4 ms·

This seems really short-sited given the reality of pandemics. Walking or biking or high utilization of public transport implies high density. In a pandemic, the

This seems really short-sited given the reality of pandemics. Walking or biking or high utilization of public transport implies high density. In a pandemic, the more people you encounter, the higher the chance of contracting the disease. Cars decrease density by increasing the effective area where people can work/shop/live. The area accessible grows as the square of the distance you can travel. In addition, in a car, increased travel time does not increase exposure. With walking or public transport, your exposure increases the longer you travel.

esoterica 7y ago
I don’t think density matters as much as you think it does. The evidence seems to be that people are mostly contracting the virus in indoor spaces like offices, restaurants, theaters and churches, and people in low density areas go to offices, restaurants, theaters and churches that are just as crowded as the ones in cities. In high density areas people live in smaller apartments that are stacked on top of one another, but it’s not like the virus is percolating through the walls and ceilings of your dwellings. The only real difference in exposure to the virus is public transit.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  I have some control over selecting grocery stores, churches, and even employers who have better social distancing/health policies. Public transit, by its very nature, is a monopoly. I have no choice, in particular if you take the individual car fall-back option.
asveikau 7y ago
> This seems really short-sited given the reality of pandemics. Your comment is literally short-sighted because in the long view, the pandemic will end, but health and economic benefits of greater density and less car-dependent life will still be a thing. Why should we optimize for an exceptional circumstance (a pandemic) and miss out on the benefits of density in more normal times?
ollo 7y ago
Walking or biking does not always imply high density! On the other hand, public transportation can easily get crowded. That is one reason why European cities are moving away from public transportation in favour of bikes, scooters and so on. Finally, I agree that it would be better to encourage car usage during a pandemic. One reasonable reason not to do so is that parking spots are limited.
- luckylion 7y ago
  Bikes and scooters cannot replace public transportation though. I live at the very edge of a large city. Fortunately, I don't work in the city, but if I were, it would be a 30 minute train ride. Sure, I could also do that by bike, but it would take me ~90 minutes. That's not a realistic alternative. Scooters are fine if they are to replace buses that you'd take for two or three stops, e.g. a kilometer or two. And we still occasionally get bad weather. I predict that scooter and bike usage will drop extremely fast once it rains for a week or two, or, god forbid, we get a real winter once again, with snow and sub-zero temperatures. People want comfort, and riding a bike in bad weather, even if it's an ebike, isn't comfortable.
  - ollo 7y ago
    > And we still occasionally get bad weather. I predict that scooter and bike usage will drop extremely fast once it rains for a week or two, or, god forbid, we get a real winter once again, with snow and sub-zero temperatures Live in the Netherlands for a week and you'd be amazed at the resilience of Dutch bikers in bad weather.
    - luckylion 7y ago
      Maybe living with the knowledge that the sea lurks to drown you gives them fortitude ;) I live in northern Germany, we've got plenty of bad weather and always have, and you can see lots of cycling when spring blesses us with a sunny and warm day, but it drops when it rains. Maybe it's intention ("I want to ride my bike to work because reasons") vs opportunity ("I can take the bike, it's so nice outside") that helps create all-season bikers.
IAmEveryone 7y ago
There really isn't much of a correlation of density and fatalities, even if New York City may create that impression. Even in New York, Long Island and Westchester County have more cases per capita than New York City.

esoterica 7y ago

I don’t think density matters as much as you think it does. The evidence seems to be that people are mostly contracting the virus in indoor spaces like offices, restaurants, theaters and churches, and people in low density areas go to offices, restaurants, theaters and churches that are just as crowded as the ones in cities. In high density areas people live in smaller apartments that are stacked on top of one another, but it’s not like the virus is percolating through the walls and ceilings of your dwellings. The only real difference in exposure to the virus is public transit.

Consultant32452 7y ago
I have some control over selecting grocery stores, churches, and even employers who have better social distancing/health policies. Public transit, by its very nature, is a monopoly. I have no choice, in particular if you take the individual car fall-back option.

asveikau 7y ago

> This seems really short-sited given the reality of pandemics. Your comment is literally short-sighted because in the long view, the pandemic will end, but health and economic benefits of greater density and less car-dependent life will still be a thing. Why should we optimize for an exceptional circumstance (a pandemic) and miss out on the benefits of density in more normal times?

ollo 7y ago

Walking or biking does not always imply high density! On the other hand, public transportation can easily get crowded. That is one reason why European cities are moving away from public transportation in favour of bikes, scooters and so on. Finally, I agree that it would be better to encourage car usage during a pandemic. One reasonable reason not to do so is that parking spots are limited.

luckylion 7y ago
Bikes and scooters cannot replace public transportation though. I live at the very edge of a large city. Fortunately, I don't work in the city, but if I were, it would be a 30 minute train ride. Sure, I could also do that by bike, but it would take me ~90 minutes. That's not a realistic alternative. Scooters are fine if they are to replace buses that you'd take for two or three stops, e.g. a kilometer or two. And we still occasionally get bad weather. I predict that scooter and bike usage will drop extremely fast once it rains for a week or two, or, god forbid, we get a real winter once again, with snow and sub-zero temperatures. People want comfort, and riding a bike in bad weather, even if it's an ebike, isn't comfortable.
- ollo 7y ago
  > And we still occasionally get bad weather. I predict that scooter and bike usage will drop extremely fast once it rains for a week or two, or, god forbid, we get a real winter once again, with snow and sub-zero temperatures Live in the Netherlands for a week and you'd be amazed at the resilience of Dutch bikers in bad weather.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    Maybe living with the knowledge that the sea lurks to drown you gives them fortitude ;) I live in northern Germany, we've got plenty of bad weather and always have, and you can see lots of cycling when spring blesses us with a sunny and warm day, but it drops when it rains. Maybe it's intention ("I want to ride my bike to work because reasons") vs opportunity ("I can take the bike, it's so nice outside") that helps create all-season bikers.

IAmEveryone 7y ago

There really isn't much of a correlation of density and fatalities, even if New York City may create that impression. Even in New York, Long Island and Westchester County have more cases per capita than New York City.