11194 replies to this topic

[Dimitrios]

NParker - how about supporting cycling infrastructure because bikes are the most efficient form of mass human transportation in existence? Yep, more efficient than walking. And powered by renewable energy (food). In today's energy-hungry world, when most vehicles are simply used for carrying around (usually) one person, surely that argument must have merit?

http://www.explorato...umanpower1.html

Cycling, being exercise, also has positive externalities - improved health and decreased pollution, resulting in reduced mortality and health care expenses.

http://ehp03.niehs.n...289/ehp.1103440

As opposed to the negative externalities associated with fossil fuel/ car dependency - health impacts, climate change, oil spills, supporting anti-democratic states and other dubious foreign policy decisions, etc.

And as for groceries, surely, grocery delivery by bicycle isn't that radical a concept, is it? In a small, dense city like Victoria, no problem!
http://www.youtube.c...d&v=OaXrOWvalqc

And some emergency services have been serviced quite well by bicycle, actually:


(the BBC series is based on the memoirs of midwife Jennifer Worth, who describes attending to patients in East London by bicycle)

Does this mean that firefighters and paramedics will soon be responding to incidents by bike? Of course not. But if you look out the window, most steel boxes on the road are not emergency vehicles, they're single drivers. Many of these folks probably could do their trips by bike. Hence the push for more bicycle trips.

[Nparker]

NParker - how about supporting cycling infrastructure because bikes are the most efficient form of mass human transportation in existence...

Then why are cars VASTLY more popular even though they cost 10, 15 or 20 times as much as a (good) bicycle to purchase, and require expensive fuel and insurance to operate? When human-powered bikes are able to move at 50-70 km/hour then maybe they will supplant cars, but I don't see this as happening any time soon. BTW I own neither a bicycle nor a car.

[VicHockeyFan]

Then why are cars VASTLY more popular even though they cost 10, 15 or 20 times as much as a (good) bicycle to purchase, and require expensive fuel and insurance to operate? When human-powered bikes are able to move at 50-70 km/hour then maybe they will supplant cars, but I don't see this as happening any time soon. BTW I own neither a bicycle nor a car.

Well, hold on. Bicycles are certainly more plentiful than cars.

As recently as 1965, world production of cars and bikes was essentially the same, with each at nearly 20 million, but as of 2003 bike production had climbed to over 100 million per year compared with 42 million cars. Bicycle production was 105 million units globally in 2004, a 1.5% increase over 2003 (WorldWatch Institute).

http://www.worldometers.info/bicycles/

[Nparker]

Well, hold on. Bicycles are certainly more plentiful than cars./

Well I said cars were more popular (and I suppose I meant in North America) not that cars outnumber bikes. Cockroaches probably outnumber humans, but I am not advocating they take over the world...although...

[jklymak]

Then why are cars VASTLY more popular even though they cost 10, 15 or 20 times as much as a (good) bicycle to purchase, and require expensive fuel and insurance to operate? When human-powered bikes are able to move at 50-70 km/hour then maybe they will supplant cars, but I don't see this as happening any time soon. BTW I own neither a bicycle nor a car.

Bicycling infrastructure costs a fraction of road infrastructure. $50k/mile, at the most for a bike lane, $2.5million/mile for a two-lane road. So you can get 50 miles of gold plated bike lanes for 1 mile of car lanes. After that, the maintenance of bike lanes is a fraction of car lanes. If you are improving a road, putting in an extra 0.2 to 2% to the cost to improve the bike infrastructure doesn't seem disproportionate with the number of bike riders.

[Nparker]

Bicycling infrastructure costs a fraction of road infrastructure...

So this should be a relatively small cost for cyclists to pay through licencing and/or taxes.

[jklymak]

^ You don't think cyclists already pay this small cost? Even if they don't own a car, most pay income taxes, sales taxes (on their bikes and their maintenance), municipal taxes (either directly, or through their rents) and buy goods that are shipped on the roads and thus help pay gas taxes. Surely you don't think the roads are being funded directly by licensing fees on cars?

Bernard will probably pipe up and say that roads are fully funded by gas taxes, but I think he means the operating costs, not the capital costs, and I suspect he means the provincial road system, which doesn't include the municipal roads.

[Bingo]

How would it work if except for emergency vehicles and buses, vehicles were only allowed to make left turns, and cyclists were only allowed to make right turns, which would mean you would have to make a number of loops to get where you want to go?

Then for pedestrians you go back to an idea tried at Yates and Douglas years ago, where the intersection light turns red in both directions and you can walk diagonally across the street.

[Nparker]

^ You don't think cyclists already pay this small cost...

Then why is an additional $220 million needed in cycling infrastructure if the costs are already accounted for in current revenue and if not, from where do we magically come up with this money?

[rjag]

This will confuse the enviroweenies:wave:

Western Europeans Have More Cars Per Person Than Americans

[sebberry]

hehehe

[jklymak]

Then why is an additional $220 million needed in cycling infrastructure if the costs are already accounted for in current revenue and if not, from where do we magically come up with this money?

a) who said there was an additional $220 million needed and for where? CRD? BC? Canada? and b) I assume it'll come from the highways budget, and would be a small fraction of the highway infrastructure cost. $220 million would only get you 100 miles of two-lane road. I'm pretty sure we have spent billions on two lane roads in Victoria alone.

[Bob Fugger]

Fugger, are you really Adrian Raeside? His cartoon in today's paper traces your argument perfectly: http://www.timescolo...oons/index.html

LOL! Maybe he's a regular VV reader and I inspired his column!

[jklymak]

This will confuse the enviroweenies:wave:

Western Europeans Have More Cars Per Person Than Americans

Maybe all that car exhaust has ruined your attention span, and you didn't get to the end of the article where it pointed out that US energy consumption is twice that of Europeans. I could care less how many cars someone owns so long as they don't drive them very often.

[Baro]

I wonder what the per capital car ownership is based on the weight of vehicle. Like how many tonnes per person of vehicle is owned.

[Greg]

This will confuse the enviroweenies:wave:

Western Europeans Have More Cars Per Person Than Americans

I'd like to see that data corrected for adults only. Higher birth rates in USA than other industrialized nations may be skewing the date. Not a lot of children have cars.

/but it still surprised me!
//not an enviroweenie (I assume, having not seen the technical definition)

[VicHockeyFan]

I wonder what the per capital car ownership is based on the weight of vehicle. Like how many tonnes per person of vehicle is owned.

There is also questions as to whether those stats take into account trucks. Americans use trucks as their principle vehicles way more than anywhere else.

[Baro]

While europe uses trucks to move everything rather than rail. Both the US andeurope have equally developed rail system and both are just as heavily used, just one continent uses it for freight and the other passenger.

[sebberry]

There is also questions as to whether those stats take into account trucks. Americans use trucks as their principle vehicles way more than anywhere else.

From the article:

Update: Some confusion in the comments about what kinds of vehicles are counted in the rankings. I respond below, but the gist is that this data includes all "passenger vehicles," which means cars, pickup trucks, SUVs, and minibuses. It does not include commercial freight trucks or buses with over nine seats, both of which the U.S. has a lot of, but which tend to be owned by businesses rather than individuals.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ There are further questions raised later in comments.

Jan 2012 article:

http://www.ft.com/cm...l#axzz23bYDrXy7

The US has bounced back to become the fastest growing big car market in the world in 2011, with car and light truck sales climbing by about 10 per cent as Americans took advantage of cheap credit to replace ageing vehicles.

According to preliminary estimates, light vehicle sales climbed to 12.8m units in 2011 from 11.6m the previous year and 10.4m in the depths of the 2009 financial crisis.

...

Europe’s car market contracted by more than 1 per cent in the year through November. Car sales slowed especially in the second half as the eurozone crisis began to sap consumer confidence. Sales fell 18 per cent in France in December and by 4 per cent in Spain, where the market is now less than half the size it was before the recession in 2007. Italy’s car market is about 70 per cent of its pre-recession size.