21 ms·
Cities Are Not Loud: Cars Are Loud, and Places Without Cars Are Quiet [video]
- readonthegoapp 5y agoBikes are not loud Motorbikes are
- lathiat 5y ago"Not Just Bikes" is the name of the YouTube channel. Confused me before I clicked.
- squarefoot 5y agoNot all motorbikes are loud, just the ones owned by creatures that apparently still need to mark their territory acoustically.
- pcmoney 5y agoI think cities should become linearly more car hostile every year. No free parking. Single lanes. Large protected bike lanes and walking areas with trees and shade. Prioritize plowing sidewalks and bike ways. Then limit total decibel emissions. Just slowly extricate the parasite from our cities.
- throwawaysea 5y agoParasite? My car is an important part of my life and the lives of most people I know. The alternative is that I would spend significantly more time shuttling humans, getting my weekly shopping done, getting to/from work, and so on. All the infrastructure and amenities that you are suggesting be casually tossed aside, improve my family's life significantly in a way that other modes of transportation simply cannot match. The sheer time savings are worth much more to me than the alleged noise pollution from cars, which isn't really even noticeable.
- Dylan16807 5y agoThose benefits come at a cost, and you're only paying for some of it. If going downtown and parking there had a direct price in keeping with what it costs to supply, then you wouldn't be a parasite. Instead the costs are obfuscated and forced onto people. If you're driving around somewhere that land is at less of a premium, have fun.
- throwawaysea 5y ago> If going downtown and parking there had a direct price in keeping with what it costs to supply, then you wouldn't be a parasite. These are amenities that residents and local governments have elected to have, to the benefit of all. Your claim that I'm only paying for some of it is false. I'm paying exactly the required amount for it, because my taxes fund the city and have done so for a long time. Costs are also not "forced" onto people - the newcomers who don't like my car-centric city are the ones forcing themselves upon the city, demanding density beyond what can be reasonably supplied just so they can have the exact price point they want. These same people can just as well live elsewhere and form their own city instead of trying to simultaneously benefit from the community and economy current residents (and infrastructure policies) have built up over years and decades, while they also insist that things be altered drastically to their desire. Who exactly is the parasite in this picture? Hint: not the long-time residents.
- eesmith 5y ago> have elected to have, to the benefit of all Laws about required parking spaces were put into place many years ago, by different people, with incomplete information about the future. When that information changes, the laws should change too, yes? For example, as the Boomers age, fewer will be able to drive, making their current independent life in the suburbs unsupportable. Many elderly are able to walk even if they can't drive. But if mandatory minimum parking laws prevent the construction of walkable areas then fewer options are available to them. These laws, often put into place in the post-war boom, don't reflect current life, so must change. Hint: retired Boomers are long-time residents. > I'm paying exactly the required amount for it, Unless you have metered or paid permit parking set by free market rates, I have a hard time understanding how you can be so certain. Cities change their tax levels and fee structures often. Surely you don't think that roads and parking happens to be perfectly funded. BTW, many cities have gone into debt to fund their growth. What you see is "a modest, short term illusion of wealth in exchange for enormous, long term liabilities" - https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/ https://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/ . The current residents are not "paying exactly the required amount for it"; it's been pushed off to future residents. Rather like parking minimum laws.
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoIt's a pipe dream as long as cities are dependent on areas beyond their rail transit networks for labor. The infrastructure of every major city would need to be re-worked to make it not a pipe dream. The kind of re-work it would need simply doesn't happen to existing development. There's too many stake holders and too much valuable existing construction would need to be gotten rid of. Cities in Europe still have the original street layouts of their medieval cores that were left mostly intact when trains and then cars came onto the scene. If something displaces cars it will likely result in new development, not re-work of old development.
- aeternum 5y agoElectric bikes could be the game-changer that makes this work. It used to be that most people were opposed to biking due to many issues: safety, arriving sweaty, difficulty riding up hills. Nowadays with the general easy availability of electric bikes in city bikeshare the main complaint is now safety around cars.
- jandrese 5y agoWhat about rain and snow?
- jwalton 5y agoRain is not as bad as you think it is. With a not-e-bike, I’m generally pretty warm from cycling, and a little cold rain is usually welcome. Fenders are required for a commuter bike if you want to bike in the rain, and you have to clean your bike more often if you bike in the rain often. Snow is suicidal, not because of your bike, it because of the drivers.
- jandrese 5y agoThe problem is that you then arrive at work soaking wet, so you have to change clothes and then store your wet stuff somewhere all day. Then change back into the wet stuff for the ride back (which might be in the rain again).
- leetcrew 5y agoother than NYC, pretty much all US cities have household car ownership >50%. how are you going to sell your plan to these people?
- dionidium 5y agoOf course people own cars today; we prioritize driver interests wherever they conflict with other concerns. But even passive changes to the built environment -- allow more density, upzone urban neighborhoods, eliminate parking requirements -- will in many places result in cities that are far more car-hostile. In my view people will naturally respond to changing incentives. Car ownership rates should be understood to exist in a context where the alternatives are more or less illegal. If they weren't literally illegal, then they'd be more common.
- leetcrew 5y agothere's a significant difference between "allow denser construction" and "deliberately ratchet up the pain for drivers each year". a city that's genuinely designed for pedestrians sounds great! having my commute to work be even worse for n years until public transit reaches viability doesn't sound so great.
- drewcoo 5y agoWhat's the difference? Is it that "deliberately ratchet up the pain for drivers each year" includes (malicious) intent, an overwrought exaggeration, a victim (gasp!), or a timeframe? Or is the whole comparison really just not in good faith?
- leetcrew 5y agoeliminating free parking and parking minimums seems reasonable enough. people who need a car to get to the place where they make money can figure out how to pay for parking. stuff like prioritizing plowing the sidewalk over the road sounds like deliberately pissing drivers off. what it sounds like is important, and most people drive. imagine being a politician outside of maybe NYC and having that as part of your platform. other people like me have more specific issues. I'd actually love to bike or take public transit to work, but there's no bus/train that goes anywhere near my office, it would take over an hour to bike there, and all the other software companies are also outside the city. why are there no virtually no employers in my field in a major american city? kind of a tangent, but if you don't look at things like this too, you are making my life worse without offering anything.
- FridayoLeary 5y agoI think that's a terrible idea. It's just a negative. What about when we need to get somewhere?
- chaps 5y agoThe implication of these pipe dreams includes the doubling down of public transit infrastructure.
- FridayoLeary 5y agoImprove public transport then take away my car. But what they can do is get rid of all those useless, oversized, bloated SUV's. A car doesn't need to be a status symbol, and in approximately 99.99987% of use cases it does not need to be a Mercedes G-Wagen amg. (there are millions of drivers out there, so i'm not sure if i put in enough 9's)
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoIf you improve public transit you don't need to take away people's cars. Nobody is enduring a car commute into Boston, NYC, London, Paris, etc, unless their other options are downright terrible.
- rootusrootus 5y agoSmart cars for everyone. Statistically that's all anyone should need. Sounds really like a leopard-ate-my-face moment, TBH. It's fine when they come for the things you don't like. Just wait...
- lamontcg 5y ago> Smart cars for everyone. Statistically that's all anyone should need. That's not how statistics work.
- 3np 5y agoYou use public transport. Which implies huge infrastructure developments, of course.
- babyshake 5y agoOne can at least imagine a future in which downtown areas are limited to quiet autonomous electric vehicles that do not have horns and only screech to avoid imminent collision.
- ineedasername 5y agoI'm not sure about other areas if the world, but mass transit in the US isn't sufficient to fill the gap in the need to get people around with even minimal efficiency.
- Rapzid 5y agoCities are made for people. Those people drive cars.
- aspyct 5y agoI agree and disagree. Bikes are the best transportation for small trips. No questionning it. Unless you can't use a bike because something's wrong with your body. Then you need a car. For some people, it's obvious: they have a broken leg, or no legs at all. They'll get a pass (and boy do they need it!). For other people, like me, it's less obvious. I still have my two legs, my two feet, but some bones are broken, and it hurts to cycle or walk just a few kilometers. Essentially, as much as I hate it, I need a car. Otherwise each day ends in pain and misery. And public transportation doesn't solve it, since I need to walk to the bus stop. So yes, cities need to have less cars, but please don't forget about people who don't have another solution.
- addicted 5y agoOr public transport. Or, as in the Netherlands, small golf cart like vehicles that can go on the bike path and the speeds are capped at a level where they are not a threat to everyone around them and they don’t take up inordinate amounts of space.
- timbit42 5y agoWe need more electric tri/quad-cycles like the Better Bikes PEDL and the Organic Transit ELF. They provide shelter from sun, rain and snow, and have enough battery to not require pedaling. They are also small enough to go on bike lanes and paths yet large enough to been seen by drivers of ICE vehicles.
- foxyv 5y agoBetter bicycle infrastructure solves this problem too. Sidewalks are okay, but dedicated bike paths are AWESOME for motorized wheelchairs. In addition, the Netherlands came up with a cool system where disabled and elderly persons could use little, enclosed, motor vehicles like the Canta on dedicated use paths. Being disabled doesn't mean you need a car. In fact, it usually means that you cannot use a car at all and depend on public transit and cycle/ped infrastructure. If you are an alcoholic, epileptic, or blind you absolutely need public transportation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canta_(vehicle) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canta_(vehicle)
- lolsal 5y agoWhat about people with disabilities? Busses or some courier/taxi/delivery services? Eliminating cars for American cities is not as straightforward as "just stop using cars".
- pcmoney 5y agoI dont see why disabilities necessitate a mobile armored living room? Maybe an electric scooter or golf cart sized apparatus?
- lolsal 5y agoHave you never seen folks with walkers or wheelchairs out and about? Sometimes loading a wheelchair into a van and driving to the grocery store is easier than using a wheelchair to go 10 miles to pickup groceries.
- porknubbins 5y agoStandard passenger cars are essentially silent compared to trucks, busses and trains, unless you are right up next to traffic and they are going over 40ish which doesn’t happen often in a city.
- fnord77 5y agodepends on the age and condition of the car. car mufflers get louder over the years as the inner baffles rust and burn out.
- porknubbins 5y agoI believe this but in a major city most cars are new enough to not be loud. I’ve got an almost 20 year old truck that is older than average and not loud, and I’ve never really heard of mufflers rusting here either.
- crooked-v 5y agoOf course, part of the issue there is the many, many SUVs built as truck derivatives.
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoHe likely means medium and heavy trucks.
- porknubbins 5y agoYeah meant commercial trucks. Recent pickups aren’t that bad unless they have some horrible sport package or aftermarket exhaust.
- loloquwowndueo 5y agoYou say that because you haven’t heard the din of a congested street where cars are moving at an average of 5-10 km/h, with all the engines stop-and-going and the horns blaring (people are desperate to move) in large cities. Can be heard from hundreds of meters away.
- jph 5y agoParklets in U.S. cities can make a significant difference in some areas. There are neighborhoods in SF, LA, NY etc. where restaurants are able to expand into the street area, changing a few parking spaces into outdoor seating. The outcomes are human-friendly sidewalk-friendly areas, and fewer cars in the areas. There are some parklets that also include bicycle racks and skateboard racks, which tend to also encourage alternative transportation and better health. What's especially nice about parklets is that business owners strongly like them because the parklets bring more customers to the areas.
- mr_tristan 5y agoDue to quarantine restrictions, a number of parklets were created for outdoor seating arrangements here. What I wonder, is how many cities are considering making the arrangement more frequent and common now that it's been done. My hope is that it happens. I haven't seen a lot of discussion from local officials yet, but I could see the new parklets sticking around this summer as a trial, particularly to help restaurants expand seating en route to recovery.
- wozniacki 5y agoSome would say access to restaurants / eateries / other forms of vended food fare establishments are no more fundamental than access to essential means of transport as cars are. No city anywhere makes it a part of its charter to promise its residents ready access to global fare at their doorstep. If personal vehicles are secondary to public transit, then restaurants are secondary to home cooking. Also restaurants reserve the right to deny or pick who they serve and who they do not and may bar you from dining there if they do not like you or your appearance - so why should they be afforded public spaces in the form of parklets?
- athrun 5y agoI hope you realize that restaurants and other small businesses provide tax revenue to the city, while parked cars usually don't (in most places).
- 5y ago
- FredPret 5y agoElectric engines will fix that; especially for trucks
- dalanmiller 5y agoBut as the video states, 'rolling noise' becomes louder than ICE engine noise at 50km\h or higher. Tesla's driving by still make noise parting air and creating friction on the road.
- FredPret 5y agoI'm astonished every time I hear a truck or a bus huffing and puffing dramatically as it accelerates from 0 to maybe 10
- numpad0 5y agoWhich is insignificant in the context. The noises that video author discusses comes almost purely from tires rolling, at speeds where ICEs are basically silent compared to it.
- throw0101a 5y agoAt 7m30s the video states that rolling noise (tires) starts being same/louder than propulsion noise at 30 kph. Reducing speeds from 50 kph to 30 kph reduces noise by 6 dB (a change of 3 dB is halving/doubling). So yes, it's not surprising that 0-10/15 kph you hear the engine more.
- shusaku 5y ago> But as the video states I’m pretty sure 90% of the comments here are from people who didn’t watch the video. Which is a shame because it was really well done.
- r00fus 5y agoAnecdata but my house is near a road that has a particularly bad section where sound bounces and I can tell you we can’t hear the EVs that drive by but standard ICE rumble a lot.
- adxl 5y agoThe biggest culprits are Dodge and Ford for putting out massively overpowered 5, 6 and even 700 horse powered super vehicles with exhaust that can be set up to make excessive volumes of noise bypassing or even removing mufflers to make the car even more ridiculous. This may be a southern phenom since I live in Atlanta many of my neighbors have been complaining about late night road racing and other stupid crap like 100s of ATVs running the streets in gangs. Check it out https://youtu.be/xlJAySvoH9M https://youtu.be/xlJAySvoH9M and https://www.cbs46.com/news/caught-on-camera-swarm-of-atv-dirt-bike-riders-take-to-streets-of-atlanta/article_743602ac-d84f-11eb-8d35-03181e94e296.html?block_id=1056862 https://www.cbs46.com/news/caught-on-camera-swarm-of-atv-dir.... I’ve seen this in person and it’s very scary when you’re pinned in a car with these morons running by.
- blhack 5y agoThis is not dodge and ford. People modify their cars to make them louder.
- wjamesg 5y agoWhy do people do this?
- FleaFlicker99 5y agoHarley style motorcycles take the cake though, "loud pipes" are such a thing in that part of motorcycle culture. I don't understand the aesthetic of trying to annoy everyone to such a degree, and I don't understand why it's not prosecuted at all.
- r00fus 5y agoIf you’re buying that kind of vehicle you want to be seen and HEARD. It’s a conscious decision by both buyer and manufacturer.
- 29083011397778 5y agoIt's primary reason is image. That's why it's mostly Harley-Davidson, not Indian motorcycles, that roar past. Not that Indian can't be loud, but the former has a reputation that's exacerbated by owners riding at high RPM or modifying the exhaust system. More to the point, do you believe an exhaust system quiet enough to be legal is still immediately noticeable over highway-speed road and wind noise, sound-deadening, climate-control fans running flat out, and any media playing at any volume?
- atlanta90210 5y agoMiami made Ocean Drive pedestrian only after the pandemic started. Hope they keep it that way.
- rsj_hn 5y agoOcean drive was the street you drove your lambo down slowly with the speakers blasting so you could make a lot of noise and have a good time. It was a scene. A good chunk of the time it's cordoned off for street parties anyway. It has absolutely nothing to do with how people get from A to B in Miami Beach.
- sologoub 5y agoThere are definitely degrees to this - engine noise, exhaust noise, tire noise, break noise, etc. Electric cars are very quiet. Motorcycles are usually the other end of the extreme in rattle-your-bones-loud (yeah I know people argue it’s safety). Sensible regulation that affects all cars/motorcycles used in the city (not just new vehicles) would go a long way to improving quality of life for many many people.
- esperent 5y agoI live in Asia where everyone drives scooters and small motorbikes. They are not that loud - certainly quieter than cars. It's only large bikes with exhausts designed to be loud that rattle your bones. Thankfully they are rare here.
- sologoub 5y agoGood call, though these can also be modded to be louder. A newer scooter is really not bad. Here in CA, cruisers seem to be the loudest, but spot bikes are not far behind.
- Johnythree 5y agoI spent years living in Asia and I found the streets to be incredibly noisy. The main problem was two-stroke scooters. Not only are two-strokes inherently noisy, but users often remove the mufflers to improve the power (two-strokes hate back pressure). However in recent times there's been a big change to four-stroke and even electric scooters. Which means that the noise levels have improved somewhat. Still terrible though.
- elihu 5y agoThe video mentions porous asphalt as one way to limit road noise. I hadn't heard of that before. I also liked the idea of planting the ground that streetcar tracks run through with grass.
- wodenokoto 5y agoThe slicker you build the road, the less noise and traction you have. There’s a whole science around balancing noisiness of roads and brake length. Porous roads sounds like sand or gravel. Not great for driving or for noise.
- thepete2 5y agoWell money is also part of the equation. Or is there an even cheaper option that beats those porous roads?
- jaclaz 5y agoAFAIK porous asphalt (which is often called draining asphalt here) is a very good thing (for rain) and driving (braking/adherence is excellent) but not particularly good for noise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeable_paving#Porous_asphalt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeable_paving#Porous_asphal... it is largely used in highways, actually near 100% of highways in Italy are paved with this kind: https://www.autostrade.it/en/tecnologia-sicurezza/sicurezza/pavimentazione-asfalto-drenante https://www.autostrade.it/en/tecnologia-sicurezza/sicurezza/... Since several years they are experimenting in various EU cities, particularly for roads restricted to buses, a type of asphalt that incorporates (recycled) rubber which reduces effectively a part of the noise and vibrations, but is seemingly used in US too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubberized_asphalt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubberized_asphalt
- tonfreed 5y agoIt's pretty incredible that bougies in the inner city with good public transport seem to think cars are optional everywhere.
- OwlsParlay 5y agoI don't think NJB is arguing against the use of cars outside the city (although he's a big fan of trains, naturally). But also don't forget it's not just bougies living in the city, it's working-class people too, who often can't afford to have a car in the city and so need properly working public transport.
- thepete2 5y agoThis is a channel mostly about city layout and urban development. What he really argues for is changing cities and providing alternatives, not flat out banning cars.
- lionkor 5y agoI just want to point out that the title is completely wrong. Cities are loud, even the places in Europe that have no cars in the core of the city. Music, drunk people, homeless people screaming, roadwork, other construction, etc. Cities are loud because there are a lot of people in a small area.
- thepete2 5y agoTrue, but I think you underestimate how loud traffic is. A lively pedestrian area (which there aren't many of) is probably nowhere near a busy street. It could also easily have 5 times as many people per area. Edit: Also if you watch the video there's a scene where he steps off a train in Delft and it's very quiet. Obviously densely settled areas must be louder, but perhaps not always loud.
- asamant 5y agoAs a resident of Delft (and originally hailing from Mumbai) I can vouch for the subjective difference in average noise levels one would be exposed to - coming from a bustling city filled with "layers" of various sounds (trains, honks, crowd, etc.) to a town where most of the sound seems to come from people, the difference is considerable. Naturally, Delft cannot be compared to Mumbai (whose population is more than the entire population of the Netherlands), but having had first-hand experience of spending a considerable amount of time in both places, I simply cannot overstate the peace of mind felt with extremely low noise levels. As far as a good solution to noise levels in cities like Mumbai goes, there's a whole lot to be done - and a Delftian approach certainly wouldn't work.
- addicted 5y agoI’m curious why you think a Delft like approach wouldn’t work. 1) Mumbai is already suffering from massive space constraints and traffic issues. A trip in a car is usually slower than walking that distance (assuming the infrastructure exists and you can walk without falling into an open pothole). Mumbai desperately needs more public transport, and needs to add safe biking, also because of #2 2) Mumbai has very few roads per person, and further, it doesn’t have space to build anymore. Besides the fact that this means cars are not sustainable at all in the city, it also means there’s not too much quiet asphalt that would be needed to replace the existing road material. 3) Mumbai already has an excellent public transport infrastructure, especially with buses. That system is currently unworkable because of all the cars clogging the road. If you were to have dedicated bus lanes, and increase service drastically, it would solve most of Mumbai’s transit issues. 4) Cars in Mumbai rarely travel over 30km/h anyways. Just moving usa. Welcome miracle for the most part.
- asamant 5y agoIn theory, a Delft-like approach would work for any given city - but as far as Mumbai goes, the main problem (apart from bureaucratic/administrative issues) is the sheer density of population - there aren't many places in the world with such space constraints, and that raises unique challenges (even after having Navi Mumbai built in the '70s the burden doesn't seem to have reduced much). 1) Thanks to the north-south alignment of the city (further aggravated by the commercial-residential area distribution along the north-south direction) there is just an extremely high population load involved in mass movement twice a day (of course, in the usual circumstances). Better infrastructure wouldn't help so much as more structural changes like redistribution of these areas or enforcing staggered working hours. 2) I feel this is more of an administrative problem - the current model of tenders does not work very well and there seems to be little or no incentive (or deterrents) for contractors to keep roads in good shape. The current road infrastructure is dismal and would require a major system overhaul to facilitate finances and will required for replacing the existing material with quiet asphalt. But yes, this probably seems more doable. 3) The municipal corp did consider having a BRTS system (a la the Bogota model) but their surveys led to the conclusion that improving the existing suburban rail system with more frequent services was more impactful. In terms of point-to-point connectivity, Mumbai certainly has very good infrastructure (especially compared to Bengaluru and Pune). 4) Don't forget about the honking! There's little or no honking in Delft.
- srichakradhar 5y agoWhy is everyone trying to cancel motor vehicles. I enjoy driving my car and I'm a foreign student in The Netherlands. I hate the fact that the roads are so small and whenever you say you enjoy driving your car, everyone looks at you with hate.
- jamincan 5y agoI think part of the problem is that car manufacturers do an extremely good job of reducing noise inside the car. When I'm driving my car, I scarcely hear the noise around me. If I'm running alongside the same street, though, I need noise-cancelling headphones just to hear a podcast. As long as manufacturers can limit the effects of the noise on the driver, there is little incentive for them to limit the noise to the environment in general.
- oxplot 5y agoIt was only after owning a Tesla that I realized how much of the noise from a car comes from its engine, and not the tires. I'd ballpark around 80%, especially at city speeds (less than 50 km/h).
- bbielsa 5y agoBefore you convince yourself that you are doing the world a favor by driving a “quiet” car you should probably watch the video where he explicitly debunks this.
- bhelkey 5y agoCould you link this video? My experience has been that electric vehicles are significantly quieter than ice vehicles. Edit: Are you referring to this video? He mentions electric cars being too quiet at low speeds and reasonably noisy at high speeds. I would imagine that speeds inside a city should be low, no?
- bbielsa 5y agoIn his small scale test (which I admit is far from perfect at isolating sources of sound), he shows that both ICE and electric cars are both way louder than bikes. And both types of cars still have extremely loud horns. His thesis is that high background noise of cities makes people agitated and make cities uncomfortable places to live. So, yes, while electric cars do have no engine noise they still contribute massively to noise pollution and that awful constant hum of tires that engulf cities.
- oxplot 5y agoI’m talking about my own experience comparing an electric car and a gasoline car at low speeds. EVs being significantly quieter is already well established and we have laws for EVs to make extra noise to alert pedestrians.