4 ms·

Electric cars powered with renewables solves that problem somewhat.

mellavora 4y ago
Yes, noting the "powered with renewables" aspect. and keeping in mind that any 1 ton plus vehicle is going to take substantial energy to move around (vs, say, an ebike).
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > take substantial energy to move around (vs, say, an ebike). e-bikes are an alternative to cars the same way wheelbarrows are an alternative to trucks. they are different means of transportation, for different purposes. I don't own a car and I try to use cars as less as possible, but every time I need to use one, an e-bike would be useless. When an e-bike could be useful, I can walk or use public transports.
  - 411111111111111 4y ago
    > they are different means of transportation, for different purposes. Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home. This is a need that could likely be fulfilled by an E-Bike just as well, unless the route is unreasonably long. so while the initial statement is true, the conclusion you drew from it is false -- at least from the perspective of society.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home Anecdotal evidence is no evidence. Cars and bikes are complementary, not alternatives. Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home too, they travel 100 kms a day on an highway from one side to the other of the city. If they had to go by bike, they had to be pro bikers, which they are very far from. Even if they took the road through the city, which is shorter, they would have to climb a few steep hills (you know, Rome it's not flat like Amsterdam and it's huge). Starting from now there'll be 35-40 degrees celsius in Rome until august, not really the best climate to bike, also considering that arriving all sweaty at work and having to shower and change is not exactly what "most people" want do or can do. They could, however, use the public transport. That would solve the issue. Bike would not. > the conclusion you drew from it is false -- at least from the perspective of society. Show me the proof that on average what you say it's true and I'll consider it. In my country average commute time is 30 minutes, only in Milan, 1.5 million residents, the subway moves 400 million passengers/year. Also in Italy there are around 10 thousand electric scooter on rental, in the past two years there have been already 2.000 incidents, mostly self inflicted. Put those 400 million passengers / year on bikes and the next month ER rooms will look like the COVID 19 period. To convince them to bike for 30 minutes under heavy rain, or scorching sun or uphiil, it would mean forcing them. Cities are already bikeable, but most people prefer not to, because biking is not the best way to move for many people. If they wanted to do it, they already would. I think if you speak about society, bikers are some of the worst offender of common spaces, if you'll ever come to Milan I'll show you why that's the case. One example above all: they protested for the bike lane, the city made the bike lane, they are not using it because they "don't like it" and now they bike on the sidewalk. And they also think they have the right to. At that point it's far too easy to prefer car drivers, at least they don't drive where it's clearly signaled that the space is pedestrians only.
      - 7952 4y ago
        Cars and bikes are a bad solution to long commutes. The best solution is short commutes or WFH. In that situation bikes are fine and even cars are less bad.
        bluGill 4y ago
        The problem with short commutes is most people are part of what we call a "family". Most have two people with jobs. The shorter the commute the harder it is for both to find a job within range. WFH is nice for those who can do it, but there are a lot of jobs that cannot be done from home.
        peoplefromibiza 4y ago
        > Cars and bikes are a bad solution to long commutes Yes, exactly. Long commutes are the problem. > The best solution is short commutes or WFH. In that situation bikes are fine and even cars are less bad Except for traffic jams, I agree. The more time people spend on the road, the more accidents are going to happen. It's true for cars, bikes, mopeds, motorbikes, but not for walking or using the subway. So every time a person says "we should all be cyclist" is only expressing an opinion, not a fact! -------- For those who want some crude numbers. Stop here if not interested -------- An e-bike that goes 20-25mph in a park full of people, it's actually more dangerous than a moped at the same speed, also because mopeds don't access to pedestrian areas usually. In my country every year a report on pedestrian accidents is released. The most recent issue is about year 2019, that says: - 352 bikes were in accidents involving a pedestrian, they killed one and injured 366 of them. - 325 mopeds in the same period killed no one, injured 271. - 1,831 motorbikes killed 26 people and injured 2,131 But there are 7 million motorbikes, going around every day, while bikes are only 1.5 million and most of them aren't used daily. E-bikes are basically mopeds, but are statistically more dangerous than mopeds for pedestrian and have a death rate that's only 20% of the deaths by motorbikes, that are much heavier (15x) and can run a lot faster (10x). If there were as many bikes as motorbikes (4.6x) it's possible to predict at least 352 * ( 7 / 1.5) = 5 deaths and 1,685 injured people. Add that a safe +20% If they traveled for as long as motorbikes (5 days a week instead of 1 or 2), and you get 2.022 injured and 6 deaths, worrisome numbers if you ask me. Also, due to COVID-19 and people ordering delivery more than ever (usually delivered by bike), Milan have seen an increment on bike accidents of 30% year on year, in the face of only a 7% increase of traveled distances. In this case it can't even be said it's because of cars, cars could hardly run during the lock downs!
  - RobertoG 4y ago
    That's true, but it seems to me that, in many circumstances, people are using a truck when all they need is a wheelbarrow.

Yes, noting the "powered with renewables" aspect. and keeping in mind that any 1 ton plus vehicle is going to take substantial energy to move around (vs, say, an ebike).

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> take substantial energy to move around (vs, say, an ebike). e-bikes are an alternative to cars the same way wheelbarrows are an alternative to trucks. they are different means of transportation, for different purposes. I don't own a car and I try to use cars as less as possible, but every time I need to use one, an e-bike would be useless. When an e-bike could be useful, I can walk or use public transports.
- 411111111111111 4y ago
  > they are different means of transportation, for different purposes. Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home. This is a need that could likely be fulfilled by an E-Bike just as well, unless the route is unreasonably long. so while the initial statement is true, the conclusion you drew from it is false -- at least from the perspective of society.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home Anecdotal evidence is no evidence. Cars and bikes are complementary, not alternatives. Most people I know mainly use their car to get to work and back home too, they travel 100 kms a day on an highway from one side to the other of the city. If they had to go by bike, they had to be pro bikers, which they are very far from. Even if they took the road through the city, which is shorter, they would have to climb a few steep hills (you know, Rome it's not flat like Amsterdam and it's huge). Starting from now there'll be 35-40 degrees celsius in Rome until august, not really the best climate to bike, also considering that arriving all sweaty at work and having to shower and change is not exactly what "most people" want do or can do. They could, however, use the public transport. That would solve the issue. Bike would not. > the conclusion you drew from it is false -- at least from the perspective of society. Show me the proof that on average what you say it's true and I'll consider it. In my country average commute time is 30 minutes, only in Milan, 1.5 million residents, the subway moves 400 million passengers/year. Also in Italy there are around 10 thousand electric scooter on rental, in the past two years there have been already 2.000 incidents, mostly self inflicted. Put those 400 million passengers / year on bikes and the next month ER rooms will look like the COVID 19 period. To convince them to bike for 30 minutes under heavy rain, or scorching sun or uphiil, it would mean forcing them. Cities are already bikeable, but most people prefer not to, because biking is not the best way to move for many people. If they wanted to do it, they already would. I think if you speak about society, bikers are some of the worst offender of common spaces, if you'll ever come to Milan I'll show you why that's the case. One example above all: they protested for the bike lane, the city made the bike lane, they are not using it because they "don't like it" and now they bike on the sidewalk. And they also think they have the right to. At that point it's far too easy to prefer car drivers, at least they don't drive where it's clearly signaled that the space is pedestrians only.
    - 7952 4y ago
      Cars and bikes are a bad solution to long commutes. The best solution is short commutes or WFH. In that situation bikes are fine and even cars are less bad.
      - bluGill 4y ago
        The problem with short commutes is most people are part of what we call a "family". Most have two people with jobs. The shorter the commute the harder it is for both to find a job within range. WFH is nice for those who can do it, but there are a lot of jobs that cannot be done from home.
      - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
        > Cars and bikes are a bad solution to long commutes Yes, exactly. Long commutes are the problem. > The best solution is short commutes or WFH. In that situation bikes are fine and even cars are less bad Except for traffic jams, I agree. The more time people spend on the road, the more accidents are going to happen. It's true for cars, bikes, mopeds, motorbikes, but not for walking or using the subway. So every time a person says "we should all be cyclist" is only expressing an opinion, not a fact! -------- For those who want some crude numbers. Stop here if not interested -------- An e-bike that goes 20-25mph in a park full of people, it's actually more dangerous than a moped at the same speed, also because mopeds don't access to pedestrian areas usually. In my country every year a report on pedestrian accidents is released. The most recent issue is about year 2019, that says: - 352 bikes were in accidents involving a pedestrian, they killed one and injured 366 of them. - 325 mopeds in the same period killed no one, injured 271. - 1,831 motorbikes killed 26 people and injured 2,131 But there are 7 million motorbikes, going around every day, while bikes are only 1.5 million and most of them aren't used daily. E-bikes are basically mopeds, but are statistically more dangerous than mopeds for pedestrian and have a death rate that's only 20% of the deaths by motorbikes, that are much heavier (15x) and can run a lot faster (10x). If there were as many bikes as motorbikes (4.6x) it's possible to predict at least 352 * ( 7 / 1.5) = 5 deaths and 1,685 injured people. Add that a safe +20% If they traveled for as long as motorbikes (5 days a week instead of 1 or 2), and you get 2.022 injured and 6 deaths, worrisome numbers if you ask me. Also, due to COVID-19 and people ordering delivery more than ever (usually delivered by bike), Milan have seen an increment on bike accidents of 30% year on year, in the face of only a 7% increase of traveled distances. In this case it can't even be said it's because of cars, cars could hardly run during the lock downs!
- RobertoG 4y ago
  That's true, but it seems to me that, in many circumstances, people are using a truck when all they need is a wheelbarrow.