4 ms·

> Now a last misconception is that this ban is bad because people will revert to cars. No they won't. In the first place, people riding rental e-scooters do not

• Fradow 4y ago
  That one is specifically for Paris as seen by a Parisian. I would not argue that's the case globally, and there are certainly studies showing otherwise in other contexts. Usage of e-scooter and e-bikes decreases car traffic yes. But does banning rental e-scooter (not personal e-scooters, and not e-bikes) lead to an increase in car traffic? In Paris, I argue that no it won't, or if it does it will be negligible. > There are other points though, "last mile" is a difficult problem That's not true in Paris. Paris has very good public transportation. There are bus and subway stations everywhere. It's not the case outside of Paris intra-muros, but here I'm specifically talking about Paris intra-muros, because the ban only apply to that location. > it's not solved with rental bicycles either (they are usually very few and far between). That's not true in Paris. The city rental bicycles are omnipresent and cheap. Even though I own a good bike, I use those as well, in cases I don't want to take my own bike. And there are other rental e-bikes (by the same company that do rental e-scooters) In general, personal e-scooters are considered fine. Their owners don't behave nearly as bad as rental e-scooters. The speed limit, as far as I know, is the same for any e-bike/e-scooter: 25km/h. Otherwise it's in a different class (same as a moped) and is no longer allowed on bike lanes (which doesn't prevent people from doing so, but so far they are few and far between).
• bombcar 4y ago
  > There are other points though, "last mile" is a difficult problem "Last mile" is literally solved with two legs and some shoes. A mile is walked in 15-30 minutes, and if you can scooter you can walk. The actually mobility-challenged can be provided vehicles if necessary.
  • dijit 4y ago
    I mean, it's not, because if the options are too time consuming too uncertain and/or too inconvenient people will move further away and buy a car (then expect that everywhere they go to have open roads and 12sqm of open space wherever they decide to stop). To break down what you're suggesting, imagine 20-25 minutes walk to the train station, 10 minutes waiting for the train (you want to be early if it's an infrequent train!), 30 minutes on a train, 20-25 minutes walk on the other side. For what looks like a quick walk and a "comfortable" 30 minute train journey you're suddenly realising that a lot of your day has gone. Somewhere in the region of 1hr20m - 1.5hrs~ has gone to your "30 minute" commute, and that's twice a day. You could reduce both walks, and instead: bike or scooter (which are roughly three times faster on average) that journey collapses from 1h20m (in the best case) to under an hour for the worst case... (6-8.5 mins or so for each last-mile instead of 20-25) And I mean, do this twice a day?... For a month? That's 16 hours saved. Last mile is not solved by ignoring it and telling people they have legs, that logic is what boomers use to tell us we're all living wrong for having a lifestyle that isn't revolving around servitude and living to work..
    • bombcar 4y ago
      The problem down that argument, is if we go by time alone, the car wins almost every time (there are a few cities with certain commutes that are faster by transit, but not many, even WITH traffic jams).
      • dijit 4y ago
        not really. theres a sweet zone. almost no journeys inside the city of malmo are faster with a car if you include parking too, nearly all are faster with a bicycle — and its not even close most of the time