3 ms·

Car pollute, are extremely dangerous to other road users, and take a lot of space on the road. Cars in city should be the exception, not the rule.

throwawaysea 5y ago
> pollute I consider the level of pollution to be minimal. It’s not even noticeable in many US cities. Plus this is also always improving, particularly with increasing popularity of hybrids and electric cars. > extremely dangerous to other road user First off, “extremely dangerous” is hyperbole. The number of fatalities on roads is very low, and it will keep getting lower as safety features like blind spot monitoring become standards. Roads are already incredibly safe - in the US the fatality rate is something like 1 per 100 million vehicle miles. But safety is also why roads should be reserved for motorized vehicles. Your assertion also seems very one sided. Safety is a two way thing - a substantial portion of bikers put themselves in danger by riding where they really shouldn’t. > take a lot of space on the road They also provide a lot of utility, which is why taxpayers funded roads and parking spaces to begin with. I, and I suspect most people, don’t mind using space for things that are high value, like cars.
- jon_n 5y ago
  > I consider the level of pollution to be minimal. It’s not even noticeable in many US cities. Transport is one of the highest contributors to greenhouse gases in the US with light vehicles being the largest contributor to that sector https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10127TU.pdf https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10127TU.pdf >The number of fatalities on roads is very low, Road traffic crashes are a leading cause of death in the United States for people aged 1–54 https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index... > and it will keep getting lower as safety features like blind spot monitoring become standards. The rate has been pretty stagnant for the last 10 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... > the US the fatality rate is something like 1 per 100 million vehicle miles. This is true, but this number needs context. Average US driver covers 13k a year * by a lifetime of driving your over 1/2 a million miles per person, so the number you should be presenting is 1 in 200 chance to die. And thats just fatalities, when you consdier serious injury as well, the number isn't great. > I suspect most people, don’t mind using space for things that are high value, like cars. Was with you until "like cars". Cars waste a lot of space. They take up space in city centres, parked, while you're working/shopping, when you're actually in them they're still using a lot of space for typically one person. I think we'll see a lot more of this in the coming decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway_removal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway_removal
maccolgan 5y ago
>take a lot of space on the road That's the point, cars deliver a lot of personal space & comfort that really make it attractive vis a vis public transport.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  Try Cambridge in England just once. The commuter gridlock is appalling. On a bicycle you could just zip by the madness, and you don't even need much fitness.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - maccolgan 5y ago
    Cambridge is hardly a modern city, with any form of space anyway.
    - HarryHirsch 5y ago
      In Cambridge there are housing estates from the mid-19th century, and there are housing estates developed this century. That statement is just not true.

throwawaysea 5y ago

> pollute I consider the level of pollution to be minimal. It’s not even noticeable in many US cities. Plus this is also always improving, particularly with increasing popularity of hybrids and electric cars. > extremely dangerous to other road user First off, “extremely dangerous” is hyperbole. The number of fatalities on roads is very low, and it will keep getting lower as safety features like blind spot monitoring become standards. Roads are already incredibly safe - in the US the fatality rate is something like 1 per 100 million vehicle miles. But safety is also why roads should be reserved for motorized vehicles. Your assertion also seems very one sided. Safety is a two way thing - a substantial portion of bikers put themselves in danger by riding where they really shouldn’t. > take a lot of space on the road They also provide a lot of utility, which is why taxpayers funded roads and parking spaces to begin with. I, and I suspect most people, don’t mind using space for things that are high value, like cars.

jon_n 5y ago
> I consider the level of pollution to be minimal. It’s not even noticeable in many US cities. Transport is one of the highest contributors to greenhouse gases in the US with light vehicles being the largest contributor to that sector https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10127TU.pdf https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10127TU.pdf >The number of fatalities on roads is very low, Road traffic crashes are a leading cause of death in the United States for people aged 1–54 https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/injury/features/global-road-safety/index... > and it will keep getting lower as safety features like blind spot monitoring become standards. The rate has been pretty stagnant for the last 10 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... > the US the fatality rate is something like 1 per 100 million vehicle miles. This is true, but this number needs context. Average US driver covers 13k a year * by a lifetime of driving your over 1/2 a million miles per person, so the number you should be presenting is 1 in 200 chance to die. And thats just fatalities, when you consdier serious injury as well, the number isn't great. > I suspect most people, don’t mind using space for things that are high value, like cars. Was with you until "like cars". Cars waste a lot of space. They take up space in city centres, parked, while you're working/shopping, when you're actually in them they're still using a lot of space for typically one person. I think we'll see a lot more of this in the coming decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway_removal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway_removal

maccolgan 5y ago

>take a lot of space on the road That's the point, cars deliver a lot of personal space & comfort that really make it attractive vis a vis public transport.

HarryHirsch 5y ago
Try Cambridge in England just once. The commuter gridlock is appalling. On a bicycle you could just zip by the madness, and you don't even need much fitness.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- maccolgan 5y ago
  Cambridge is hardly a modern city, with any form of space anyway.
  - HarryHirsch 5y ago
    In Cambridge there are housing estates from the mid-19th century, and there are housing estates developed this century. That statement is just not true.