4 ms·

> Nobody needs interstate or international bicycle paths, because nobody cycles that far. IMHO, this is 120% just a chicken and egg problem. Sure, nobody bikes

by gbrown 7y ago

> Nobody needs interstate or international bicycle paths, because nobody cycles that far. IMHO, this is 120% just a chicken and egg problem. Sure, nobody bikes that far to work, but if you build it people can and will travel large distances to visit just to go on bike tours. In my state, we have an annual event which attracts thousands in which people bike hundreds of miles from one side to the other. Rural highways are closed down/protected for bikes, but just for that one week.

seanmcdirmid 7y ago
You aren’t wrong from a recreational perspective. But from a practical one meant to alleviate traffic and pollution, long distance intercity biking is less viable in addressing those compared to public transit.
- gbrown 7y ago
  No argument there, I just think it's also worthwhile from a quality of life + tourism $ perspective.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    Ya, but it should be classed in that bucket rather than to alleviate other problems. E.g. there are some nice new recreational bike trails here in Washington and Idaho along old rail road routes. They won’t do much for rush hour traffic, but they are nice to have.
    - gbrown 7y ago
      True, though I do think it's worth looking for connections between the two. A rail trail running through an area could form a good route for many different short commutes all along its length. If it's all rural, then sure - there's unlikely to be any overlap. If it connects populated areas, then subsections are likely to be multi-purpose. That's the case for a lot of the trails in my state - there are big, rural, rail trail loops, but the suburban/urban connections to the routes are excellent commuting corridors.
mcv 7y ago
True. In fact, the previous owner of our house went on a bicycle vacation in the US where he'd cycle down route 66. In Europe bicycle vacations are pretty common, but it's very different from a regular commute. I did have one coworker once who biked about 50 km to work, but he was very much an exception. For most people, 10 km is a reasonable maximum.
bluGill 7y ago
Sure there are bike vacations, and perhaps we can make them a little more popular. I'm not going to take my family on such a vacation: most of our vacations are visiting grandparents. With a car and modern freeways we can make the trip in 21 hours of driving (split over a few days - we try to visit some other uncle along the way), few people get enough continuous vacation to bike that far. If flying wasn't such a hassle I'd probably do that instead (driving is cheaper)
clarry 7y ago
I've done some 50 to 90 km (one way) intercity trips on bike. I'd love to do more with the help of extended range and speed with electric assist but they have a silly 25 kph speed limit. If you get a faster electric, it'll be treated like a moped -- you need license, insurance, registration. Largely defeats the point of cycling for me.

by gbrown 7y ago

seanmcdirmid 7y ago

You aren’t wrong from a recreational perspective. But from a practical one meant to alleviate traffic and pollution, long distance intercity biking is less viable in addressing those compared to public transit.

gbrown 7y ago
No argument there, I just think it's also worthwhile from a quality of life + tourism $ perspective.
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  Ya, but it should be classed in that bucket rather than to alleviate other problems. E.g. there are some nice new recreational bike trails here in Washington and Idaho along old rail road routes. They won’t do much for rush hour traffic, but they are nice to have.
  - gbrown 7y ago
    True, though I do think it's worth looking for connections between the two. A rail trail running through an area could form a good route for many different short commutes all along its length. If it's all rural, then sure - there's unlikely to be any overlap. If it connects populated areas, then subsections are likely to be multi-purpose. That's the case for a lot of the trails in my state - there are big, rural, rail trail loops, but the suburban/urban connections to the routes are excellent commuting corridors.

mcv 7y ago

True. In fact, the previous owner of our house went on a bicycle vacation in the US where he'd cycle down route 66. In Europe bicycle vacations are pretty common, but it's very different from a regular commute. I did have one coworker once who biked about 50 km to work, but he was very much an exception. For most people, 10 km is a reasonable maximum.

bluGill 7y ago

Sure there are bike vacations, and perhaps we can make them a little more popular. I'm not going to take my family on such a vacation: most of our vacations are visiting grandparents. With a car and modern freeways we can make the trip in 21 hours of driving (split over a few days - we try to visit some other uncle along the way), few people get enough continuous vacation to bike that far. If flying wasn't such a hassle I'd probably do that instead (driving is cheaper)

clarry 7y ago

I've done some 50 to 90 km (one way) intercity trips on bike. I'd love to do more with the help of extended range and speed with electric assist but they have a silly 25 kph speed limit. If you get a faster electric, it'll be treated like a moped -- you need license, insurance, registration. Largely defeats the point of cycling for me.