5 ms·

I always dislike these comparisons. The truth is simply that it depends. You can't justify an unknown city having a certain quality of bus routes compared to a

by IanCal 10y ago

I always dislike these comparisons. The truth is simply that it depends. You can't justify an unknown city having a certain quality of bus routes compared to a diverse range of tens of countries by saying "it's smaller". It'd be slower and more expensive in some parts of the UK, easier in others and in some countries I assume you'd be expected to just cycle the 6 miles.

Arnt 10y ago
Which ones would that be? 6 miles is 10 km, that's a nice ride but I've never heard of traffic planners that expect 10km rides.
- IanCal 10y ago
  Maybe I'm totally wrong on this, I guess it just didn't seem like an odd choice in the UK and other countries have much stronger focus on cycling. "People I know" will be a hugely unrepresentative sample though. For another unrepresentative sample, cycling commuters on strava average a bit over 10 miles: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/10-stats-paint-picture-british-cyclists-compare-151542 http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/10-stats-pai... I can't find the stat I want for Copenhagen, they have 1/3rd to 1/2 of people commuting by bike but I can't find out how many journeys of ~10km are completed by bike. I know it's a small number of cycle journeys, as many are shorter, but that's not quite what I'm after.
  - CalRobert 10y ago
    It may be over half commuting by bike now. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/nov/30/cycling-revolution-bikes-outnumber-cars-first-time-copenhagen-denmark https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/nov/30/cycling-revol... I can't seem to find mode share as a function of commute distance. Pure anecdata, but when I worked in El Segundo and lived in Santa Monica, I usually cycled the 12 miles to work. It took about 5 minutes longer than the drive.
    - IanCal 10y ago
      Thanks, I saw references to it being 50% but then also found a source where 50% was simply an aim so assumed it had been taken out of context. I think from that article the figure might be over 40% though at least.
  - pm215 10y ago
    I think it doesn't seem a totally odd choice in the UK partly because the public transport is often pretty poor (London is a huge exception to the usual UK situation). Certainly here in Cambridge I'd choose a 6 mile cycle over the bus every time. But then I enjoy my (4 mile) cycle commute; I don't think I'm particularly representative. The right fix is for the buses to be better.
  - Arnt 10y ago
    AFAIK, most traffic planners seem to believe that "if you build the streets/intersections for cycles, people will use cycles a great deal up to about x km, but only rarely for longer trips" for some x. I've heard different values of x, nothing close to 10. I'm sure it depends on the climate, terrain, etc. I'd be very interested in hearing about any place that uses a value as high as 10km, and the rationale.
  - nickkell 10y ago
    As the person commenting on that article points out, cyclists using strava are probably more likely to be athletic and cycle further and faster than cyclists not using strava
paulddraper 10y ago
> cycle the 6 miles The minority cycles. Crowded cyclists are hardly better than crowded cars.
- IanCal 10y ago
  They take up less space and result in less pollution and a healthier population. In what way do you think they're about the same?
  - kobeya 10y ago
    I get the sense you are imagining this: https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/amsterdam.jpg https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/amsterdam.j... But the pragmatic reality is that in much of the world that has had such a bike culture, you will eventually end up with this: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QSXDqDni9VE/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QSXDqDni9VE/maxresdefault.jpg Cars, although far less dense, are objectively better than the latter case. Safer, quieter, less polluting.
    - CalRobert 10y ago
      "Cars, although far less dense, are objectively better than the latter case. Safer, quieter, less polluting. " Citation desperately needed. Also, keep in mind there are different ways of defining "safe". Cars are only "safe" inasmuch as they are safer for the occupants and incredibly dangerous for everyone else around. If we considered harm to people _outside_ the car we would view them as much more dangerous (and walking, motorcycling, cycling, etc as being much safer)
    - erpellan 10y ago
      Safer? Debatable. There are no cars in that picture, which represent the largest danger to moped riders. You'd also need a road 10x wider for the same volume of traffic.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    I was mostly referring to congestion. (They certainly have advantages like exercise, noise, and storage space.) Bicycles are physically smaller, but they still need a substantial safety zone, just like cars. It's easier and faster to stop a 25mph car than a 25mph bike.

by IanCal 10y ago

Arnt 10y ago

Which ones would that be? 6 miles is 10 km, that's a nice ride but I've never heard of traffic planners that expect 10km rides.

IanCal 10y ago
Maybe I'm totally wrong on this, I guess it just didn't seem like an odd choice in the UK and other countries have much stronger focus on cycling. "People I know" will be a hugely unrepresentative sample though. For another unrepresentative sample, cycling commuters on strava average a bit over 10 miles: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/10-stats-paint-picture-british-cyclists-compare-151542 http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/10-stats-pai... I can't find the stat I want for Copenhagen, they have 1/3rd to 1/2 of people commuting by bike but I can't find out how many journeys of ~10km are completed by bike. I know it's a small number of cycle journeys, as many are shorter, but that's not quite what I'm after.
- CalRobert 10y ago
  It may be over half commuting by bike now. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/nov/30/cycling-revolution-bikes-outnumber-cars-first-time-copenhagen-denmark https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/nov/30/cycling-revol... I can't seem to find mode share as a function of commute distance. Pure anecdata, but when I worked in El Segundo and lived in Santa Monica, I usually cycled the 12 miles to work. It took about 5 minutes longer than the drive.
  - IanCal 10y ago
    Thanks, I saw references to it being 50% but then also found a source where 50% was simply an aim so assumed it had been taken out of context. I think from that article the figure might be over 40% though at least.
- pm215 10y ago
  I think it doesn't seem a totally odd choice in the UK partly because the public transport is often pretty poor (London is a huge exception to the usual UK situation). Certainly here in Cambridge I'd choose a 6 mile cycle over the bus every time. But then I enjoy my (4 mile) cycle commute; I don't think I'm particularly representative. The right fix is for the buses to be better.
- Arnt 10y ago
  AFAIK, most traffic planners seem to believe that "if you build the streets/intersections for cycles, people will use cycles a great deal up to about x km, but only rarely for longer trips" for some x. I've heard different values of x, nothing close to 10. I'm sure it depends on the climate, terrain, etc. I'd be very interested in hearing about any place that uses a value as high as 10km, and the rationale.
- nickkell 10y ago
  As the person commenting on that article points out, cyclists using strava are probably more likely to be athletic and cycle further and faster than cyclists not using strava

paulddraper 10y ago

> cycle the 6 miles The minority cycles. Crowded cyclists are hardly better than crowded cars.

IanCal 10y ago
They take up less space and result in less pollution and a healthier population. In what way do you think they're about the same?
- kobeya 10y ago
  I get the sense you are imagining this: https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/amsterdam.jpg https://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/amsterdam.j... But the pragmatic reality is that in much of the world that has had such a bike culture, you will eventually end up with this: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QSXDqDni9VE/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QSXDqDni9VE/maxresdefault.jpg Cars, although far less dense, are objectively better than the latter case. Safer, quieter, less polluting.
  - CalRobert 10y ago
    "Cars, although far less dense, are objectively better than the latter case. Safer, quieter, less polluting. " Citation desperately needed. Also, keep in mind there are different ways of defining "safe". Cars are only "safe" inasmuch as they are safer for the occupants and incredibly dangerous for everyone else around. If we considered harm to people _outside_ the car we would view them as much more dangerous (and walking, motorcycling, cycling, etc as being much safer)
  - erpellan 10y ago
    Safer? Debatable. There are no cars in that picture, which represent the largest danger to moped riders. You'd also need a road 10x wider for the same volume of traffic.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  I was mostly referring to congestion. (They certainly have advantages like exercise, noise, and storage space.) Bicycles are physically smaller, but they still need a substantial safety zone, just like cars. It's easier and faster to stop a 25mph car than a 25mph bike.