14 ms·
I'm inclined to suggest that cyclists have the right to be entitled assholes (with the exception of not yielding to pedestrians). On the grand scale of things,
by anonporridge 4y ago
I'm inclined to suggest that cyclists have the right to be entitled assholes (with the exception of not yielding to pedestrians).
On the grand scale of things, cyclists, even the lazy e-cyclists, are actually doing their part to contribute to a climate change solution, unlike the extraordinarily lazy and entitled drivers who refuse to modify their lifestyles to actually do something real to reduce their carbon impact.
Even EVs pale in comparison to e-bikes for the actual contribution they make to reducing carbon emissions (especially since half of a car's lifetime emissions comes from its production).
There's also some evidence that when you account for the energy cost of calories from food and its associate carbon emissions that ebikes are actually drastically better than regular bikes in terms of distance traveled per unit energy used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport#Table_Overview https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport.... So your degrading language of lazy ebike riders might be completely misaligned with reality. And that's not even considering the possibility that ebikes enable drastically more biking and less driving since they make the choice to bike rather than drive much more palatable for more people and situations. e.g. I can do a full Costco run on my ebike and cart home 50lbs of product no problem. If I only had a regular bike, I'd be drastically more likely to make that shopping trip in a car.
Drivers are the assholes in city life and should entirely submit and yield to cyclists while bowing to thank them for their service for our collective environment. A service drivers themselves are too weak or selfish to participate in.
- socialismisok 4y agoThe fact that electric bikes might be more energy efficient than regular bikes is wild, but makes sense. And I've been able to replace probably 60% of my car trips with bike trips so far, and I'm still a fairly novice biker. It's amazing how much even a small cargo bike can haul.
- anonporridge 4y agoWhat's even more wild is that even regular cycling is double the energy efficient as walking. And ebikes are 5x more energy efficient than walking.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoDepends what you mean by ebike Something the same weight as a regular bike with a 250W motor doing the same speed is vastly more efficient. A LEV with accessory pedals doing double the speed with 2kWh of battery is at best a wash and likely requires 1000s of trips to break even on the embodied energy.
- kevincox 4y agoIn my mind yielding should be based on the relative efficiency of the transportation. Mass public transit should have priority, then bikes, then pedestrians. Cars should obviously be last. Of course this shouldn't be all the time. Even when this is the system in general people should follow rules and take their turn to keep everyone safe.
- jraph 4y agoI would prefer pedestrians > cyclists > tramways > bus > cars. - Pedestrians are the most vulnerable and should be protected. Also most people are supposedly regularly pedestrians so it seems it would benefit everyone to have them prioritized. They also don't usually form uninterrupted flows like bikes or cars can. - Then, bikes are very efficient and quite vulnerable. - Then, I really want public transport to be as smooth as possible and cars should be discouraged (if not forbidden except for specific good reasons), especially the ones that only have one or two people in them, so tramways and bus should always be prioritized. - Tramways should win against buses, they also don't usually form uninterrupted flows and we want them to be fast. I believe a really efficient public transport is very important for a working city, and cars are usually the only thing forming continuous streams and are, I think, the only reason we have traffic and traffic lights.