Paris cycling numbers double in one year thanks to investment(momentummag.com)
momentummag.com
Paris cycling numbers double in one year thanks to investment
https://momentummag.com/paris-cycling-numbers-double/
217 comments
I've also been a daily cyclist for over 10 years in Paris and paradoxically, I feel less safe now when I'm riding on shared infrastructure (that is roads without a separated cycling lane). I attribute it to the fact that people driving, and especially people who HAVE to drive (taxis, deliveries, etc...) are facing insane levels of congestion and are lashing out on cyclists because they blame them for being stuck in traffic for hours every day.
Now of course as a cyclist, I applaud all this new infrastructure but I'm wondering if there's a way to appease this growing atmosphere of violence (and I'm not exagerating, I've seen several fights break out between motorists and cyclists). Given the very limited space available in Paris centre, I don't really see an easy way unfortunately...
Curious if that's also something you noticed / experienced ?
Now of course as a cyclist, I applaud all this new infrastructure but I'm wondering if there's a way to appease this growing atmosphere of violence (and I'm not exagerating, I've seen several fights break out between motorists and cyclists). Given the very limited space available in Paris centre, I don't really see an easy way unfortunately...
Curious if that's also something you noticed / experienced ?
> Given the very limited space available in Paris centre, I don't really see an easy way unfortunately...
Bicycles take less space than cars, both on road and when parked, don't they? A four-lane bicycle highway is as wide as one-lane car road. If anything, people switching from cars to bicycles should produce more free space for the city, not less.
Am I missing something?
Bicycles take less space than cars, both on road and when parked, don't they? A four-lane bicycle highway is as wide as one-lane car road. If anything, people switching from cars to bicycles should produce more free space for the city, not less.
Am I missing something?
Possibly the dis-ingenuity of vocal posters? The continuing anti-rational love of the most expensive form of entranched transport?
In Paris, most people who are now biking are people who would have taken public transportation before, so the amount of cars on the roads is roughly the same as before.
Do you have a citation for that? Is car ownership and usage for city residents really the same?
I don't live there anymore but I grew up in Paris -
I knew absolutely nobody living in Paris driving to another location in Paris. It's always been metro first, bicycle sometime. Almost all of the passenger car you see in Paris are people driving from the suburb.
I knew absolutely nobody living in Paris driving to another location in Paris. It's always been metro first, bicycle sometime. Almost all of the passenger car you see in Paris are people driving from the suburb.
This is why this whole change was even politically possible.
Many cars in Paris are driven by people commuting to Paris from outside. There is a real fracture between suburbans (who don't vote for those changes happening in Paris) and city residents who votwd for them.
Many streets have been transformed to one way or made cycle-only so some critical arteries are getting congested a lot. I feel the violence and anger too, you don't even need to go to Paris, the suburbs are becoming a mess of seething drivers. I get a lot more of very dangerous behaviour, insults from drivers on shared infrastructure as I did 5 years ago, even though I have my kids in a cargo and I cycle around the max assisted (25km/h) speed or higher if my legs work, most of the time.
I see shouting matches at least once a week, angry drivers honking on streets they can't even pass a bicycle... And isolated infrastructure is not always possible...
I feel this has become another part of some culture war, where I just don't have a license and drive my kids around in a bicycle (I don't want to drive a car) so I'm some angry green extremist out to annoy every driver out there...
I see shouting matches at least once a week, angry drivers honking on streets they can't even pass a bicycle... And isolated infrastructure is not always possible...
I feel this has become another part of some culture war, where I just don't have a license and drive my kids around in a bicycle (I don't want to drive a car) so I'm some angry green extremist out to annoy every driver out there...
I had the same reaction when bike lines were rolled out over London.
The influx of slower and less inexperienced riders with the (correct) mentality of "I have the right to cycle as slowly as I feel safe to", vs the previous (incorrect, but accepted) mentality of "keep up with traffic or pull over" amongst riders, made my cycle commute less efficient.
But it's better now. People learn, the city adjusts, attitudes change.
The influx of slower and less inexperienced riders with the (correct) mentality of "I have the right to cycle as slowly as I feel safe to", vs the previous (incorrect, but accepted) mentality of "keep up with traffic or pull over" amongst riders, made my cycle commute less efficient.
But it's better now. People learn, the city adjusts, attitudes change.
We were trying to decide where to live and visiting Paris for Christmas in 2022 was a sheer joy. We ended up in the Netherlands but biking along Rue de Rivoli, the Seine, etc. were a delight for myself and my daughters (we were in a cargo bike) and we hope to return for many visits.
I visited in 2008 and while it was a great city then I definitely wouldn't have been as quick to take kids along for a bike ride.
I visited in 2008 and while it was a great city then I definitely wouldn't have been as quick to take kids along for a bike ride.
Were you able to rent a cargo bike in Paris?
Or did you somehow bring one with you?
Or did you somehow bring one with you?
We rented one from here - https://www.hollandbikes.com/117-velo-transport
One challenge with cargo bikes is transport - They're not allowed on trains (understandably) and carrying one on a car roof is a pretty big undertaking. This guy documented how, though! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UBGT_eE4q0dJZWZrOoBdM80b...
One challenge with cargo bikes is transport - They're not allowed on trains (understandably) and carrying one on a car roof is a pretty big undertaking. This guy documented how, though! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UBGT_eE4q0dJZWZrOoBdM80b...
Thanks, will keep that in mind, we use a cargo bike at home, but never considered renting one. A great way to explore a city!
Same here. I'm pleasantly surprised when I try a new itinerary, and now it's mostly bike lanes. Even 5 years ago, it was 50/50 whether there was a proper separated bike lane you could use.
I also remember 20 years ago, when a car was a normal way to move around in Paris. It hasn't been the case for several years for me now.
Around 2019/2020, something important happened: the critical mass for bicycle infrastructure was crossed, and nearly overnight a lot of people started cycling (no doubt helped by 2019 strikes and 2020 covid lanes). Since then, bicycles are a common sight everywhere.
I also remember 20 years ago, when a car was a normal way to move around in Paris. It hasn't been the case for several years for me now.
Around 2019/2020, something important happened: the critical mass for bicycle infrastructure was crossed, and nearly overnight a lot of people started cycling (no doubt helped by 2019 strikes and 2020 covid lanes). Since then, bicycles are a common sight everywhere.
The right bank is going to be really overcrowded this spring, for sure. Left bank have wider roads and less bikes, but right bank is insane.
It's now up to the point that i rather wait for commute hours to be over before i take my bike to that side.
It's now up to the point that i rather wait for commute hours to be over before i take my bike to that side.
How far outside central Paris does the cycle infra reach? Are the suburbs still very car-centric and/or hostile bicycles?
Good question, and I do not know.
However, I suspect that looking at the OpenStreetMap of cycling, there are trunk cycling lines, which feed to lower car density backstreets - so certainly one can cycle the suburbs, but without the excellent ammenities of cycle-lanes on every street over 30km/h like in Holland or Belgium.
> cyclists are less annoying than drivers
I had to laugh out loud at this, please define "less annoying".
As a daily cyclist in Paris my very own statistics say that about 95% of them (yes, that's NINETY FIVE percent) are either color blind, suicidal or willfully ignore the most basic rule, aka red lights. And yes that include M12 signs which have arrows indicating directions in which running the red light is authorized, that is ignored as well. Breaking these 95% down into categories, the vast majority would be delivery guys - you can easily imagine their "excuse" - and (usually young) idiotic morons on bikeshares (Vélib, Dott, Lime, etc) who therefore do not own the bikes and therefore care even less. I'm especially angry at parents on cargo bikes who run red lights with kids with them, this is not only suicidal, it's borderline criminal. But, you know, they are saving the planet, or something.
So I kinda disagree with the "less annoying", cyclists in Paris are the reason why everybody in Paris hates cyclists.
I had to laugh out loud at this, please define "less annoying".
As a daily cyclist in Paris my very own statistics say that about 95% of them (yes, that's NINETY FIVE percent) are either color blind, suicidal or willfully ignore the most basic rule, aka red lights. And yes that include M12 signs which have arrows indicating directions in which running the red light is authorized, that is ignored as well. Breaking these 95% down into categories, the vast majority would be delivery guys - you can easily imagine their "excuse" - and (usually young) idiotic morons on bikeshares (Vélib, Dott, Lime, etc) who therefore do not own the bikes and therefore care even less. I'm especially angry at parents on cargo bikes who run red lights with kids with them, this is not only suicidal, it's borderline criminal. But, you know, they are saving the planet, or something.
So I kinda disagree with the "less annoying", cyclists in Paris are the reason why everybody in Paris hates cyclists.
This is not just Paris but drivers are the same on the inside.
The in my experience difference is enforcement. A higher proportion of cyclists believe they will get away with breaking rules and so you see much more of it. Once it’s a norm to sneak around that corner or cross that road then other rule breaking follows.
This can only be fixed with enforcement. It can be ameliorated with infrastructure and more permissive rules where appropriate but the only way to make cyclists less annoying is enforcement.
EDIT: I say this as someone who very rarely drives and even then only outside of the city.
The in my experience difference is enforcement. A higher proportion of cyclists believe they will get away with breaking rules and so you see much more of it. Once it’s a norm to sneak around that corner or cross that road then other rule breaking follows.
This can only be fixed with enforcement. It can be ameliorated with infrastructure and more permissive rules where appropriate but the only way to make cyclists less annoying is enforcement.
EDIT: I say this as someone who very rarely drives and even then only outside of the city.
How far outside central Paris does the cycle infra reach? Are the suburbs still very car-centric?
Is Paris still full of dog poop?
> especially for pedestrians as cyclists are less annoying than drivers
As an American pedestrian I find cyclists far worse on average than drivers. They far more often ignore traffic signs and I have seen multiple collisions including one that looked quite serious, though luckily no fatalities.
On a per person basis my personal annoyance scale goes subway riders have least impact, followed by busses, normal pedestrians, cars, joggers, then cyclists at the top. Obviously cars are quite dangerous but they are more predictable. Bikes and joggers seem to spend a lot of time looking at traffic not who they are going to run into.
Edit: To be clear I think this would improve as more average people start cycling.
As an American pedestrian I find cyclists far worse on average than drivers. They far more often ignore traffic signs and I have seen multiple collisions including one that looked quite serious, though luckily no fatalities.
On a per person basis my personal annoyance scale goes subway riders have least impact, followed by busses, normal pedestrians, cars, joggers, then cyclists at the top. Obviously cars are quite dangerous but they are more predictable. Bikes and joggers seem to spend a lot of time looking at traffic not who they are going to run into.
Edit: To be clear I think this would improve as more average people start cycling.
Your personal observation does not match statistics. Most statistics show that in the majority of bike car crashes the driver has been at fault. The second link which is for Berlin where cyclist have a very bad reputation it's 77% the drivers fault, in contrast for car pedestrian accidents it was 50/50.
I also find these complaints interesting, considering that it's generally considered the norm to drive about 10% above the speed limit, and especially pedestrians are happy to cross traffic lights at red all the time.
https://www.quadlockcase.com.au/blogs/news/8-key-facts-about...
https://www.udv.de/resource/blob/79324/c290c92fc2f0712187c0d... (sorry German)
I also find these complaints interesting, considering that it's generally considered the norm to drive about 10% above the speed limit, and especially pedestrians are happy to cross traffic lights at red all the time.
https://www.quadlockcase.com.au/blogs/news/8-key-facts-about...
https://www.udv.de/resource/blob/79324/c290c92fc2f0712187c0d... (sorry German)
Seconding this. American cyclists are extremely rude to pedestrians. Whenever somebody brings this up, cyclists dismiss it by pointing out that cars kill more pedestrians than bikes. Well that's certainly true, but I've never had cars yell at me for walking on the sidewalk or over a crosswalk, while cyclists have hurled abuse and (deliberate) near misses at me more times than I can count.
And a driver assaulted me with his car last week (I was on a bike in a "sharrow" lane). Almost put me into the ditch, and when I didn't fall, he proceeded to brake-check me.
I've had food thrown at me by motorists when I'm in dedicated bike lanes.
I've been buzzed by trucks and buses while in bike lanes.
I see cars regularly use the bike lane outside my house to make aggressive passes of slower auto traffic.
Pedestrians have been killed crossing the streets near my house. All by cars, not bicycles.
Cars regularly kill animals. And not just squirrels, but raptors and fox and other predators we don't want to lose.
And on and on. We all have our anecdotes. The answer is dedicated infrastructure for a range of transportation.
I've had food thrown at me by motorists when I'm in dedicated bike lanes.
I've been buzzed by trucks and buses while in bike lanes.
I see cars regularly use the bike lane outside my house to make aggressive passes of slower auto traffic.
Pedestrians have been killed crossing the streets near my house. All by cars, not bicycles.
Cars regularly kill animals. And not just squirrels, but raptors and fox and other predators we don't want to lose.
And on and on. We all have our anecdotes. The answer is dedicated infrastructure for a range of transportation.
You have. They're just cussing you out in their cars, where you can't hear them.
> but I've never had cars yell at me for walking ... over a crosswalk
You don't live in Boston, I see.
You don't live in Boston, I see.
True, I don't. I recognize that driver and pedestrian culture are very different indifferent cities. However a significant number of cyclists seem to hate pedestrians everywhere I've gone.
To the other responder, I agree that cars are frequently assholes to cyclists, but how is that relevant to cyclists abusing pedestrians?
To the other responder, I agree that cars are frequently assholes to cyclists, but how is that relevant to cyclists abusing pedestrians?
Way less noise though
I don't think London has made quite the strides in bikeability that Paris has since 2020, but when I visited Hackney last year I was astonished to see more bikes during rush hour than cars. Walking down a road to a coffee shop, I actually had to wait a few seconds to cross at the intersection between two bike highways.
Hundreds of people riding bikes to work. And as quiet as the wilderness behind my house in the rural USA. I could hear the wind in the trees, and that was it. Maybe a little drivetrain noise from a poorly maintained bike here or there.
I desperately want to live in a city that quiet. Back when I lived in NYC practically every environment was an assault on the ears.
Hundreds of people riding bikes to work. And as quiet as the wilderness behind my house in the rural USA. I could hear the wind in the trees, and that was it. Maybe a little drivetrain noise from a poorly maintained bike here or there.
I desperately want to live in a city that quiet. Back when I lived in NYC practically every environment was an assault on the ears.
A treat for you: https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8?t=289 :)
And way less particulate pollution. Automobile drivers are actively hurting you everytime you breathe their exhaust fumes, tire wear dust, or brake pad dust. Of course the same can be said for bicycle tires or brakes on a far smaller scale, or probably even pedestrian plastic shoe soles.
Sure, that's fair.
That no fatalities bit is the crucial part. And for quality of life the amount of noise is just much better for bikes, which if you live somewhere with roads and bicycle lanes, you'd love for all the cars to go away and just have bicycles. You just need separates infrastructure, as a pedestrian you should almost never have to share a space with bicycles (or cars for that matter). And if you are on a shared space any sane design will make all cars and bicycles wait and slow down. And at that point they can't be annoying cause you don't have to go out of the way for them ever, they can wait (and seethe I suppose).
> as a pedestrian you should almost never have to share a space with bicycles
These collisions are mostly at intersections, which aren't avoidable on a flat surface you would need to go 3D.
I'm in favor of raised sidewalks for pedestrians, but they are relatively pricey infrastructure.
Edit: > That no fatalities bit is the crucial part.
Globally I think the rates are quite a bit lower. But in the US it's closer than it might seem based on how many more drivers there are than cyclists. Cyclist only kill about 4 pedestrians per year in the US, but cyclists are also vastly less common especially on a per mile basis. https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/pedestrians-kill...
To be clear I don't this says as much about bikes as it does the biased population of people currently using them.
These collisions are mostly at intersections, which aren't avoidable on a flat surface you would need to go 3D.
I'm in favor of raised sidewalks for pedestrians, but they are relatively pricey infrastructure.
Edit: > That no fatalities bit is the crucial part.
Globally I think the rates are quite a bit lower. But in the US it's closer than it might seem based on how many more drivers there are than cyclists. Cyclist only kill about 4 pedestrians per year in the US, but cyclists are also vastly less common especially on a per mile basis. https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/pedestrians-kill...
To be clear I don't this says as much about bikes as it does the biased population of people currently using them.
If we are comparing against cars though this is a no brainer. Cars and trucks are extremely hard on infrastructure while people and bikes are basically free. Go 3D!
Cars (drivers, really) are very, very dangerous. They are the leading cause of dead children. They are also one of the reasons kids don't play in the street. I find that far less annoying than cyclists.
Drivers are a lot more common than cyclists in the US.
So yes cars kill ~7,000 pedestrians per year vs ~4 (2013-2020) for bikes, but normalize the numbers and bikes are also very dangerous in the US especially on a per mile basis. https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/pedestrians-kill...
https://www.statista.com/chart/17194/pedestrian-fatalities-i...
So yes cars kill ~7,000 pedestrians per year vs ~4 (2013-2020) for bikes, but normalize the numbers and bikes are also very dangerous in the US especially on a per mile basis. https://www.nationalworld.com/news/politics/pedestrians-kill...
https://www.statista.com/chart/17194/pedestrian-fatalities-i...
your first link is for the UK, I think? That seems like a separate issue in a place with very different urban design and habits.
What's remarkable is that cars kill thousands of pedestrians _even after we've greatly reduced the frequency of walking_. If the pool were full of sharks then deaths by shark would quickly fall to 0 of course since nobody would swim anymore!
What's remarkable is that cars kill thousands of pedestrians _even after we've greatly reduced the frequency of walking_. If the pool were full of sharks then deaths by shark would quickly fall to 0 of course since nobody would swim anymore!
Ops, can’t find national numbers for the US. NYC alone had at least 7 pedestrians killed by cyclists from 2011-2019 plus several more recent deaths not counted by this article. That works out to ~10x safer per cyclist and fairly close mile. (As a side note NYC cabs are driving 100k miles per year!)
https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...
https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...
Seems like much of the danger of cycling is due to being near cars though, while the reverse isn't true. Better infrastructure and less car subsidy is likely to make cycling a lot safer, whereas cars already have ~all the infrastructure and subsidy and are still enormously dangerous
Laughable opinion as a fellow American and New Yorker. A bike crash is an unfortunate, and potentially scary event. A car crash is often life threatening or fatal. You're just not weighing the cost of each type of incident properly
People not living in Paris can't even grasp how much the city has changed in just 6 years. Starting a bit before 2020 but massively accelerated by the covid situation (and public transport saturation). You could barely cycle safely before and now it's hard to not find a bike lane.
Because of the fast pace, of course not everything is perfect but we have to celebrate this as much as we can.
Because of the fast pace, of course not everything is perfect but we have to celebrate this as much as we can.
I concur: I used to ride a bike in Paris during the mid 2010 and I eventually left the city in 2017 in part because I was fed up with the difficulty of the endeavor. And now everytime I travel back there I'm amazed at how far it's gone already, and the number of cyclists keep rising every time!
This year I started seeing a significant amount of cargo bikes, the things that I had only seen in the Nederland before.
I don't know when the growth will stop, but it's already beyond what I could even imagine back then.
This year I started seeing a significant amount of cargo bikes, the things that I had only seen in the Nederland before.
I don't know when the growth will stop, but it's already beyond what I could even imagine back then.
I'm hoping Vienna will learn from this and accelerate things here a bit.
That's a problem I desperately hope the US has to encounter soon. Too much demand and we have to accelerate our plans to satisfy all those people on bikes!
Too much demand
That's interesting because the article says the opposite, that supply (mostly) proceeds demand when it comes to mobility infrastructure. The fact that demand is showing so readily indicates there is much unrealized potential there.
That's interesting because the article says the opposite, that supply (mostly) proceeds demand when it comes to mobility infrastructure. The fact that demand is showing so readily indicates there is much unrealized potential there.
It's called "induced demand" when people don't like it - but for almost all transportation you need the supply before the demand because there's not really any other way to go about it. You can try to work out where people are currently traveling and build on that, but it's such a feedback loop it may not work.
One of the most common examples I know of is building a metro line to "nowhere" (e.g. a few stops past where it ends) - in 5-10 years that will be a bustling area because now it's connected.
One of the most common examples I know of is building a metro line to "nowhere" (e.g. a few stops past where it ends) - in 5-10 years that will be a bustling area because now it's connected.
US cities should probably first start focusing on pedestrians.
The best way to help pedestrians is to start removing cars.
The best way to do this is to install public transport and facilitate bike use.
The best way to do this is to install public transport and facilitate bike use.
With the way many areas of the US are laid out (being car-centric), a bike bias may be needed. Bikes to get to where you want to go, then once you’re there, walk around.
Currently, a lot of people need to drive to get to an area they would walk. Everything is very spread out.
Currently, a lot of people need to drive to get to an area they would walk. Everything is very spread out.
I can walk with my toddler and infant and post c-section wife. I can't bike ride with them.
Of course, I can also drive almost anywhere with them.
Of course, I can also drive almost anywhere with them.
Great! if most other people are walking and biking, that's less traffic on the road to slow you down and endanger those young children.
There are various solutions for biking with an infant, and from what I can tell, a c-section takes 6-8 weeks for recovery. No one ever side bikes should be the only possible form for transport. Use the car for 2 months while your wife recovers, for the trips she needs to take. If you live in a walkable area, go for a walk.
A bike path is easier to drop in than rebuilding entire cites and relocating the entire population around those walkable areas. Bike paths take years, consolidating urban sprawl would take decades, even if the political will existed.
A bike path is easier to drop in than rebuilding entire cites and relocating the entire population around those walkable areas. Bike paths take years, consolidating urban sprawl would take decades, even if the political will existed.
While its true that compared to 10 years ago cycling is much better served by the infrastructure, there are still large challenges ahead, and I would mention only two of them:
- many intersection are very poorly signaled if you are riding a bike (not sure for cars is much better) and old bike lanes setups put you in weird situations (ex: bike lane changing from "outside" of the road to "inside" of the road, without clear way to change from one to another)
- there is quite few temporary parking space for personal bikes. Velib works great until there is a rush hour and you either can't find bikes or a parking spot.
- many intersection are very poorly signaled if you are riding a bike (not sure for cars is much better) and old bike lanes setups put you in weird situations (ex: bike lane changing from "outside" of the road to "inside" of the road, without clear way to change from one to another)
- there is quite few temporary parking space for personal bikes. Velib works great until there is a rush hour and you either can't find bikes or a parking spot.
> While its true that compared to 10 years ago cycling is much better served by the infrastructure, there are still large challenges ahead
It takes decades (emphases on plural) in most places. Having seen it happen to my hometown from the start of the '90s until about halfway though the '10s as an example. And that was with a head start since in some places it was already done well. And that was in the often mentioned cyclist's Valhalla.
It takes decades (emphases on plural) in most places. Having seen it happen to my hometown from the start of the '90s until about halfway though the '10s as an example. And that was with a head start since in some places it was already done well. And that was in the often mentioned cyclist's Valhalla.
> And that was in the often mentioned cyclists Valhalla.
I’m confused by this analogy. Are cars Valkyries in this case, taking the souls of bikers off to Valhalla?
I’m confused by this analogy. Are cars Valkyries in this case, taking the souls of bikers off to Valhalla?
Probably lost in translation, should have phrased differently. A <something> Valhalla is seen as an alternative phrasing to <something> paradise but probably does not translate well into English and might be a specific cultural thing (and not even Nordic in use, since I'm talking about the Netherlands). It has a bit more "promised land" tone than paradise without the baggage of a large faith behind it.
No that part translated, I was just under the impression that one only got to Valhalla by dying in glorious battle.
I commuted 15km each way for a few years through heavy traffic and had a few close calls - would they count as "dying in glorious battle".
e.g. I was cycling home at night once when kids threw a brick at my head...
e.g. I was cycling home at night once when kids threw a brick at my head...
"I really hope US cities head in this direction"
The US is headed on the path of autonomous vehicles as the solution. It's the perfect combination of things our society loves: 1) No new public investment. 2) Continuous, end-to-end air conditioning
The US is headed on the path of autonomous vehicles as the solution. It's the perfect combination of things our society loves: 1) No new public investment. 2) Continuous, end-to-end air conditioning
I don't get the American fixation of cars. Isn't public roads a mild form of communism?
Lots of money has been successfully spent on convincing Americans that car ownership directly makes them more free. Car == freedom
This is sorta true in part (in some places) because other options like walk/bike/bus/train have been so disinvested that in many places you really do need to own a car to get around with any level of dignity.
It does seem to be changing on larger US cities though, so I’m hopeful.
This is sorta true in part (in some places) because other options like walk/bike/bus/train have been so disinvested that in many places you really do need to own a car to get around with any level of dignity.
It does seem to be changing on larger US cities though, so I’m hopeful.
Freedom of movement. Cars represent freedom of movement akin to a horse with a trailer, except you have an engine instead of a horse.
I dont think Americans care for the current road monopoly states have, or the monopolistic tolls and enforcement.
The idea of freedom of movement isn't really a European-centric ideal - its more uniquely American and derived from being a nation derived from those escaping injustices of Europe and searching freedom and liberty.
With the history of Europe being based in serfdom - peasants being forced to work their lord's land for protection - the idea of freedom of movement never really seemed to be of importance.
Those who deemed it important probably emigrated from Europe to America.
I dont think Americans care for the current road monopoly states have, or the monopolistic tolls and enforcement.
The idea of freedom of movement isn't really a European-centric ideal - its more uniquely American and derived from being a nation derived from those escaping injustices of Europe and searching freedom and liberty.
With the history of Europe being based in serfdom - peasants being forced to work their lord's land for protection - the idea of freedom of movement never really seemed to be of importance.
Those who deemed it important probably emigrated from Europe to America.
I agree, but for those that truly value freedom, I would think that they would also value the freedom of choice.
Car dependent societies don't allow many choices, you are restricted to only choosing a car for transportation.
Car dependent societies don't allow many choices, you are restricted to only choosing a car for transportation.
"Freedom of choice" is literally that, a freedom to make a choice, nobody is restricting you from it. Having many choices to make is not a freedom, it's power.
Car infrastructure taking up unnecessary parts of cities limits the freedom of transportation by other means, like walking or cycling.
Homes do the same. In both cases, though, if you don't want people to build something you need to exercise power, not freedom. Freedom of choice does not entitle you to others not doing something.
I disagree that it provides any freedom at all, since you are limited by roads. If certain roads are cut off by sabotage or other means, you lose your imaginary "freedom of movement".
Regarding it being an "American thing", Germany was the first country to build highways, and currently the highways there (Autobahn) don't even have a speed limit, so you could say that they provide more freedom of movement than the roads in the US.
Regarding it being an "American thing", Germany was the first country to build highways, and currently the highways there (Autobahn) don't even have a speed limit, so you could say that they provide more freedom of movement than the roads in the US.
Every freedom has limitations. Just because there are limitations doesn't mean that the underlying principle doesn't exist. People have the freedom to move, even before the car, and well before the interstate highway system.
The Autobahn was constructed for a similar goal as of the Interstate highway system - to act as a transportation backbone for the military during conflict. The fact that it's grown to what it is today is because it was built with free money (for the cities and states building them) and it became one of the safest ways to travel long distances without having to spend a lot of money.
Regardless, there's a lot more freedom to a car than a politically charged public transit system tied to a social credit score or even economic ability to pay whatever arbitrary fare exists. While cars do cost money, they also tended to keep going with a lot of abuse, and aren't tied to how politicians think of you.
The Autobahn was constructed for a similar goal as of the Interstate highway system - to act as a transportation backbone for the military during conflict. The fact that it's grown to what it is today is because it was built with free money (for the cities and states building them) and it became one of the safest ways to travel long distances without having to spend a lot of money.
Regardless, there's a lot more freedom to a car than a politically charged public transit system tied to a social credit score or even economic ability to pay whatever arbitrary fare exists. While cars do cost money, they also tended to keep going with a lot of abuse, and aren't tied to how politicians think of you.
Although I do agree that cars provide some freedom of transportation, they are still heavily regulated, are more difficult to fix yourself than ever before (good luck fixing the electronics in your new BMW in the middle of nowhere), and you have to register them, buy insurance, etc. just so you could drive a extremely limited set of public roads that could be closed down any minute for a variety of reasons. Or you could just get stuck in traffic, enjoying that sweet freedom of sitting in a metal can whilst those peasants drive past you on their bicycles or other, not-as-free, means of transportation.
Are cars cool? Absolutely. Are they some kind of freedom machines? As much as oil companies and car (excuse me - freedom machine) manufacturers would say otherwise, no.
Are cars cool? Absolutely. Are they some kind of freedom machines? As much as oil companies and car (excuse me - freedom machine) manufacturers would say otherwise, no.
Yeah or just like normal traffic where you're stuck behind a long line of other cars
Imperialism rather.
Done properly (I know…) autonomous vehicles could be a godsend for cycling in the US. If vehicles behaved properly you wouldn't theoretically need cycling infrastructure at all – the dream of vehicular cycling would actually start working and you could share the road anywhere.
+100...I love driving and will miss it with autonomous cars but I like being able to ride my bike without being nearly killed in the city every week. Autonomous cars (assuming they're trained to deal with bikes) would be a massive benefit I'm keeping my fingers crossed for.
the aspirational future of AI-traffic is kei cars and vans puttering around. Hope to see it in my lifetime still.
I suspect the US is going to get a super bifurcated urbanist result across cities in the next 20 years. Places like NYC, Boston, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco (maybe not these exact cities but you get the gist) are going to move strong towards European style urban infrastructure. It seems to be one topic that really does mobilize voters, especially younger educated voters, in these cities. It will in turn attract a lot more of these kinds of people, accelerating the change.
The rest of the US is just going to double down on sprawl.
The rest of the US is just going to double down on sprawl.
Those cities you mentioned already have European style urban infrastructure. In my opinion the big difference is that the drivers in the European cities seemed crazier than their US counterparts.
>Those cities you mentioned already have European style urban infrastructure.
I hope you're joking. it's very rare to see a highway wider than 6 lanes in Europe, especially that runs through cities, whilst the aforementioned cities have a abundance of such monstrosities.
I hope you're joking. it's very rare to see a highway wider than 6 lanes in Europe, especially that runs through cities, whilst the aforementioned cities have a abundance of such monstrosities.
That’s interesting. I’m a born and raised American, but I lived in two different European countries (Oslo and Geneva) between 2014 and 2017. During that time I traveled all over Western Europe and the near east for fun and business, and besides 2020-21 I have vacationed in Europe once or twice per year when not living there. Old Soviet Europe drives pretty crazy, but other than that I have not encountered anywhere else in Europe with drivers as crazy as the US.
They have very different norms in Europe that Americans might confuse as crazy but are actually better habits IMO. E.g drivers in Florence and Rome followed few rules and basically drive by the “if it fits, it fits” manta. But they were always keenly aware of pedestrians and other drivers. They drive very light cars in streets where they can’t get above 15 mph. Even if they do get into more fender-benders, I’m not very concerned about a fiat hitting my car at 15mph. In short, their way of driving is safer and I feel much more comfortable around it.
Americans on the other hand seem to prefer deadly speeds in giant vehicles even in neighborhoods. My current neighborhood regularly sees F150s and King Ranches going 55+mph, on neighborhood streets. I saw a driver last year hit a dog they should have clearly seen and avoided because they were going about 45 mph and on their phone, they didn’t even slow down after they hit the dog. Americans regularly pretend pedestrians and obstacles don’t exist at all, and have way worse reaction times than what I saw living in Europe. Combined with the high speeds and heavy cars, driving is comfortable for the driver and terrifying for everyone else on and around the roads.
I also wouldn’t compare these American cities infrastructure to most European cities of the late 2010s. Excepting possibly NYC, which is sort of its own league in the US. Maybe they are comparable to the European cities of the 90s, but things have moved on a lot since then.
They have very different norms in Europe that Americans might confuse as crazy but are actually better habits IMO. E.g drivers in Florence and Rome followed few rules and basically drive by the “if it fits, it fits” manta. But they were always keenly aware of pedestrians and other drivers. They drive very light cars in streets where they can’t get above 15 mph. Even if they do get into more fender-benders, I’m not very concerned about a fiat hitting my car at 15mph. In short, their way of driving is safer and I feel much more comfortable around it.
Americans on the other hand seem to prefer deadly speeds in giant vehicles even in neighborhoods. My current neighborhood regularly sees F150s and King Ranches going 55+mph, on neighborhood streets. I saw a driver last year hit a dog they should have clearly seen and avoided because they were going about 45 mph and on their phone, they didn’t even slow down after they hit the dog. Americans regularly pretend pedestrians and obstacles don’t exist at all, and have way worse reaction times than what I saw living in Europe. Combined with the high speeds and heavy cars, driving is comfortable for the driver and terrifying for everyone else on and around the roads.
I also wouldn’t compare these American cities infrastructure to most European cities of the late 2010s. Excepting possibly NYC, which is sort of its own league in the US. Maybe they are comparable to the European cities of the 90s, but things have moved on a lot since then.
Autonomous vehicles will make traffic worse, not better. Now we won’t even need people in cars to create traffic.
3) A technical solution to a societal problem
I would definitely prefer end to end AC over cycling in >30c heat
The city started during the pandemic and has moved toward making these bike lanes more permanent. There is also a deep dissatisfaction with public transportation here. While comprehensive throughout the entirety of the Paris metropolitan, it is expensive, unreliable (especially the regional RER trains that connect the inner city to suburbs and vital for commuters), often filthy, and at times unsafe (depending on the line). The other issue is the traffic above ground. I've heard reports that there are fewer cars, but it doesn't feel this way. If anything, there are more delivery trucks.
So while infrastructure investment has helped (not to mention some nice tax write-offs and discounts on e-bikes), there are some other issues here. I like bikeable Paris a lot, but the ecological goals of this city's mayor demand much more investment in the city and regional authority's mass transit. It is unreasonable to expect commuters to bike in from many kilometers away. Biking inside Paris upon arrival should be the desired end result. Ultimately to get the cars off the roads, people need to feel good on mass transit so that they want to use it more than a car, and the impression I have right now is that many people are biking because it's better than sweating in filthy, delayed trains.
To that effect, riding a bike is and should be a delight -- not a mere alternative to defunct metro transit, but I know many who are terrorized or disgruntledby biking in Paris. To solve this intractable issue of getting more riders, cars have to be removed from the streets which need to be progressively closed to make room for more bike infrastructure. These kinds of plans well face strident criticism and backlash from the suburbanite commuters. In that vein, I am totally for the Grand Paris Express plan. Make Paris great for Parisians again!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Paris_Express
So while infrastructure investment has helped (not to mention some nice tax write-offs and discounts on e-bikes), there are some other issues here. I like bikeable Paris a lot, but the ecological goals of this city's mayor demand much more investment in the city and regional authority's mass transit. It is unreasonable to expect commuters to bike in from many kilometers away. Biking inside Paris upon arrival should be the desired end result. Ultimately to get the cars off the roads, people need to feel good on mass transit so that they want to use it more than a car, and the impression I have right now is that many people are biking because it's better than sweating in filthy, delayed trains.
To that effect, riding a bike is and should be a delight -- not a mere alternative to defunct metro transit, but I know many who are terrorized or disgruntledby biking in Paris. To solve this intractable issue of getting more riders, cars have to be removed from the streets which need to be progressively closed to make room for more bike infrastructure. These kinds of plans well face strident criticism and backlash from the suburbanite commuters. In that vein, I am totally for the Grand Paris Express plan. Make Paris great for Parisians again!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Paris_Express
Title is misleading... the source Le Monde article states that use of certain bicycle paths has doubled (or tripled) in certain places, as investment has gone into improving these paths.
That's great, but kind of obvious that if you build out dedicated bike lanes, cyclists are more likely to prefer them to alternate routes.
That's great, but kind of obvious that if you build out dedicated bike lanes, cyclists are more likely to prefer them to alternate routes.
> kind of obvious that if you build out dedicated bike lanes, cyclists are more likely to prefer them to alternate routes.
That's not obvious at all; it's not even true. It's not uncommon in US cities to install long, wide bike lanes on major roads which see close to 0 daily users. Significant problems include:
- complete lack of physical barriers between cars and bikes
- bike lanes terminating at dangerous roads
- density is still low and there are dangerous parking lots at every destination
- bike lanes are exposed to direct sunlight in 100F+
- a non-trivial number of American drivers need extremely little push to intentionally hurt or kill bibcyclists
That's not obvious at all; it's not even true. It's not uncommon in US cities to install long, wide bike lanes on major roads which see close to 0 daily users. Significant problems include:
- complete lack of physical barriers between cars and bikes
- bike lanes terminating at dangerous roads
- density is still low and there are dangerous parking lots at every destination
- bike lanes are exposed to direct sunlight in 100F+
- a non-trivial number of American drivers need extremely little push to intentionally hurt or kill bibcyclists
While those are "dedicated bike lanes", it wasn't infrastructure built for bikes. Typically those are existing road safety shoulders converted to a bike lane.
I dont count that as dedicated bike infrastructure.
I dont count that as dedicated bike infrastructure.
If your definition of bicycle infrastructure excludes anything insufficient to facilitate increased usage, then yes we can agree it is obvious that building such will facilitate increased usage, but that's a useless statement.
But if we talk about all bicycle infrastructure, which is a conversation useful to have, it is clear from the multiple issues I pointed out (not limited to lack of physical separation) that simply building bike infrastructure ad-hoc and without holistic change is not useful.
But if we talk about all bicycle infrastructure, which is a conversation useful to have, it is clear from the multiple issues I pointed out (not limited to lack of physical separation) that simply building bike infrastructure ad-hoc and without holistic change is not useful.
Almost all of your points are because what you are describing isn't bike infrastructure, it's a line of paint on a highway's shoulder that use to be a pull-over safety shoulder - that's why they terminate randomly, don't have any barriers, there's random/low density, and direct sunlight). It's literally a political line in the road to get federal money from the DOT, which is why it shouldn't be counted as bike infrastructure. It's a literal line on a state highway.
Any real conversation about bike infrastructure would need to start with recognize a political line in the road is not real bike infrastructure any more than Amtrak using freight lines is a real passenger rail route.
Any real conversation about bike infrastructure would need to start with recognize a political line in the road is not real bike infrastructure any more than Amtrak using freight lines is a real passenger rail route.
One of those points relates directly to paint-only bike lanes. None of the others do.
Any conversation about expanding bike infrastructure needs to acknowledge existing bad bike infrastructure and common bad techniques in order to explain why we can't expect results if we use them again. Otherwise, they'll just get used again and waste more money. If all you say is "You literally have no bike infrastructure" to a city that literally has spent money and effort creating (bad) bike infrastructure, I don't see how that's helpful.
Any conversation about expanding bike infrastructure needs to acknowledge existing bad bike infrastructure and common bad techniques in order to explain why we can't expect results if we use them again. Otherwise, they'll just get used again and waste more money. If all you say is "You literally have no bike infrastructure" to a city that literally has spent money and effort creating (bad) bike infrastructure, I don't see how that's helpful.
> That's great, but kind of obvious that if you build out dedicated bike lanes, cyclists are more likely to prefer them to alternate routes.
Not really, here in Poland there are new bike lanes, but they go far from the city, so if you need to commute you end up going around the city to finish in a bottleneck when you are approaching the center. So, want it or not, you end up using the alternate routes.
Not really, here in Poland there are new bike lanes, but they go far from the city, so if you need to commute you end up going around the city to finish in a bottleneck when you are approaching the center. So, want it or not, you end up using the alternate routes.
not sure about the title, but i guarantee that usage has exploded. It's really obvious (and starts to become a problem in certain areas).
Based on some videos, some paths usage has way more than doubled. It's getting super messy.. a sad side effect of popularity.
Even though it seems obvious you will find the majority of Americans fighting against bike lanes because they think nobody will use it. Having data to show causation like this is genuinely helpful for other countries and cities to follow their lead.
I think a lot of the push back in the US against bike lanes comes from bad bike lanes and a lack of a wholistic solution.
In most places I’ve been, the city will paint a line on a road where cars are going 50mph and call it a bike lane. There is no chance that will get me to start riding a bike. All it does it make the road worse for cars, by making it more narrow, or more likely, losing a lane.
One place I lived did get a protected bike lane going right in front of the building. I still didn’t use it, as it wasn’t really connected to anything else. Everywhere along the route I’d go, I’d simply walk. It wasn’t that far. Everything has to start somewhere, and I hope they build more, but so far drivers see problems without any payoff.
The worst of it was during the pandemic. There were construction barrels all over the city. It was hell to get around by car. I figured they were preparing for construction and ripping up the road. I found out a year later that the barrels were meant to create temporary protected bike lanes so people could get out and ride around to places during the pandemic. Cool… if there has been a single sign to tell people that’s what it was. Instead, it just made drivers mad, and the lanes weren’t used, because people didn’t know what they were for. More space taken from cars with no payoff in terms of reducing traffic through increased biking.
I want good bike infrastructure, but the plans and efforts I keep seeing still don’t seem that good. The useful paths are dangerous and the safe paths aren’t that useful.
In most places I’ve been, the city will paint a line on a road where cars are going 50mph and call it a bike lane. There is no chance that will get me to start riding a bike. All it does it make the road worse for cars, by making it more narrow, or more likely, losing a lane.
One place I lived did get a protected bike lane going right in front of the building. I still didn’t use it, as it wasn’t really connected to anything else. Everywhere along the route I’d go, I’d simply walk. It wasn’t that far. Everything has to start somewhere, and I hope they build more, but so far drivers see problems without any payoff.
The worst of it was during the pandemic. There were construction barrels all over the city. It was hell to get around by car. I figured they were preparing for construction and ripping up the road. I found out a year later that the barrels were meant to create temporary protected bike lanes so people could get out and ride around to places during the pandemic. Cool… if there has been a single sign to tell people that’s what it was. Instead, it just made drivers mad, and the lanes weren’t used, because people didn’t know what they were for. More space taken from cars with no payoff in terms of reducing traffic through increased biking.
I want good bike infrastructure, but the plans and efforts I keep seeing still don’t seem that good. The useful paths are dangerous and the safe paths aren’t that useful.
Given safe infrastructure cycling is one of the fastest most reliable forms of transportation in cities. No wonder more people ride if you improve the experience.
It truly is. I moved to a city across my country that has pretty good bike infrastructure. I had never even considered riding a bike for transportation, but after experiencing somewhat good infrastructure that got me to my office faster than driving, I was blown away by how enjoyable, sustainable, and economical it can be.
My wife and I visited Paris last summer and biked everywhere. It felt very safe, not as safe as Copenhagen but still safe. I hope that with more time, as more drivers get used to bikes on the road it will get safer and more people will bike, creating a positive feedback loop.
I'm a strong believer in road culture change happening. Biking in DC changed enormously when our bike share program showed up in 2008. Seeing casual chill people on slow bikes, often a little lost or uneasy, forces a bit of a reset from the classic fast cars vs spandex wheel-stander bikes dynamic.
Having just moved from Houston to Manhattan , I have been really impressed by the number of bikes I see. One factor, which this article doesn’t seem to discuss, is the e-bike. In Paris, is it mostly classical bikes, or are the electronics becoming widespread there too?
Note that ebikes in the EU are limited to 25 km/h and 250 W. Thus there is little difference in practice with regular bikes ... except when climbing hills.
Max 25kmh is stupid. 5km slower than the traffic I'm trying to keep up with, so being constantly close-shaved is an e-bike pain.
It's the perfect speed. It's around the upper speed of cycling somewhere like Copenhagen, so the people on e-bikes by too annoying for the people on bicycles.
I'm in a Paris suburb. Lots of e-bikes and lots of electric scooters.
I would say there is a 80/20 ratio between mechanical and e-bikes. The regional council offers ebikes for 40€/month[1] which boosted ebike adoption. The service is very popular with both office workers and food delivery workers.
[1]: https://www.iledefrance-mobilites.fr/en/the-network/mobility...
[1]: https://www.iledefrance-mobilites.fr/en/the-network/mobility...
On that topic, I ride a regular bicycle but I love that there are so many e-bikes on the roads these days. The city where I live is blessed with pretty good weather for a lot of the year and e-bikes enable people who live out towards the edge of town to get downtown with relative ease.
Even though they lack some of the benefits of a simple bicycle, they drive the same infrastructure development that I need.
Even though they lack some of the benefits of a simple bicycle, they drive the same infrastructure development that I need.
I imagine that’s just about the starkest within-US move you could make with regard to bike friendliness. I once made the mistake of visiting Houston without a rental car, and it was bleak. Welcome to NYC!
I bike in Manhattan and it's a dream. A literal grid of 20-30mph traffic, with a greenway up and down in case you want to avoid traffic entirely.
Using 'induced demand' for good - I love it.
People are under the impression that things "are just the way they are" in the US, but it is very much a political choice to not dedicate more funding to keeping people on bicycles safe from automobiles.
People are under the impression that things "are just the way they are" in the US, but it is very much a political choice to not dedicate more funding to keeping people on bicycles safe from automobiles.
I'm sure some people do but I know on HN specifically in most threads around american urban cycling you will see some extremely clear-eyed car advocates. They (rightly) recognize that better prioritizing cycling requires, to some extent, fewer resources allocated to car use and oppose it on those grounds.
Some of it is ignorance but a lot of it is not, and a continuing car-centric world is just their well understood and sincerely held value.
Some of it is ignorance but a lot of it is not, and a continuing car-centric world is just their well understood and sincerely held value.
Even as a driver, if you think about the second-order effects of getting more (other) people out of their cars, it becomes obvious that it would improve traffic for you. An enlightened self-interested driver would want to increase investment in alternatives to driving, since that is the only proven solution for congestion.
As a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8RRE2rDw4k
As a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8RRE2rDw4k
Getting people out of cars also reduces tax spend on road costs. Bike infrastructure lasts longer and is cheaper to maintain than a road, which can result in improved municipal finances.
The thing that is somewhat counterintuitive is that countries with amazing cycling infrastructure are also very good for drivers because you just get less congestion on the roads. There are some great youtube videos about it - how driving across Amsterdam takes less time than covering 3 miles in LA, that kind of thing.
Like, if you like driving cars, a place like the Netherlands is great for it because you spend more time actually driving and not standing in traffic(because most people are out on bikes and not in cars).
Like, if you like driving cars, a place like the Netherlands is great for it because you spend more time actually driving and not standing in traffic(because most people are out on bikes and not in cars).
In the later chapters of The Power Broker, there are stories of transit advocates and driving advocates begging Robert Moses to preserve right of way for transit when building the Van Wyck Expressway and the Long Island Expressway. The expected traffic demand (~9k cars/hr) the day they opened was far beyond the capacity (1500 cars/hour/lane * 3 lanes). A transit line takes about the same space as one traffic lane, with a capacity of 30-40k/hour. Without provision for transit, the road wouldn't even be a good road for drivers, because everyone with no choice but to drive would overcrowd the road and create the congestion the road was supposed to alleviate.
This is setting aside all other considerations - urban design, air pollution, land and property value, tax revenue, health, neighborhood cohesion, etc. Roads without provision for transit and non-motorized travel don't even do the job of a road well.
This is setting aside all other considerations - urban design, air pollution, land and property value, tax revenue, health, neighborhood cohesion, etc. Roads without provision for transit and non-motorized travel don't even do the job of a road well.
Almost every additional cyclist is one less car. And since bicycle infrastructure is a lot cheaper than vehicle infrastructure, spending a dollar on bicycle infrastructure can improve conditions for car drivers more than spending that dollar on car infrastructure.
When I bike and have to wait at a busy crossing alongside other cyclists and cars nearby, I take note of how vastly different the two situations are.
Each car (often an SUV or a pickup truck) typically only has one passenger. Each bike also typically only has one passenger. But in the space of one car at a stoplight, you can fit 3 to 5 cyclists.
Each car (often an SUV or a pickup truck) typically only has one passenger. Each bike also typically only has one passenger. But in the space of one car at a stoplight, you can fit 3 to 5 cyclists.
It's a real "you hate traffic without realizing that you _are_ traffic" situation.
> Using 'induced demand' for good - I love it.
Oh The Urbanity had a good video on this, "What People Get Wrong About Induced Demand":
> In this video we explain why induced demand does apply to transit, walking, and cycling infrastructure, but with different consequences.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wlld3Z9wRc
Transit, for example, can get better with more ridership: more train capacity is added to a line, and more frequent service may occur for better throughput. Both actions would improve service for each individual rider, so while while one may not want it "crowded", having it busy is good. While with roads, an individual driver may want enough traffic so that a street exists, any traffic beyond that would probably only slow you down.
There are also externalities: more walking, cycling, transit reduces pollution and can improve individual health and the collective health of the population. Driving does the opposite.
Oh The Urbanity had a good video on this, "What People Get Wrong About Induced Demand":
> In this video we explain why induced demand does apply to transit, walking, and cycling infrastructure, but with different consequences.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wlld3Z9wRc
Transit, for example, can get better with more ridership: more train capacity is added to a line, and more frequent service may occur for better throughput. Both actions would improve service for each individual rider, so while while one may not want it "crowded", having it busy is good. While with roads, an individual driver may want enough traffic so that a street exists, any traffic beyond that would probably only slow you down.
There are also externalities: more walking, cycling, transit reduces pollution and can improve individual health and the collective health of the population. Driving does the opposite.
[deleted]
I don’t get how you can make bicycling your only form of transportation, even if the bike travel infrastructure and parking is adequate. When I bicycle, even for a short amount of time like 15 minutes, I sweat, and end up a stinky wet mess at my destination. Especially in the summer. My shoes and pants get dirty from the road and my hair gets wet and messed up especially if it’s raining. So if I’m going anywhere with even a moderate expectation of personal hygiene, I need to 1. Make sure there is a shower at my destination, 2. Haul a change of clothes with me (necessitating a backpack or bag), 3. Hang on to my dirty sweaty clothes in that bag the whole time. Fine if I’m commuting to work where they have a shower and storage. What about going to a restaurant or business meeting or a museum or an appointment with a professional? I honestly don’t know but there are so many cities where people bike everywhere so there must be a solution.
EDIT: ok, ok, I guess e-bikes it is. Still there are cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam where everyone bikes everywhere and they don’t all have e-bikes. Do they just bring multiple changes of clothes everywhere?
EDIT: ok, ok, I guess e-bikes it is. Still there are cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam where everyone bikes everywhere and they don’t all have e-bikes. Do they just bring multiple changes of clothes everywhere?
Ebike is a good solution. I ride 20 minutes to work and never show up sweaty. The breeze works better than AC to keep me cool even on 85F+ days.
I invested in a good rain jacked with helmet compatible hood and a pair of rain pants and I am able to ride in all but the heaviest of PNW rains.
I do end up nearly always carrying a pannier with me wherever I bike (usually to hold the extra layers I need while biking) but that has turned out to rarely ever be an issue.
I have been able to replace ~80% of my car trips the bike, it could be 99%+ if I were a little less lazy.
I invested in a good rain jacked with helmet compatible hood and a pair of rain pants and I am able to ride in all but the heaviest of PNW rains.
I do end up nearly always carrying a pannier with me wherever I bike (usually to hold the extra layers I need while biking) but that has turned out to rarely ever be an issue.
I have been able to replace ~80% of my car trips the bike, it could be 99%+ if I were a little less lazy.
After biking for some months a 15min ride shouldn't get you too sweaty
Yeah, I disagree. During the pandemic I did a year of heavy cycling, including a 525-mile trip over 7 days. While cycling got a lot easier, I didn't stop sweating.
My family is full of heavy sweaters, and I live in states where it gets into the 80s-90s in the summer. My girlfriend however seems to never sweat, even when pushing herself.
Admittedly, I struggle to maintain a "casual speed."
My family is full of heavy sweaters, and I live in states where it gets into the 80s-90s in the summer. My girlfriend however seems to never sweat, even when pushing herself.
Admittedly, I struggle to maintain a "casual speed."
Why should that be the case?
The amount of sweat is only correlated to the amount of heat generated.
Only way to counter sweating is to dress appropriately and/or ride slower.
The amount of sweat is only correlated to the amount of heat generated.
Only way to counter sweating is to dress appropriately and/or ride slower.
Cycling economy increases naturally with increased fitness. As with virtually all forms of fitness training. It along with many other factors is why someone can quadruple their possible power output with training. All without melting. Look up cycling economy.
Also how much you sweat is a trained response. This is why athletes do heat training before hot events. There is more to it than some oversimplified physics based equation. It’s a biological system.
All these things are much more significant when going from someone who basically never cycles or exercises, to someone who does. It is less significant in pros, so keep that in mind if you are looking at studies of “trained cyclists”. Law of diminishing returns.
Also how much you sweat is a trained response. This is why athletes do heat training before hot events. There is more to it than some oversimplified physics based equation. It’s a biological system.
All these things are much more significant when going from someone who basically never cycles or exercises, to someone who does. It is less significant in pros, so keep that in mind if you are looking at studies of “trained cyclists”. Law of diminishing returns.
Sweating is absolutely not a “trained” response.
I’ve always been an athlete from when I was a competitive athlete in my college days (cross-country running) but I’ve always sweated a lot more than average and it’s not correlated with my fitness. I’ve always been slim and fit and I’ve often noticed that I sweat a lot more than people whom I’m beating in races! That is, I can be fitter and faster than someone and still sweat more.
On the flip side, I am extremely cold resistant and when others are chilly and need to wear a sweater or coat, I don’t need it. My body just seems to run hotter than others, for better or worse.
I’ve always been an athlete from when I was a competitive athlete in my college days (cross-country running) but I’ve always sweated a lot more than average and it’s not correlated with my fitness. I’ve always been slim and fit and I’ve often noticed that I sweat a lot more than people whom I’m beating in races! That is, I can be fitter and faster than someone and still sweat more.
On the flip side, I am extremely cold resistant and when others are chilly and need to wear a sweater or coat, I don’t need it. My body just seems to run hotter than others, for better or worse.
It absolutely is.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9460081/
Adaptations include decreases in HR, internal body temperature, skin temperature, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and sweat sodium and chloride concentrations, as well as increases in plasma volume and sweat rate.
Sweat rate. Sweat rate is a training adaptation. Thus we would say sweating is a trained response.
Yes, I have no doubt you are very sweaty. That doesn’t mean that sweatiness isn’t a trained response though.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9460081/
Adaptations include decreases in HR, internal body temperature, skin temperature, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and sweat sodium and chloride concentrations, as well as increases in plasma volume and sweat rate.
Sweat rate. Sweat rate is a training adaptation. Thus we would say sweating is a trained response.
Yes, I have no doubt you are very sweaty. That doesn’t mean that sweatiness isn’t a trained response though.
Did you even read your own link? This says “increases in sweat rate” not decreases.
And if you read the study and look at the results, after the heat training the average “sweatiness” was higher, not lower.
The whole point of this debate was that you can’t train yourself to sweat less, and I am still right in that assertion.
And if you read the study and look at the results, after the heat training the average “sweatiness” was higher, not lower.
The whole point of this debate was that you can’t train yourself to sweat less, and I am still right in that assertion.
> All these things are much more significant when going from someone who basically never cycles or exercises, to someone who does.
You could say that I do that every season(well, I walk all year round at least) and my observation is that there's maybe a short period of increased unnecessary movements that I do which produce more sweat, but after two weeks, when I relearn the right movements, it plateaus and sweating is just proportional to energy used - it's lower, but still there.
In any case I noticed that I would need to go frustratingly slow to be appropriately fresh for an office. Even at my leisurely pace of 15km/h I change my shirt when I get back from a ride, because it's simply uncomfortable otherwise.
You could say that I do that every season(well, I walk all year round at least) and my observation is that there's maybe a short period of increased unnecessary movements that I do which produce more sweat, but after two weeks, when I relearn the right movements, it plateaus and sweating is just proportional to energy used - it's lower, but still there.
In any case I noticed that I would need to go frustratingly slow to be appropriately fresh for an office. Even at my leisurely pace of 15km/h I change my shirt when I get back from a ride, because it's simply uncomfortable otherwise.
Airflow drastically alters cooling.
The amount of sweat is only correlated to the amount of heat generated.
I’m no expert, but that’s demonstrably not true. Evidence being two fit cyclists riding the same route, and one is visibly more sweaty than the other.
I’m no expert, but that’s demonstrably not true. Evidence being two fit cyclists riding the same route, and one is visibly more sweaty than the other.
People that exercise regularly sweat less for the same amount of effort than when they weren't exercising. I have no idea what the biological / thermodynamics explanation is, but it's a quite basic fact.
After a few months of regular training, your fitness will invariably improve, even if that "training" is just cycling to/from work each day. The higher your fitness level, the less heat you generate for the same physical output. Lower heat generation requires lower heat dissipation, which requires less sweating.
Yeah this is absolutely not accurate, some people just sweat more and it’s not correlated with fitness.
I’ve noticed that I sweat a “lot” more than people who are much less fit than I am.
I’ve noticed that I sweat a “lot” more than people who are much less fit than I am.
Could an eBike help?
I think e-bikes are a good solution for this problem.
One solution is e-bikes which are getting better every year and will allow you to go quite far without breaking a sweat.
The answer is probably just a lot (most?) people don't sweat as much as you do. It's a solution that works for many but not all. There's also a huge uptake for ebikes, which remove a lot of the exertion component.
As an aside, when I started cycling I sweat a lot more than I do now. It is a mild form of exercise, after all. Once you get used to it, cycling at a leisurely pace takes less energy than walking.
As an aside, when I started cycling I sweat a lot more than I do now. It is a mild form of exercise, after all. Once you get used to it, cycling at a leisurely pace takes less energy than walking.
That sounds like a fitness issue. Millions of people cycle everywhere in Netherlands, in regular clothes, without needing showers in between.
Okay - but Netherlands is not as sunny, hot, and swampy as Houston and Orlando in the Summer.
I've never biked anywhere that's super hot and humid and sunny like Orlando in the Summer. Theoretically, the wind from biking should help evaporate your sweat before you get "sweaty" - but it's got to be easier to get swamp ass in Houston than Amsterdam.
I think the climate would matter somewhat.
I've never biked anywhere that's super hot and humid and sunny like Orlando in the Summer. Theoretically, the wind from biking should help evaporate your sweat before you get "sweaty" - but it's got to be easier to get swamp ass in Houston than Amsterdam.
I think the climate would matter somewhat.
It's not a fitness issue. The netherlands is fairly flat and has a cooler climate than any major US city. It's just not possible to be pedaling up/down hills in any amount of heat/humidity and not get sweaty.
It is as possible as walking in the same place, unless we talk about some kind of super steep hill where would just push the bike.
Very likely issue here is that people who are used to cycle for sport only are not used to bike for transport. They don't do equivalent of walk, they do equivalent of run. So they get sweaty, because they race.
Very likely issue here is that people who are used to cycle for sport only are not used to bike for transport. They don't do equivalent of walk, they do equivalent of run. So they get sweaty, because they race.
That is an excuse. There are many people in hilly cities that cycle. Not as many as in the Netherlands or in Denmark, but they exist. And even Norther Europe gets days of 30 °C (~90F), and we do not stop cycling, its rather the other way around. So just start cycling in winter, if you want to try.
Northern European climates are not comparable to even mid-atlantic US cities. Take a look at a comparison between Amsterdam and Washington DC. https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/51381~20957/Comparison-of....
Pay special attention to the "Chance of Muggy Conditions" chart.
Pay special attention to the "Chance of Muggy Conditions" chart.
As I said, just cycle in winter. Your chart says that it does not get muggy from November to April, i.e half of the year. And yes, I do not mind the cold, and do not need it flat, I live in Stockholm and not in Amsterdam.
I think you should come live for a year in DC and see what you think about the winters. Notice that the comparison also shows it snows quite a bit more, ~~and is on average colder during core winter months~~! Weather is just more of a "thing" for the average US city. And when you start by subtracting half the year for heat, at least a month for snow, more days for harsh freezing conditions (not uncommon to have some weeks in winter that dip to -10C) etc etc... (edit: forgot you lived in stockholm where it's quite cold, I admit)
The point is not that cycling is impossible but that it's attractiveness is highly variable depending on local/daily conditions, since you are exposed to the elements. Less consistency in conditions means the entire form of transportatin is percieved as unreliable.
The point is not that cycling is impossible but that it's attractiveness is highly variable depending on local/daily conditions, since you are exposed to the elements. Less consistency in conditions means the entire form of transportatin is percieved as unreliable.
I commute by bike in my US city, and the weather concerns are alleviated 90% of the time just by having the right clothing. If you have gym clothes, that's what you wear during hot/warm weather. If you have cold weather hiking clothes, that's what you wear during cold/cool weather. Pack a small towel and a change of clothes for your destination, and you're all set. It's actually easier to do this during the warm months because you wear fewer layers and the clothes aren't as bulky. I use a rack-mounted bag more often in winter to carry those extra layers.
The remaining 10% of the time is for just straight up unpleasant weather that catches you by surprise. For example, if I bike to work in the morning and there's a huge rainstorm when I would bike home in the afternoon. When that happens, I just leave my bike at the office and catch a bus home. Or Lyft if I'm feeling especially impatient.
The remaining 10% of the time is for just straight up unpleasant weather that catches you by surprise. For example, if I bike to work in the morning and there's a huge rainstorm when I would bike home in the afternoon. When that happens, I just leave my bike at the office and catch a bus home. Or Lyft if I'm feeling especially impatient.
Yes, of course cycling is most popular in the Netherlands because geography and climate are most ideal there. But the same is true about infrastructure. If it exists, any form of transportation becomes widely more popular. Just think of Oulu :)
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231220-why-oulu-finland...
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231220-why-oulu-finland...
I’m in favor of cycling infrastructure in the US, but it’s important to remember that the latitude of the Netherlands (like most of the European cycling cities) is north of the entire continental US.
I’m in decent shape, but will sweat at a resting heart rate in a Southern US summer.
I’m in decent shape, but will sweat at a resting heart rate in a Southern US summer.
An e-bike changes this math considerably.
You get:
1. Faster trip, so less time to sweat
2. Faster speed, so more cooling, so less sweating overall.
3. Less exertion, so less generated heat by body.
Although if you live in a hot AND humid climate, I'm afraid there's just not much you can do. There are physical limits after all.
You get:
1. Faster trip, so less time to sweat
2. Faster speed, so more cooling, so less sweating overall.
3. Less exertion, so less generated heat by body.
Although if you live in a hot AND humid climate, I'm afraid there's just not much you can do. There are physical limits after all.
E-bikes solve this, they're already basically mandatory for cities with a lot of grade. Personally I run 100% of my errands on a jack rabbit e-bike [0] which isn't even really a bike (no pedals) but a sit down scooter.
[0] https://jackrabbit.bike/
[0] https://jackrabbit.bike/
I think the key here is mostly to go slow. Right now,if I'm bike commuting I need to keep up with cars or risk getting rear ended or tailgated or shouted at. Setting things up so you don't have to worry about cars while on your bike means you can bike at a more reasonable speed instead of 25mph.
Think beach cruiser bikes not guys in spandex on race bikes
Think beach cruiser bikes not guys in spandex on race bikes
Also infrequent cyclists are often overdressed. You don't need to get out the spandex, but if the weather permits dress so that you are slightly cold while standing still. That gives you the thermal budget to heat up from exercise without instantly sweating.
Be bold, start cold!
Cycling 15 km/h requires just as much power as walking.
If you ride at a reasonable pace and shift gears frequently to adapt to the terrain, you should never need to exert yourself so much that you'd break out in sweat. A gentle bike ride should feel pretty similar to a walk.
Best solution is of course “shower at the office”.
I worked for a company about 1h cycling away, and Sofia, Bulgaria is a hilly city, so cycling would involve quite a lot of exertion.
After some experimenting I found that my condition would be acceptable if I just change my t-shirt when I arrive.
My role was just your average dev so grooming requirements are a bit less than customer facing roles.
Also its all about temp management. I’d ware clothes that can be easily removed mid-journey so I can manage my temperature. Airy exercise t-shirts can cool you so well that if you don’t strain yourself too much you can avoid sweating altogether.
After some experimenting I found that my condition would be acceptable if I just change my t-shirt when I arrive.
My role was just your average dev so grooming requirements are a bit less than customer facing roles.
Also its all about temp management. I’d ware clothes that can be easily removed mid-journey so I can manage my temperature. Airy exercise t-shirts can cool you so well that if you don’t strain yourself too much you can avoid sweating altogether.
> cycling would involve quite a lot of excretion.
I think you meant "exertion". I did giggle like a child though (very sorry).
I think you meant "exertion". I did giggle like a child though (very sorry).
thanks!
skill issue i’m afraid, when you cycle a lot a 15min bike ride is like a 3min walk, and most of the time if the temp is high you’ll sweat regardless
in that case, get an electric bike :)
in that case, get an electric bike :)
Won't help on dirt and rain (and limited help on upwind and uphill) but using a low enough gear you should be able to stroll around with similar strain as walking. And you need to be able to accept a slightly slower speed, which is often challening, at least for me.
> What about going to a restaurant or business meeting or a museum or an appointment with a professional?
I also like to find my bicycle where I left it. Which is not an option in many cities.
> I honestly don’t know but there are so many cities where people bike everywhere so there must be a solution
People have less and less money to spend on a car and fuel/electricity. Many are using bicycles not by choice but because they're broke. And it shows when you see the kind of bicycle they ride.
My car is an extension of my house and although I'll take public transports once in a while (public transports are free in my country), there's no way I'll bicycle everywhere.
Add to that that I do actually bicycle with a MTB, from point A to point A, with a 5-digit $$$ bicycle and there's no way I could possibly enjoy riding a shittier bike. And due to the insecurity (thieving scums), there's no way I can leave my bicycle anywhere in the city (gone in 60 seconds would be an understatement).
Same for my neighbor: he'll do 50 kilometers+ a day on his bicycle, but from point A to point A, with a roadbike.
Don't get me started as to when I was living in a rural area, with the closest highway being a 45 minutes (car) drive: I'd rant about how practical bicycles are there.
I just don't get it and I don't think I can get along with people who wants to put us all on bicycles and I don't think people who want to get us all on bicycles could get along with me. And I'm fine with that.
I also like to find my bicycle where I left it. Which is not an option in many cities.
> I honestly don’t know but there are so many cities where people bike everywhere so there must be a solution
People have less and less money to spend on a car and fuel/electricity. Many are using bicycles not by choice but because they're broke. And it shows when you see the kind of bicycle they ride.
My car is an extension of my house and although I'll take public transports once in a while (public transports are free in my country), there's no way I'll bicycle everywhere.
Add to that that I do actually bicycle with a MTB, from point A to point A, with a 5-digit $$$ bicycle and there's no way I could possibly enjoy riding a shittier bike. And due to the insecurity (thieving scums), there's no way I can leave my bicycle anywhere in the city (gone in 60 seconds would be an understatement).
Same for my neighbor: he'll do 50 kilometers+ a day on his bicycle, but from point A to point A, with a roadbike.
Don't get me started as to when I was living in a rural area, with the closest highway being a 45 minutes (car) drive: I'd rant about how practical bicycles are there.
I just don't get it and I don't think I can get along with people who wants to put us all on bicycles and I don't think people who want to get us all on bicycles could get along with me. And I'm fine with that.
> Many are using bicycles not by choice but because they're broke. And it shows when you see the kind of bicycle they ride.
I'd be careful to assume people's social/financial status based on the bicycle they ride. Where I'm from, you get the cheapest bike possible not because you cannot afford something else, but because eventually it'll get vandalized or stolen, so if you only spent 20 EUR on the bike, it won't hurt as much to replace it with another 20 EUR bike.
I'd be careful to assume people's social/financial status based on the bicycle they ride. Where I'm from, you get the cheapest bike possible not because you cannot afford something else, but because eventually it'll get vandalized or stolen, so if you only spent 20 EUR on the bike, it won't hurt as much to replace it with another 20 EUR bike.
Nobody’s going to make you bike. What people want is the option to choose, which is not possible for safety reasons in many cities.
Personally I’d rather spend my money on more interesting things than car ownership and maintenance.
Personally I’d rather spend my money on more interesting things than car ownership and maintenance.
I do have a quite nice (and growing) amount of personal assets, yet I bike everywhere on my now 17 year old bike. My grandpa still has his bike of 60 years (and grandmas of 55). Of course will a $10k bike more likely be stolen over a $100 bike. Though proper bike infrastructure also lessens that risk quite a bit. Or where you personally live is an international crime hotspot.
> I just don't get it and I don't think I can get along with people who wants to put us all on bicycles and I don't think people who want to get us all on bicycles could get along with me. And I'm fine with that.
You are creating a strawman though, people like me want urbanites/city dwellers to become cyclists because it's better for everyone living in a city.
If you live in a rural area where you need to go 10-20km to find a grocery store, yeah, it's not that practical to only rely on a bike. If you live in a dense-ish city where you can bike some 15 minutes to get to almost all of your daily needs, and with a 30 min ride you can get to 80% of your needs in a year then yeah, I will try to convince you that a bike is more practical for your day-to-day than driving the odd 3-4 km to get somewhere (and paying for parking, fuel, polluting the city, etc.), it's just stupid to drive this short if you don't really need it (e.g.: carrying big/heavy loads, being disabled, etc.).
It's odd to see this kind of overreaction to something that simply is better for your health, for the other residents of the city. It's odd to see how defensive car-centric people get by the suggestion that maybe more people cycling, and governments taking action to create infrastructure for it, will be overall better for a city. Even if you prefer to drive it'll be better for you.
Just don't create a strawman to distill your reactionary take, it always sounds like a whining child feeling their toy will be taken away... That's not the point.
You are creating a strawman though, people like me want urbanites/city dwellers to become cyclists because it's better for everyone living in a city.
If you live in a rural area where you need to go 10-20km to find a grocery store, yeah, it's not that practical to only rely on a bike. If you live in a dense-ish city where you can bike some 15 minutes to get to almost all of your daily needs, and with a 30 min ride you can get to 80% of your needs in a year then yeah, I will try to convince you that a bike is more practical for your day-to-day than driving the odd 3-4 km to get somewhere (and paying for parking, fuel, polluting the city, etc.), it's just stupid to drive this short if you don't really need it (e.g.: carrying big/heavy loads, being disabled, etc.).
It's odd to see this kind of overreaction to something that simply is better for your health, for the other residents of the city. It's odd to see how defensive car-centric people get by the suggestion that maybe more people cycling, and governments taking action to create infrastructure for it, will be overall better for a city. Even if you prefer to drive it'll be better for you.
Just don't create a strawman to distill your reactionary take, it always sounds like a whining child feeling their toy will be taken away... That's not the point.
> > I just don't get it and I don't think I can get along with people who wants to put us all on bicycles and I don't think people who want to get us all on bicycles could get along with me. And I'm fine with that.
> You are creating a strawman though, people like me want urbanites/city dwellers to become cyclists because it's better for everyone living in a city.
In my experience what people like the OP really mean by "I don't like that cyclist want to put us all on bikes", is that they want infrastructure to be catered for their car use (paid by the everyone), e.g. they say they can't use a bike because they (want to) live rural (rural infrastructure is heavily subsidised by city dwellers btw), but want to be able to drive into the city (despite city dwellers wanting less cars and more bikes). Thus they complain about "cyclist forcing everyone to bike".
> You are creating a strawman though, people like me want urbanites/city dwellers to become cyclists because it's better for everyone living in a city.
In my experience what people like the OP really mean by "I don't like that cyclist want to put us all on bikes", is that they want infrastructure to be catered for their car use (paid by the everyone), e.g. they say they can't use a bike because they (want to) live rural (rural infrastructure is heavily subsidised by city dwellers btw), but want to be able to drive into the city (despite city dwellers wanting less cars and more bikes). Thus they complain about "cyclist forcing everyone to bike".
> Many are using bicycles not by choice but because they're broke. And it shows when you see the kind of bicycle they ride.
Maybe in your place.
In my place (a big city in Belgium) people just use whatever bike they have that works and fix it up from time to time, but as long as it rides few people care how it looks. Especially since less shiny bikes don't attract thieves as much (although this isn't a big problem here).
I use my bike because driving in traffic is longer and the trip to school with the kids and back home would take 20-30 minutes depending on traffic, while it takes almost exactly 15 minutes by bike (with the kids in a trailer).
I use one of two bikes depending on where I parked my car (which I use once or twice a week to go to places with bad public transit. Otherwise it's parked somewhere within a 10 minutes walk radius, wherever I found space) and one of them looks like I fished it out of the river, the paint is gone in many places, but it's lighter. The other looks nice but it's quite old and heavy steel so I tend to use it less.
I also use my bike (the heavy one, I figure if I want to do exercise, the whole point is to do some actual efforts) for 50 to 100 kilometre round-trips, although less so these days, it was nicer when I lived closer to the countryside between France and Belgium.
But the most important thing is I hate the noise of cars in the city. I want to be able to walk with someone and talk in the street without having to shout or stop while a loud vehicle passes. I don't care about cars themselves, after all they're on their streets doing their things, if they take twice as long as I do to get somewhere it's not my problem. I just want their noise to be gone.
Maybe in your place.
In my place (a big city in Belgium) people just use whatever bike they have that works and fix it up from time to time, but as long as it rides few people care how it looks. Especially since less shiny bikes don't attract thieves as much (although this isn't a big problem here).
I use my bike because driving in traffic is longer and the trip to school with the kids and back home would take 20-30 minutes depending on traffic, while it takes almost exactly 15 minutes by bike (with the kids in a trailer).
I use one of two bikes depending on where I parked my car (which I use once or twice a week to go to places with bad public transit. Otherwise it's parked somewhere within a 10 minutes walk radius, wherever I found space) and one of them looks like I fished it out of the river, the paint is gone in many places, but it's lighter. The other looks nice but it's quite old and heavy steel so I tend to use it less.
I also use my bike (the heavy one, I figure if I want to do exercise, the whole point is to do some actual efforts) for 50 to 100 kilometre round-trips, although less so these days, it was nicer when I lived closer to the countryside between France and Belgium.
But the most important thing is I hate the noise of cars in the city. I want to be able to walk with someone and talk in the street without having to shout or stop while a loud vehicle passes. I don't care about cars themselves, after all they're on their streets doing their things, if they take twice as long as I do to get somewhere it's not my problem. I just want their noise to be gone.
A large part of that is cycling on roads with automobile traffic.
Dodging cars, taking gaps, sprinting at lights, constantly looking around... are all things that make you sweaty. Plus cars kick up a load of road grime and water (when it rains).
Comparing cycling on pleasant infrastructure to cycling on roads is a bit like comparing walking and running. They're similar activities, but the level of exertion is quite different!
In NL, they cycle with umbrellas. In Tokyo, rain ponchos are a common choice.
There's also this mentality in the anglo-sphere of commuting on a racing bike with a backpack. This choice is somewhat driven by the infrastructure, since you need to be fast and agile around traffic. However, in countries with developed cycle infrastructure, people tend to use upright bikes with baskets, racks and fenders. This makes one much less sweaty when riding!
Dodging cars, taking gaps, sprinting at lights, constantly looking around... are all things that make you sweaty. Plus cars kick up a load of road grime and water (when it rains).
Comparing cycling on pleasant infrastructure to cycling on roads is a bit like comparing walking and running. They're similar activities, but the level of exertion is quite different!
In NL, they cycle with umbrellas. In Tokyo, rain ponchos are a common choice.
There's also this mentality in the anglo-sphere of commuting on a racing bike with a backpack. This choice is somewhat driven by the infrastructure, since you need to be fast and agile around traffic. However, in countries with developed cycle infrastructure, people tend to use upright bikes with baskets, racks and fenders. This makes one much less sweaty when riding!
For sure. I guess I’ve never bicycled anywhere where I wasn’t in constant fear for my life with cars whizzing past me at 45-55 miles per hour. The anxiety alone makes ya sweat!
> I honestly don’t know but there are so many cities where people bike everywhere so there must be a solution.
It depends how tolerant you are, personally I consider a little sweat to be a fairly small thing in regard to the other hardships life will throw at you, and a very small price to pay to save thousands of euros of a lot of stress.
There is no magic bullet but make sure you eat clean and stay hydrated it helps with sweat smell, dress for the ride and not for the destination, a well ventilated outfit does wonder. I personally don't sweat much so it's ok, my gf gets more sweaty and it can definitely be annoying
It depends how tolerant you are, personally I consider a little sweat to be a fairly small thing in regard to the other hardships life will throw at you, and a very small price to pay to save thousands of euros of a lot of stress.
There is no magic bullet but make sure you eat clean and stay hydrated it helps with sweat smell, dress for the ride and not for the destination, a well ventilated outfit does wonder. I personally don't sweat much so it's ok, my gf gets more sweaty and it can definitely be annoying
So this is a real problem especially in hot climates like the US can be. My advice would be slow down your cycling speed to your appointment. I found myself having to keep reminding myself to slow down because my natural cycling speed generates a sheen of sweat. Of course you can open up on the way home.
This strategy along with suitable clothes will help for moderate climates. If you are heading out into 95 and up weather there will be sweat though.
I’ve also had the benefit of a shower at work which really changed the game, but that is a luxury.
This strategy along with suitable clothes will help for moderate climates. If you are heading out into 95 and up weather there will be sweat though.
I’ve also had the benefit of a shower at work which really changed the game, but that is a luxury.
1. get fit
2. get an ebike
3. don't live that far away from everything (I do everything by bike, but all daily things are max. 15 min away
4. don't live in Mexico
5. don't race / take your time. Average (non-sporty) cyclist goes 15 kph, i.e your do not get more exhausted as you would be when walking
6. for me: do not wear a backpack (i.e bike bag or basket)
7. have proper equipment (i.e I have a poncho. I get a little wet in the rain though because it does get warm underneath)
2. get an ebike
3. don't live that far away from everything (I do everything by bike, but all daily things are max. 15 min away
4. don't live in Mexico
5. don't race / take your time. Average (non-sporty) cyclist goes 15 kph, i.e your do not get more exhausted as you would be when walking
6. for me: do not wear a backpack (i.e bike bag or basket)
7. have proper equipment (i.e I have a poncho. I get a little wet in the rain though because it does get warm underneath)
For most day-to-day things you don't need to cycle longer than 15 minutes in most bike friendly cities. In addition to recommendation by others I would also add that for journeys significantly longer than 15 Minutes you can take public transport for part of it.
Interesting! I picked 15 minutes because that’s the shortest possible distance I could imagine having to go to do anything (yes I’m in the USA). Once in my life, very briefly, I managed to afford to live a 15 minute bike ride from my work, and I did it, but (like I said) with the sweaty consequences. Usually it’s 1-2 hours by car.
I realized part of the problem recently; if you can afford to live in a 15 minute bike city, you're also living in a 5 minute car city. (Or more precisely, if something is a 10 minute walk away, it's about a minute or two by car.)
Until you go from one car to zero, the car is a damn good temptation.
I just did a round trip to pick up something from the library, a mile away. Could have walked, but couldn't have walked and got back in time before my meeting.
Until you go from one car to zero, the car is a damn good temptation.
I just did a round trip to pick up something from the library, a mile away. Could have walked, but couldn't have walked and got back in time before my meeting.
> shoes and pants get dirty from the road
Most bikes sold in the US are historically not sold or marketed for transportation, they’re aimed at fitness/sport users. So they don’t come with fenders that would keep your pants clean, and racks you could put your bag on.
To keep from getting sweaty you’ll need to intentionally ride slower, again US bikes are not designed for this. The classic Dutch bike has a much more relaxed and comfortable posture that helps remind you not to work too hard.
Most bikes sold in the US are historically not sold or marketed for transportation, they’re aimed at fitness/sport users. So they don’t come with fenders that would keep your pants clean, and racks you could put your bag on.
To keep from getting sweaty you’ll need to intentionally ride slower, again US bikes are not designed for this. The classic Dutch bike has a much more relaxed and comfortable posture that helps remind you not to work too hard.
> EDIT: ok, ok, I guess e-bikes it is. Still there are cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam where everyone bikes everywhere and they don’t all have e-bikes. Do they just bring multiple changes of clothes everywhere?
These cities are almost 100% flat, it doesn't take much effort to bike in a leisure pace anywhere, you won't be sweating if you are riding at 12-15km/h. You don't need changes of clothes to bike as people do there.
I bike in Stockholm, in a longer route these days since I live in a house some 15km away from the city center, it is quite hilly and I ride a fixed gear bike so I do sweat, I do not carry multiple changes of clothes, I have my clothes for riding depending on the season (staples are a wind jacket, wool underlayers due to their good wicking for sweat), carry a small towel with me, clothes I'd like to wear when I arrive at my destination, and wet wipes. If I'm too sweaty I will wait a few minutes until I cool down, use the towel to dry the sweat and the wet wipes in case it's needed.
It takes almost no effort after you are used to the routine, like anything you just adapt to it and becomes the new normal.
The resistance you feel is just the fear of the unknown, it's absolutely doable even in places not as perfect for biking like Denmark, the Netherlands, Berlin, etc., in my case I just love biking and the added routine I might need after biking 15km is totally fine. Others will use an e-bike around here if total practicality is needed.
These cities are almost 100% flat, it doesn't take much effort to bike in a leisure pace anywhere, you won't be sweating if you are riding at 12-15km/h. You don't need changes of clothes to bike as people do there.
I bike in Stockholm, in a longer route these days since I live in a house some 15km away from the city center, it is quite hilly and I ride a fixed gear bike so I do sweat, I do not carry multiple changes of clothes, I have my clothes for riding depending on the season (staples are a wind jacket, wool underlayers due to their good wicking for sweat), carry a small towel with me, clothes I'd like to wear when I arrive at my destination, and wet wipes. If I'm too sweaty I will wait a few minutes until I cool down, use the towel to dry the sweat and the wet wipes in case it's needed.
It takes almost no effort after you are used to the routine, like anything you just adapt to it and becomes the new normal.
The resistance you feel is just the fear of the unknown, it's absolutely doable even in places not as perfect for biking like Denmark, the Netherlands, Berlin, etc., in my case I just love biking and the added routine I might need after biking 15km is totally fine. Others will use an e-bike around here if total practicality is needed.
> Do they just bring multiple changes of clothes everywhere?
Worse: from an early age they dress considerably lighter than in other countries.
A friend of mine lived there for the first couple years of her life so she, ahem, adopted the tradition and now carries it over to the next generation with her two sons, who are essentially immune to cold already as by local standards they were always missing a layer or two.
Also 30°C in Amsterdam amounts to a massive heat wave, so there's little opportunity to sweat if you dress light enough.
Worse: from an early age they dress considerably lighter than in other countries.
A friend of mine lived there for the first couple years of her life so she, ahem, adopted the tradition and now carries it over to the next generation with her two sons, who are essentially immune to cold already as by local standards they were always missing a layer or two.
Also 30°C in Amsterdam amounts to a massive heat wave, so there's little opportunity to sweat if you dress light enough.
I think there are a lot of suggestions already given like lower the pace, ebikes, bring a fresh shirt, there are rain clothes you can put over your clothes.
But it's also about your destination and what is expected. Most of my destinations are people I like to meet or places I like to be at. A fancy restaurant or business meeting doesn't happen that often. Have you seen people at museums ;)
The Netherlands and Denmark are generally not that hot. I also think Dutch working culture has been influenced by people cycling to work. Clothes that fit the weather are more accepted. There might also be some bias to what kind of work you do opposed to what type of work is actually happening. A lot of people do work that will make you sweat more over the day than a short bike ride.
But it's also about your destination and what is expected. Most of my destinations are people I like to meet or places I like to be at. A fancy restaurant or business meeting doesn't happen that often. Have you seen people at museums ;)
The Netherlands and Denmark are generally not that hot. I also think Dutch working culture has been influenced by people cycling to work. Clothes that fit the weather are more accepted. There might also be some bias to what kind of work you do opposed to what type of work is actually happening. A lot of people do work that will make you sweat more over the day than a short bike ride.
It's quite cold a lot of the time in Northern Europe, and people who are cycling to commute there often really aren't going very fast so won't sweat much.
You can also get "moisture wicking" clothes, that might help with a certain amount of sweat.
There is quite a lot of e-bike use in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Google "bakfiets" - it's a whole "suburban parents with a family size e-bike" cliche (but a good one!).
You can also get "moisture wicking" clothes, that might help with a certain amount of sweat.
There is quite a lot of e-bike use in Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Google "bakfiets" - it's a whole "suburban parents with a family size e-bike" cliche (but a good one!).
sweat is the least of concerns, and by biking regularly you get quickly fit and don't sweat too much
They're living in places where the weather is cool, so they're not getting sweaty on their bikes.
Re: Copenhagen + Amsterdam.
These cities are relatively flat, relatively cool (watch videos of cycling in Copenhagen and you'll see a lot of people in coats and hats), and you don't have to bike very far to get somewhere interesting. There's also the fact that there's a lot of bikes on the paths (which, for me, caused me to slow down considerably from my typical bike pace when I visited). This all combines to mean you aren't putting anymore effort in than a short walk: you just end up going a little farther in the same amount of time.
Re: the rest.
When I was a regular cycle commuter (in a Canadian city) I did pack a change of clothes, spare deodorant and/or wore a removable outer layer that resisted road gunk. Road gunk is _much worse_ on any route you share with cars. Dedicated bike paths tend to be quite clean. Paniers are far better than a backpack, since they sit on the bike frame, you barely notice the weight. But as other commenters noted: a little fitness goes a long way. After a year of commuting, my regular route wouldn't even cause me to break a sweat.
These cities are relatively flat, relatively cool (watch videos of cycling in Copenhagen and you'll see a lot of people in coats and hats), and you don't have to bike very far to get somewhere interesting. There's also the fact that there's a lot of bikes on the paths (which, for me, caused me to slow down considerably from my typical bike pace when I visited). This all combines to mean you aren't putting anymore effort in than a short walk: you just end up going a little farther in the same amount of time.
Re: the rest.
When I was a regular cycle commuter (in a Canadian city) I did pack a change of clothes, spare deodorant and/or wore a removable outer layer that resisted road gunk. Road gunk is _much worse_ on any route you share with cars. Dedicated bike paths tend to be quite clean. Paniers are far better than a backpack, since they sit on the bike frame, you barely notice the weight. But as other commenters noted: a little fitness goes a long way. After a year of commuting, my regular route wouldn't even cause me to break a sweat.
> What about going to a restaurant or business meeting or a museum or an appointment with a professional?
Depends on the restaurant obviously. Client meetings and appointments obviously depends on the location. If they're coming to your office then you would probably have already showered if needed. If you have the kind of job where you need to go to other client locations to meet with them then obviously you want a car because you're going to be driving a lot across clients. I imagine such people have cars in Amsterdam as well. For museums, nobody gives a damn. I've never dressed up for a museum in my life.
Depends on the restaurant obviously. Client meetings and appointments obviously depends on the location. If they're coming to your office then you would probably have already showered if needed. If you have the kind of job where you need to go to other client locations to meet with them then obviously you want a car because you're going to be driving a lot across clients. I imagine such people have cars in Amsterdam as well. For museums, nobody gives a damn. I've never dressed up for a museum in my life.
In Copenhagen and Amsterdam, the people meeting clients probably choose their transport based on each day's needs. Several clients in the city centre? Bike, or even on foot. Spread around the suburbs? Car, or maybe bike+train if the offices are near stations. (More likely for office jobs, less likely if your clients are manufacturing/industry.)
It is rare for people visiting us to ask for a parking permit.
(Drinking alcohol with the clients in the evening? Then it can't be car.)
It is rare for people visiting us to ask for a parking permit.
(Drinking alcohol with the clients in the evening? Then it can't be car.)
I pack some backup clothes (undershirt, underwear, socks), they mostly stay in my bike bag because I rarely use them. If I do need them, I just go to the bathroom, then change back into the bike clothes for the ride home. If it's really hot, I might switch it up and put the office clothes in the bag from the start - meaning I know I'll need a change.
Really not that complicated.
Really not that complicated.
In my experience the Venn diagram of people who bike as their main transportation source and people who care about hygiene and overall appearance doesn’t overlap very much at all.
Covid really accelerated this. Friends visiting in Paris are also surprised how fast the city changed in just 2-3 years.
That’s written by gpt (bustling, at the heart of, …)
Isn't it rather thanks to the banning of electric scooters?
I switched to cycling for transportation. Benefits:
1. way more access to the city
2. eliminated need to go to gym; transport time doubles as cardio time
3. freed up time to see people; 15 minutes door to door is hard to beat
I really hope US cities head in this direction. It is a no brainer for cities: 1. higher density -> lower taxes per person, higher tax rev per sqm 2. lower cost of living -> lower inflation 3. quieter; cars on streets are noisy 4. people see each other more; better social cohesion 5. kids are free from the house to do things
I really hope US cities head in this direction. It is a no brainer for cities: 1. higher density -> lower taxes per person, higher tax rev per sqm 2. lower cost of living -> lower inflation 3. quieter; cars on streets are noisy 4. people see each other more; better social cohesion 5. kids are free from the house to do things
The first US asphalt roads were built by cycling clubs (1).
1) https://www.vox.com/2015/3/19/8253035/roads-cyclists-cars-hi...
1) https://www.vox.com/2015/3/19/8253035/roads-cyclists-cars-hi...
I biked for transportation (and fun) for years and it was great. In 2022 I moved and had no bike for eight months and hurt my back ~four times in that period.
I got a new bike about a year ago and have had no back pain since (until randomly yesterday, but I'm 41, I guess it's expected that it'll happen occasionally).
Biking doesn't seem like a back exercise, but you are using your core and flexing it a lot, and for longer than you would on any standard core exercise.
Building exercise into your day to day life is incredible valuable. If you're lucky enough to be in a place where biking is viable, I highly recommend giving it a try. It's not for everyone, but given the right situation, I suspect the majority of people would find it a positive change to start biking more. (I suspect this is true for a lot of exercise, but biking has the benefit of being a productive workout—similar to chopping wood vs. lifting weights, except few of us need much wood chopped.)
I got a new bike about a year ago and have had no back pain since (until randomly yesterday, but I'm 41, I guess it's expected that it'll happen occasionally).
Biking doesn't seem like a back exercise, but you are using your core and flexing it a lot, and for longer than you would on any standard core exercise.
Building exercise into your day to day life is incredible valuable. If you're lucky enough to be in a place where biking is viable, I highly recommend giving it a try. It's not for everyone, but given the right situation, I suspect the majority of people would find it a positive change to start biking more. (I suspect this is true for a lot of exercise, but biking has the benefit of being a productive workout—similar to chopping wood vs. lifting weights, except few of us need much wood chopped.)
Cycling is fairly heavy on your lower back and the need to balance yourself means that your core gets a huge hit a lot of the time.
Unless you have one of those lounger bikes, you're getting an exercise that hits almost everything below your ribs.
Unless you have one of those lounger bikes, you're getting an exercise that hits almost everything below your ribs.
Cycling is great! But it doesn't eliminate the need to go to the gym. People who rely on cycling as their only form of exercise tend to suffer from low bone density and unbalanced muscle development. Everyone should do resistance training as well.
[deleted]
There is also a somewhat amusing argument that cycling does not waste your time. you get every hour cycled back as hour added to your expected lifetime:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/12/cycling-add-year...
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/12/cycling-add-year...
Yeah but it's more time when you're older instead of right now /s
[deleted]
but do note that car owners in Paris (where I live) are reaching never-seen-before levels of whining, complaining about the fact that their little selfish privilege is not as cushy as it used to be and that only 80% of the public road infrastructure is dedicated to their idiotic 2 miles journeys on board of their oversized SUVs now
The second order effect is that tax rates will increase to cater to increase in social security payment and medical care thanks to increased life expectancy.
That might also divert money from other public spending that could mean living longer but with lower quality of life.
It must also has be taken into account that driving has become annoying to the point that many people from suburbs don't come anymore to Paris for shopping, theatres, exhibitions, ... and many living inside or nearby are really annoyed by the public transports which are dirty, not on time, too crowded, beggars every few minutes, ... so biking is like a forced solution that helps with some things but isn't always a choice of preference. It's easier to see this in the winter, which is not cold/wet enough in Paris to make cycling difficult, but there are clearly much less cyclists then.
You describe Paris as if it's a shopping/entertainment center for the suburbs. It also looks like you're implying that Paris needs the economic activity generated by the suburbs. For that I would investigate what a suburb is by definition.
In the 70s-90s, it was! A lot of shops and movie theatres have closed in some areas like Champs-Elysées, Montparnasse, Saint-Germain, ... where people used to come by car from suburbs on the week-ends because they could, because it was practical, because they could park.
Places for shopping and entertainment have been created in the suburbs since then, which is a win for the suburbs but not for Paris which has become depressing.
Places for shopping and entertainment have been created in the suburbs since then, which is a win for the suburbs but not for Paris which has become depressing.
it's a win win win!
[deleted](1)
You now even get to see some congestion on bike lanes (Bd Sebastopol for instance), because they are too many cyclist on an older (and thus too narrow) bike lane.
This change, the new subway lanes, and the reduction of car usage in the city make the city much more enjoyable on a day to day basis, especially for pedestrians as cyclists are less annoying than drivers.