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

#731

Post by brailsafe » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:33 AM UTC

__turbobrew__ wrote: post #635

brailsafe wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but I think Vancouver has a pretty good handle on its car/parking situation. That's Vancouver proper, not the suburbs. Most new buikdings that go up have their parking underground, and then drivers in the city are squeezed for the most part in terms of parking options and so on. The parking lots that are still around seem to be from older buildings, that then get replaced with higher density eventually. When…

I live in Vancouver proper and rarely drive. The city has done a pretty good job on the bike routes; I can get to nearly anywhere in Vancouver within a 30 minute bike ride from my home turf of Mount Pleasant. I think forcing parking lots under ground and limiting parking spaces has been great for the city! It is definitely a trend with new buildings to have limited parking options. My workplace office houses about 60…

Interesting point. I hadn't thought of a SkyTrain to Oakridge from Metrotown. Oakridge is apparently getting a massive redevelopment and that could increase demand, but is it currently busy enough? I guess with the development happening ta Metrotown as well, it would be good to just connect all major centres. I did used to live in Burnaby, and it sucked getting to the airport from there.

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

#732

Post by ido » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:50 AM UTC

RestlessMind wrote: post #725

ido wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly only out of American big cities (at least in the developed world), the point is to fix that. A lot of big cities in Europe and East Asia do fine without being car-centric.

A lot of places depend on cars / 2-wheelers beyond American big cities. Based on my first hand experience - big cities in India and Brazil.

You're right, in my zeal I overstated a bit. But among the richest/most developed nations there are the US & a few similar countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) where a lot of people drive cars and on the other hand western europe and the reach east asian countries (Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore) where mass transit (and in Europe sometimes also bicycles) is the main form of transportation in the large cities.

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

#733

Post by globular-toast » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:02 AM UTC

mrshadowgoose wrote: post #728

globular-toast wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are only comfortable in cars because they've learned to be. Before I owned a car and cycled every day I didn't once think it was uncomfortable and that I'd rather be in a car. My body was used to it.

I can offer a contrary anecdote. I grew up in a Canadian city, but my family never had a car. I spent my entire childhood bussing everywhere. It sucked. It really fucking sucked and I hated it the entire time. Most journeys across the city required waiting for transfers in temperatures ranging from -30C to +30C. Any kind of irregular or lengthy trip was always an exercise in planning and frustration when scheduled bu…

I hate buses too. I had a 12 mile journey to get to school when I was 15. I rode to school on my bike as soon as I realised it was possible. Buses are the absolute worst for me so it's no surprise a car would be considered more comfortable.

Are you sure you didn't also learn to be comfortable in a car? You had to learn to drive, right? And didn't all that bussing condition you to find it comfortable in a cramped metal box that moves? I like driving but hate commuting in heavy traffic. I'm pretty sure most people do. Have they been "tricked" into accepting that?

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

#734

Post by DocTomoe » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:07 AM UTC

Ma8ee wrote: post #717

DocTomoe wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trend has already started. E.g. in Germany, some cities prohibit older Diesel engines within city limits. This has lead especially commuters of low-wage jobs quickly being forced to buy a new, more environmentally-friendly car (and their Diesel car just lost a lot of value in the market), so they have no option other than switch to gasoline engines - which are usually OLDER cars than they used to be with WORSE po…

The change won’t be for free (even though it probably in the end will save us all a lot of money), and unfortunately, everything that cost money will hit the poor hardest. But that is a problem that is solved with progressive taxes and redistribution, not something that should stop us from saving the environment.

The change won't be for free. But rather than lower the usefulness of cars, make sure new cars have better fuel economies (which directly translates to lower pollution). Within 10-15 years, clunkers get replaced anyways, so a general policy of "by 2027, all newly-registered cars must have a maximum amount of X litres per 100 kilometres" or a ban of Diesel engines outside of speciality markets (military, agriculture, trucks) would hurt virtually no-one (but inefficient car makers, who should improve).

If you hit the poorest, you won't get a ecological paradise, you'll eventually get the next iteration of an autocratic dictatorship (either left-wing or right-wing) - now with the extra support of the industry. No-one needs that.

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

#735

Post by cycomanic » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:22 AM UTC

FpUser wrote: post #723

SirZimzim wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, too many people can't bear making anything they sense to be a sacrifice on their part. The solution is definitely to shift the car ownership economic burden more towards car owners instead of everyone. Giant empty parking lots and huge roads are an insane cost with a terrible maintenance story. I like to think of it as moving away from a datacenter to cloud based solutions. You don't need to buy all that capacit…

>"Yes, too many people can't bear making anything they sense to be a sacrifice on their part." Sorry but I do not live to make sacrifices for the "benefit of everyone". I already left one country because of that. It was called USSR. And the first thing I did as soon as I could - got myself a car and traveled all over the places on my own. My small software development company does not use cloud either. Self host and…

But you are expecting everyone to make sacrifices for your benefit, because non-car drivers are significantly subsidising car drivers. Lets make car cost exactly what they should be then, things like lets make real-estate used for roads in cities go into rental costs for those roads (via taxes, road tolls etc.), lets price the environmental costs appropriately, including the health cost from noise etc. If you still want to pay for your car then, go ahead, but don't expect others to subsidise your living.

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

#736

Post by starkruzr » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:33 AM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #498

digital-cygnet wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a chicken-egg problem at play, though. We can't build denser cities because we need to build 4-lane roads and parking; we can't get rid of these roads and parking because people need cars because the city isn't dense enough yet. It's certainly solvable on the many-decade timescale by smart, consistent city and state governments, but it's going to be a gradual slog of incrementalism (e.g., see all the changes…

Indeed, two-wheeled electric transport is pretty great! It's a mix of EVs and bicycles proper. These devices still need parking, even if they are as compact as a scooter or a bicycle (not like a motorcycle). Keeping them in an apartment is a bit uncomfortable, too, especially in a walk-in on 4th floor, since they are not exactly lightweight. Electric skateboards are much more compact, but take more skill, and have a…

"parking" is relative. we all have bike racks around somewhere; they work just fine.

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

#737

Post by starkruzr » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 7:34 AM UTC

Tiktaalik wrote: post #713

vgchh wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I appreciate the contrarian view, it’s not either/or. Cars are a wonderful thing and facilitate independence and long distance travel. Electric cars are even more wonderful things. And Bikes are wonderful for active transport and but not a substitute for cars

I never said it was an either/or situation here, but when governments put money toward things you can see where their priorities are. Right now with continuing near zero investment in active transportation the government is saying that its pretty much going go with the near status quo, minor and easy to achieve solution. The amount of CO2 reductions that follow will reflect this lack of ambition.

it's sort of unclear to me why you think moving to electric vehicles and renewable power will reflect a "lack of ambition" in CO2 reduction.

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

#738

Post by vesinisa » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 8:44 AM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #711

vesinisa wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is moving an option?

I mean I could, but wouldn't it be better to try and fix where I am instead?

Well it just sounds like your neighbors are not really open for change. You can of course try to change their opinions in town-hall meetings and so on, and that's commendable.

Another option would be to vote with your feet and money. If you move to an area where the zoning is e.g. more dense or bike-friendlier, it will add to the property market demand in those areas. OTOH you selling your property in your current area adds a tiny bit of negative market pressure. If that happens on scale, it drives down the prices in less friendly areas and drives up the prices in climate-friendlier areas.

Though I honestly don't know how realistic it is really currently to find a densely-zoned districts in American cities that are not plagued by rampant crime, run-away poverty and under-performing schools. I live in Europe, and my image of American zoning is mostly based on content of two YouTube channels: "Not Just Bikes" and "City Beautiful". You have probably heard of them, and if not I think you might find their videos quite interesting (or the "Strong Towns" initiative, if you prefer reading.)

In my European home city the council is actually already taking concrete measures to increase the density of zoning and actually discourage sub-urbanization / urban sprawl, even though the scale of the problem pales in comparison to typical the American city AFAIK. One of the concrete measures I myself pledge to is to always prioritize availability of biking and public transport when moving - if not for my own sake then for the sake of my children. This is a natural choice for me since I have always lived in the city myself.

I think the difference to US cities might be that in my home town the real estate prices in the city are very high because a sufficient large portion of the people who have the economical means to choose their place of living choose to live in the smaller apartments of the densely-populated city center districts, as opposed to the larger single-family housing in the suburbs. This is because the city center is actually filled with desirable services and urban culture, which just does not exist as much in the suburbs.

But I do understand that bootstrapping a lively and livable downtown is not as simple as just moving there if the area is currently dangerous and undesirable. The city council has to encourage this trend for it to be a viable option for residents who want to live there.

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

#739

Post by sergeykish » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:09 AM UTC

autokad wrote: post #724

sergeykish wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if we decided to completely eliminate sidewalk, how would it change traffic? It is not about forcing others, it is about freedom of choice. Bycicle is just one of the modes of transportation. People without choice have to use car.

that's a strawman. and also not very much. A lot of places either have no sidewalk or were already designed with a side walk and street in mind. so given that side walks usually don't even have enough space for a full lane of traffic, it would have 0 impact on traffic. Personally, I think subways should be the backbone of every city transportation system. But surprisingly even very environmentally conscious cities ch…

Yes, that's a strawman. Subways, roads and no sidewalk at all.

And your answer is 0... How? Bridges and tunnels between buildings? People evolving to fly?

Every person would require door to door taxi — tremendous increase in traffic. Same with bike lanes, take them away from Amsterdam and city would choke. Every Amsterdam driver benefits from less cars on the road.

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

#740

Post by TulliusCicero » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:10 AM UTC

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.

So what, you want to intentionally exclude people from the benefits of biking? Why? How is that better than making biking accessible to a wide range of people, like some countries already do?