5 ms·

In theory, but that would also require changing how/where many people live (which would require a lot of construction which would require energy and concrete -

In theory, but that would also require changing how/where many people live (which would require a lot of construction which would require energy and concrete - both bad things for the environment). I’m thinking over my schedule today and needing to drive the kids places, often many miles away in different directions, plus going to work, running errands with multiple people, etc. Both a bike and a trike would be wildly inappropriate. Especially where I live where it rains steadily for 9 months of the year. A car is the only practical way to move around without somehow either having fewer people to move around, moving the places we need to go closer together, changing the weather or moving to a drier climate, etc. Frankly I would love it if that was a reality and everything was within easy walking or biking distance, but it simply doesn’t match reality as things are currently built.

micromacrofoot 4y ago
A cargo ebike is a game changer for all of this. I can bring 2 kids to school and do a full grocery trip without even breaking a sweat. I do 6 miles each way and since I avoid traffic it's just as fast as driving. Plenty of people bike all 4 seasons, the Netherlands is the go-to example... it rains a lot there. Driving to work under-dressed in a heated box is a luxury that's kind of harmed a lot of people's ability to know how to dress for the weather. It's not particularly difficult.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  >A cargo ebike is a game changer for all of this Not so long as a "never in a lifetime on average" crash remains an acceptable justification to spend tens of thousands of dollars it's not. And that's ignoring weather and convenience.
  - micromacrofoot 4y ago
    > Not so long as a "never in a lifetime on average" crash What does this mean?
    - svnt 4y ago
      People justify purchasing large vehicles with their fear of being hit by one.
  - bertil 4y ago
    > "never in a lifetime on average" crash That’s a strong argument against SUVs, a type of vehicle that is notoriously dangerous because drivers can’t see children in front of their hood. It also flips over and kills people inside at minor incidents. Cargo bikes don’t have those issues.
    - TheCapeGreek 4y ago
      It's an arms race - cargo bikes might not have those issues, but for one of those types of crashes I'd sure rather not be on a bike.
      - adrianN 4y ago
        That's why I only leave the house to step into my Marauder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic I think every other vehicle should be banned.
    - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
      >flips over and kills people inside at minor incidents. >a strong argument against SUVs This kind of hubris to think you can plan the exact details of the market for a product followed up by cognitive dissonance when it doesn't work out drives me up the wall. The SUVs back in the day when they were becoming a thing had fine visibility, great even by modern standards. Then you people said they rolled over too much and were too unsafe so they grew wide to be stable and they got thick bodies and doors and strong pillars and high belt-lines to be strong and nobody could see out of them. And then you people backed over your kids. And then we got backup cameras and all sorts of tech. And now you people complain the screens are distracting and un-ergonomic. You see the pattern here? Just stop trying to tell everyone else what's good for them and then force it on them and we wouldn't have this problem. Want me to do zoning too? Because it's basically the same story.
      - micromacrofoot 4y ago
        who is “you people” here
- jgilias 4y ago
  Good for you! My needs are: - have place for a family of four, two of which are small children; - be something I can use with said family in -15 Celsius; - Be able to be used for a 200km trip weekly with said family; I have an EV.
  - wpm 4y ago
    - two cargo bikes, each ridden by each adult - layers, and canopies for aforementioned e-bikes - train Of course, speaking in the ideal. Just because the car has been the only option for so long doesn't mean it's replacement has to replace every trip either.
    - hellweaver666 4y ago
      I'm a family of five, three kids and my wife and I and we commute around using this method all the time. I do on average 20-30km per day on week days and a little less on the weekend. My 12 year old son bikes along side me on his own bike. If it rains, we put on waterproof clothes. As the Dutch say "we're not made of sugar!". When we need to visit another city (or other parts of Europe) we jump on the train!
      - guzik 4y ago
        "We're not made of sugar" - seems it is a popular proverb around the world.
      - manscrober 4y ago
        EVs might be less efficient, but not by multiple orders of magnitude. A google search indicates about 5.8 to 125 Wh/km per person. I don't think traveling with trains changes the overall travel time by much, even though they do go faster, and a Tesla with 2 people will probably use about 100Wh/km per person. I think bicycles certainly have a place in the Netherlands, with actively car-hostile policy, a very high population density and hardly any distance longer than 300km; but any nationality that enjoys their personal space will probably be better of with something else. I do wonder if rails or road are more efficient ecologically and economically. I've been wondering about smaller-and-slower-than-airliner planes or even eVTOLs, since they don't need a lot of infrastructure and the physics are surprisingly efficient. The technology isn't there yet but sooner or later I don't think flying is a bad idea. A small 4-seater airplane uses about 10-20 liters of fuel per 100km at faster speeds and more direct travel than a car, and if legislation allowed barrier-less mass-use and thus mass-production, planes wouldn't cost much more to the end user.
- goatlover 4y ago
  You can't be serious. It's great it works for you. An ebike isn't a serious replacement for cars used by families in most of the world.
  - mikem170 4y ago
    > An ebike isn't a serious replacement for cars used by families in most of the world. "Most of the world" is a big place. Are there more cars or mopeds in the world? I assume that the typical family in Asia has either a scooter or no vehicle, so an ebike would be an improvement for them. Probably the same for Africa and a lot of South America. I'm confident that numerically there are more families without cars in the world than with. I mention this to demonstrate that most of the world doesn't have cars, and they get along ok. Such a thing is not impossible.
  - micromacrofoot 4y ago
    It's understandable that you're having a hard time imagining it because you live in a car-centric society, but "most of the world" is objectively wrong here. There are roughly 1.4bn cars in the world for 7.8bn people... so most people get around without one. You can see it if you travel a bit, in India and China you'll see families getting around on bikes and scooters. Over 1/3 of the Dutch use a bike as their primary means of transportation. People often cite weather as a reason not to, but if the Finnish can regularly use bikes to get around (another European country with high bike use)... nearly anyone can.

micromacrofoot 4y ago

A cargo ebike is a game changer for all of this. I can bring 2 kids to school and do a full grocery trip without even breaking a sweat. I do 6 miles each way and since I avoid traffic it's just as fast as driving. Plenty of people bike all 4 seasons, the Netherlands is the go-to example... it rains a lot there. Driving to work under-dressed in a heated box is a luxury that's kind of harmed a lot of people's ability to know how to dress for the weather. It's not particularly difficult.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago
>A cargo ebike is a game changer for all of this Not so long as a "never in a lifetime on average" crash remains an acceptable justification to spend tens of thousands of dollars it's not. And that's ignoring weather and convenience.
- micromacrofoot 4y ago
  > Not so long as a "never in a lifetime on average" crash What does this mean?
  - svnt 4y ago
    People justify purchasing large vehicles with their fear of being hit by one.
- bertil 4y ago
  > "never in a lifetime on average" crash That’s a strong argument against SUVs, a type of vehicle that is notoriously dangerous because drivers can’t see children in front of their hood. It also flips over and kills people inside at minor incidents. Cargo bikes don’t have those issues.
  - TheCapeGreek 4y ago
    It's an arms race - cargo bikes might not have those issues, but for one of those types of crashes I'd sure rather not be on a bike.
    - adrianN 4y ago
      That's why I only leave the house to step into my Marauder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic I think every other vehicle should be banned.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    >flips over and kills people inside at minor incidents. >a strong argument against SUVs This kind of hubris to think you can plan the exact details of the market for a product followed up by cognitive dissonance when it doesn't work out drives me up the wall. The SUVs back in the day when they were becoming a thing had fine visibility, great even by modern standards. Then you people said they rolled over too much and were too unsafe so they grew wide to be stable and they got thick bodies and doors and strong pillars and high belt-lines to be strong and nobody could see out of them. And then you people backed over your kids. And then we got backup cameras and all sorts of tech. And now you people complain the screens are distracting and un-ergonomic. You see the pattern here? Just stop trying to tell everyone else what's good for them and then force it on them and we wouldn't have this problem. Want me to do zoning too? Because it's basically the same story.
    - micromacrofoot 4y ago
      who is “you people” here
jgilias 4y ago
Good for you! My needs are: - have place for a family of four, two of which are small children; - be something I can use with said family in -15 Celsius; - Be able to be used for a 200km trip weekly with said family; I have an EV.
- wpm 4y ago
  - two cargo bikes, each ridden by each adult - layers, and canopies for aforementioned e-bikes - train Of course, speaking in the ideal. Just because the car has been the only option for so long doesn't mean it's replacement has to replace every trip either.
  - hellweaver666 4y ago
    I'm a family of five, three kids and my wife and I and we commute around using this method all the time. I do on average 20-30km per day on week days and a little less on the weekend. My 12 year old son bikes along side me on his own bike. If it rains, we put on waterproof clothes. As the Dutch say "we're not made of sugar!". When we need to visit another city (or other parts of Europe) we jump on the train!
    - guzik 4y ago
      "We're not made of sugar" - seems it is a popular proverb around the world.
    - manscrober 4y ago
      EVs might be less efficient, but not by multiple orders of magnitude. A google search indicates about 5.8 to 125 Wh/km per person. I don't think traveling with trains changes the overall travel time by much, even though they do go faster, and a Tesla with 2 people will probably use about 100Wh/km per person. I think bicycles certainly have a place in the Netherlands, with actively car-hostile policy, a very high population density and hardly any distance longer than 300km; but any nationality that enjoys their personal space will probably be better of with something else. I do wonder if rails or road are more efficient ecologically and economically. I've been wondering about smaller-and-slower-than-airliner planes or even eVTOLs, since they don't need a lot of infrastructure and the physics are surprisingly efficient. The technology isn't there yet but sooner or later I don't think flying is a bad idea. A small 4-seater airplane uses about 10-20 liters of fuel per 100km at faster speeds and more direct travel than a car, and if legislation allowed barrier-less mass-use and thus mass-production, planes wouldn't cost much more to the end user.
goatlover 4y ago
You can't be serious. It's great it works for you. An ebike isn't a serious replacement for cars used by families in most of the world.
- mikem170 4y ago
  > An ebike isn't a serious replacement for cars used by families in most of the world. "Most of the world" is a big place. Are there more cars or mopeds in the world? I assume that the typical family in Asia has either a scooter or no vehicle, so an ebike would be an improvement for them. Probably the same for Africa and a lot of South America. I'm confident that numerically there are more families without cars in the world than with. I mention this to demonstrate that most of the world doesn't have cars, and they get along ok. Such a thing is not impossible.
- micromacrofoot 4y ago
  It's understandable that you're having a hard time imagining it because you live in a car-centric society, but "most of the world" is objectively wrong here. There are roughly 1.4bn cars in the world for 7.8bn people... so most people get around without one. You can see it if you travel a bit, in India and China you'll see families getting around on bikes and scooters. Over 1/3 of the Dutch use a bike as their primary means of transportation. People often cite weather as a reason not to, but if the Finnish can regularly use bikes to get around (another European country with high bike use)... nearly anyone can.