RECENTLY ON TOL:
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
I'd like to underscore Chris Smith's point about the relative cost effectiveness of bicycle infrastructure, even with out accounting for carbon emissions. The ratio of # of humans transported to dollars spent is an order of magnitude higher than for any other kind of transportation investment.
Of course cycling doesn't work for everyone; no one is suggesting investing in bike infrastructure in place of transit investments that can serve everyone, including the elderly and people with disabilities.
But, a large proportion of our trips *are* short trips. And you'd be suprised, once you start using a bike to get around, how many trips you don't really need a car for. All you need is some good rain gear and fenders, and our days of "liquid sunshine" become downright pleasurable to ride in. Combine a bike with transit, and you can get anywhere in the region.
It has already come up in this comment thread - the number one thing holding people back choosing bikes for those short trips around the neighborhood, or to and from transit stops, is the perception and reality of unsafe riding conditions.
Why are our roads unsafe for bikes? Because they were built to move cars.
I don't think it is productive to cast this as a culture war. Even those of us who bike commute every day in all kinds of weather are likely to own cars. This is just about how can we all practically get around an urban environment, while doing something about health and climate change.
The easier we can make it for people who can to take their bikes when appropriate, the less traffic there will be for everyone. And if we are going to get serious about carbon emissions, what's not to like about getting around with pretty much zero emissions?
posted 3 years, 7 months ago
view in context