/travel/paris/the-paris-bicycle-b...

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

#455

Post by tomglynch » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

eldenbishop wrote: post #401

I ride a bike, around 2000 miles/year and I'd love to be able to spout the statistic their claiming. But please, /they are also stating that driving a car 10KM has the same carbon footprint as sending 800 emails. That kind of claim makes the whole article suspect.

I don't understand what the problem is with the statement.

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

#456

Post by fishywang » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:47 AM UTC

physicles wrote: post #447

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 c…

>There is bike infrastructure: not only are there decent bike lanes, but drivers are used to sharing the road with bikes

You other description matches quite well to Beijing so I assume you are living in Beijing, but this one doesn't quite match from my experience.

Yes there are technically "bike lanes", but Beijing drivers really treat them more like "ramps" that's use to get on and off the main road, or even "shortcuts" when the main road is too jammed. They really have no respect whatsoever to cyclists' right of the way on the bike lanes.

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

#457

Post by imgabe » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:47 AM UTC

msla wrote: post #453

imgabe wrote: 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…

> You can address these by planning where you live and work to make it so. Yes. We can all afford to move to a dense urban center such that we'll never have to carry a few week's worth of groceries, or enough clothes for the next school year, or anything else which is hard to transport on a bike. Roads (streets, really) are always in good condition, and never icy or that special condition where there's a layer of ice…

By definition, you would only have to get a few weeks worth of groceries once every few weeks. Do you need to drive alone in your car every single day because you need to get groceries once a month?

> whiteout blizzard

Why the hell are you driving anywhere in a whiteout blizzard? Stay home. You don’t need to go into the office and update the TPS report during a blizzard.

A blizzard happens maybe once every one or two years. You need to drive on a sunny day in May because sometimes a blizzard happens? That makes no sense.

If you live somewhere that whiteout blizzards are a year-round everyday occurrence, maybe consider a dogsled as an alternative to driving.

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

#458

Post by peterthehacker » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:47 AM UTC

The environmental argument for more bike friendly cities is one thing but I think that the quality of life argument is even stronger.

One of the things I miss the most from my college days was being able to ride my bike everywhere. I could go for weeks without driving and it was wonderful. Now days I almost never ride my bike anywhere (other than by my house for exercise) because there are just too many cars and careless drivers.

If only more cities were like Copenhagen. When I travelled there I was blown away by how bike friendly the city is. There are some parts of the city that are only accessible by bike and the roads that allow cars have elevated bike lanes, which are much safer than the “share the road” bike lanes we have in the US. The psychology of road rage just disappears with bikes. Once all the metal and glass around you disappears we are much friendlier in traffic and accidents.

Making the world more bike friendly isn’t just good for the environment but good for our well being.

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

#459

Post by msla » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:52 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #457

msla wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can address these by planning where you live and work to make it so. Yes. We can all afford to move to a dense urban center such that we'll never have to carry a few week's worth of groceries, or enough clothes for the next school year, or anything else which is hard to transport on a bike. Roads (streets, really) are always in good condition, and never icy or that special condition where there's a layer of ice…

By definition, you would only have to get a few weeks worth of groceries once every few weeks. Do you need to drive alone in your car every single day because you need to get groceries once a month? > whiteout blizzard Why the hell are you driving anywhere in a whiteout blizzard? Stay home. You don’t need to go into the office and update the TPS report during a blizzard. A blizzard happens maybe once every one or two…

> By definition, you would only have to get a few weeks worth of groceries once every few weeks. Do you need to drive alone in your car every single day because you need to get groceries once a month?

This thread is about giving up the car. Entirely.

> Why the hell are you driving anywhere in a whiteout blizzard?

Shit. Happens.

Ideally, emergencies would never happen. Still have to prepare for the less-than-ideal.

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

#460

Post by estebank » Thu, Apr 08, 2021, 12:53 AM UTC

FredPret wrote: post #421

estebank wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Practically speaking, keeping 100% of the ice off of even well-used sidewalks 100% of the time all winter long isn't going to happen. Again, it's a matter of infrastructure and priorities: https://youtu.be/Uhx-26GfCBU?t=260 > There's also a safety issue in that if you're in that kind of cold for long enough, it'll kill you, jacket or no jacket. In any situation where being outside for the time a commute could take…

I’m genuinely surprised by that video. That would certainly make Canadian winters more cyclable. However, what if you have a 30-60 min commute and it’s -20, -30 out? You can easily drive that, but cycling is another matter.

I'm glad you found the video useful.

Bikes are but a means to an end: decreased traffic, reduced urban pollution and safer streets. Getting more people on bikes means fewer people on cars. Reducing traffic also require good and frequent public transport for both people of reduced mobility and weather events. Most situations were buses or trains are disrupted is a time when driving isn't quite safe either. And cars aren't going to go away, what you want to do is affect the margins: the 2 mile drive to get milk that would 1) ideally not have to be 2 miles and 2) trivially cycleable in safe infrastructure.

I am also of the belief that increased density should be a goal, for multiple reasons, which would make the need of 60 minutes commutes unnecessary for most, with the lovely side-effect that people that desire a suburban lifestyle can still have it and the equation for both bicycles and public transit a no-brainer.