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

701–710 of 764 posts

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

#701

Post by dheera »

jamil7 wrote: post #588
dheera wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We also found that the average person who shifted from car to bike for just one day a week cut their carbon footprint by 3.2kg of CO₂ – equivalent to the emissions from driving a car for 10km, eating a serving of lamb or chocolate, or sending 800 emails. This is interesting, but might it be possible that at least some those cyclists ate 1 more serving of lamb (or other high-carbon meat) or chocolate than they norma…

Are you suggesting that a cyclist would cancel out CO2 gains because they would need a whole extra meal of lamb per day? Apart from not being true this ignores all other externalities of car ownership and usage in cities.

> Apart from not being true

Data please. I'm posing a question and looking for data, not speculative conclusions.

I'm a cyclist myself and I can definitely say that after biking 10km I end up wanting to eat more protein (and chocolate) than I usually do. Maybe not an extra full meal unless I do a century, but definitely a different meal than if I hadn't biked at all. Also, after exercise I often end up tired and buying food instead of making it myself. All I can say is that my eating habits do differ on days that I bike. I eat plant-based protein but there are lots of people who don't. That's why I posed the question.

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

#702

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

thehappypm wrote: post #662
dijit wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that is actually pretty good by global standards in the US Citation needed. From a European perspective, it is not my impression that the local democratic system is good in any US city. But that could be my filter bubble, we only heard bad things because people shout the loudest about bad things.

What are the main problems you think of local government? I'm curious what the perception is in Europe. American cities aren't the pretty, walkable, public-transit oriented cities you have in Europe but that doesn't mean they're failures either.

So, the US actually has real local government, with elections at very low levels, relative to what is more centralised and formalised system in the UK & Ireland.

I'm not a big fan of the practices of a lot of these low-level elected groups (seriously, fuck you Palo Alto representatives), but the principle behind the existence of all the local town and county governance systems (and particularly the heavy reliance on elected people) are things that seem like really good ideas to me, and that I think should exist in more places (maybe they do, I'm sure the commenters here will alert me to such places ;) ).

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

#703

Post by Ygg2 »

orthoxerox wrote: post #634
Ygg2 wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I want to take grandma to visit family in neighborhing city? Common grandma, giddy up?

Take a train? Rent a car?

No train there. Rent a car? We're back to square one.

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

#704

Post by rtlfe »

thehappypm wrote: post #662
dijit wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that is actually pretty good by global standards in the US Citation needed. From a European perspective, it is not my impression that the local democratic system is good in any US city. But that could be my filter bubble, we only heard bad things because people shout the loudest about bad things.

What are the main problems you think of local government? I'm curious what the perception is in Europe. American cities aren't the pretty, walkable, public-transit oriented cities you have in Europe but that doesn't mean they're failures either.

I shared this link in a sibling comment, but here it is again: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/neighborhood-defenders/...

A big problem is that local governments place a lot of weight on "community input," but the people giving input don't accurately reflect the community. People who show up to meetings tend to be strongly opposed to change and fit into demographic groups that have a lot of free time, i.e. older, richer, and whiter. This causes a lot of positive changes to be either outright vetoed or delayed indefinitely at the whim of NIMBYs.

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

#705

Post by moistbar »

FDSGSG wrote: post #474
sudosysgen wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an SUV/crossover. Yes, it is too big. Cars got way too big since a few decades, especially in North America, and that is a huge part of why people feel that roads are too small.

Are you kidding? The Juke is smaller than a 1 series, smaller than a VW Golf and much smaller than a Prius. Even by European standards it's a tiny car.

There's no arguing with cyclists. They're worse than vegans in that regard. Pushy, smug, arrogant, completely irrational, and overall extremely ableist people that expect everyone else to bend to their way of life because "well if I can do it, then having no legs is no excuse, you ecoterrorist!"

Fuck me this place is worse than reddit.

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

#706

Post by moistbar »

ric2b wrote: post #697
moistbar wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about you, but I don't drive better when I'm stressed.

Actually you probably do. People slow down and pay more attention when they're not comfortable driving.

Considering all of the accidents I've been in have been while I was already stressed, this may be the new stupidest thing I've ever read on this site.

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

#707

Post by moistbar »

sudosysgen wrote: post #414
moistbar wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I drive a Nissan Juke when I go to the city. If you consider that a big car, I don't know what to tell you. EDIT: Since I can't respond to the comment below me, the Juke is slightly taller than a Mini Cooper and about as long and wide. I literally can't find a smaller car that I'd be comfortable driving on the highway.

That's an SUV/crossover. Yes, it is too big. Cars got way too big since a few decades, especially in North America, and that is a huge part of why people feel that roads are too small.

> That's an SUV/crossover

This is easily the stupidest excuse for logic I've ever heard. The PT cruiser is classified as a truck. Does that mean it's the same size as a RAM 3500?

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

#708

Post by moistbar »

occz wrote: post #270
moistbar wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you've ever driven in an American city, but those streets can barely fit a single lane of car traffic in some cases. Philadelphia in particular has streets so narrow that the line of parked cars along the side is enough to basically block the whole street. It's already incredibly uncomfortable to drive on those streets, so I don't get why you're so surprised that people would be angry about further in…

It should not be comfortable to drive around in a city. You are in a place with lots of people you can harm with your vehicle if you drive around fast, you should be driving slowly and paying close attention to your surroundings. Proper bicycle infrastructure (separated bike lanes etc.) and quality public transportation is the solution - the comfortable option should generally be to take a train/metro/bus/tram/boat.

Just come out and say you irrationally hate cars already, Jesus Christ.

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

#709

Post by alex_g »

uoaei wrote: post #700
TulliusCicero wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, it only works for the very few. Accessible cycling is what we need, and that usually means physical separation from cars.

No, because cycling is not for everyone. Multiple modes of transportation should be equally available, but that doesn't mean you should expect that everyone be able to use every mode. For instance I don't see any particular utility to making infrastructure so that there's enough room for every person to use a motorized wheelchair. Different conditions demand different solutions.

The point was about, or at least could be made, beyond just cycling.

Replace "Accessible Cycling" with "Accessible form of transport that does not endanger other people not using that form." Whether that's bicycles or wheelchairs or scooters, etc.

The point is that putting them with cars is dangerous.

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

#710

Post by hi41 »

My grandfather was a math teacher. Raising several kids in India with that meager salary, he could only afford a Hercules bicycle which he rode what feels like several decades. He could not afford even a scooter or a moped.

When I came to USA, I bought a car and several after that. I thought at that time how awesome I was.

How wrong have I been at this one and so many others. He was a good man.

Post reply on HN