3 ms·
As an avid cyclist, I'm not sure I'd say that cycling is necessarily an "efficient" transportation option. I love to ride my bike to work. It makes my day muc
by barney54 9y ago
As an avid cyclist, I'm not sure I'd say that cycling is necessarily an "efficient" transportation option. I love to ride my bike to work. It makes my day much better. If I could, I would ride to work everyday. However, for me (and many others) it takes more time to ride than drive and dropping off if kids in the morning is really, really tough by bike.
My point is that biking is great, but it isn't necessarily time efficient.
- chiefofgxbxl 9y agoIsn't that because cities and towns have been built with cars in mind, though? Things are further apart exactly because cars allow "quick" transportation between those points. What's quick for a car isn't quick for a bike. One example is how we measure distances in terms of time by car: It's 15 minutes away (likely implying driving as the mode of transportation)
- closeparen 9y agoYes, which is why forcing a downgrade from cars to bicycles without corresponding changes in zoning to promote a more compact environment is a terrible idea.
- wffurr 9y agoDepends on how you define efficiency. Dollar, energy, space, and health: bicycle wins out hugely. Time depends on your route and local infrastructure, and if you count in time you spend at the gym to make up for being sedentary in the car and at the service shop for regular maintenance. If dropping off the kids with your current cycling equipment is really, really hard, then perhaps your setup is deficient. A lot of what makes school drop off in particular difficult is the sheer mass of cars, which are hardly efficiently using the space or time of everyone there.