3 ms·

I live in Norway now (ex US) (BTW: One of the world's biggest producers of oil and natural gas (fossile fuels)) It is a country with winters filled with slipp

I live in Norway now (ex US) (BTW: One of the world's biggest producers of oil and natural gas (fossile fuels)) It is a country with winters filled with slippery ice at least in the south, and lots of steep hills up and down up and down. The ER stats for broken hip bones and other injuries during the winter is high. The ice is a much bigger factor than cold or snow when evaluating walking or biking It is possible to bike all year round. But very few people do it. and I think for good reason. I did it for 2 years and I am never doing it again. Yes you can get studded bike tires and they help but no. Politicians here keep talking about Norway as if we are Spain. (With enough global warming from the fossile fuels produced perhaps?) Let us be good for the environment and walk and bike everywhere. Like they do in Amsterdam. Meanwhile public transit in Oslo is good, and well used. But the buses and trains are stuffed like sardins in a can. during rush hours. I wish they would stop spending major money on constructing bike paths and allocating more and more of the road to bikes, and instead invest heavily in improving and expanding public transit. Since it is useful for nearly all of the population all year around. Since Norway is investing heavily in EV busses, the trains are electric as are the trams, increasing the number of busses, allowing people to breathe in rush hour would not have any noticeable impact on emissions. I would rather see many more lanes for public transit only than the same space being built for bikes only. With a population of 700.000, the capital Oslo, seems at most 3.000 brave bikers during the winter. (less than 0.5%) This is easy to calculate since the city have signs that measure the number of bikers that pass them 24h a day. There is a Finish town that the newspapers like to cover in how people ride their bikes there all year around. Joensuu. ""Meet the bike-loving Finnish city that keeps pedaling even in the snow"" It is blessed by being flat, by having a youngish population, and a consistently below freezing winter. (Which means much less of an ice problem). Even there only 7% ride their bikes in the winter. Since Oslo will remain outstandingly non flat, and be covered in ice during good parts of the winter, I dont see the advantage of spending on bike infrastructure over public transit. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-loving-finnish-city-that-keeps-pedalling-even-in-the-snow https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-... https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2020/feb/08/why-finland-leads-the-field-when-it-comes-to-winter-cycling https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2020/feb/0...

grecy 3y ago
I biked to work every day for 4 years in Whitehorse, Yukon. (~61 deg North). It was -40 for a couple of months a year, plenty of ice. Whitehorse actually has the highest rate of bike commuters of anywhere in Canada, though that is likely just because everyone there is nuts about the outdoors. Studded tires were great, and I loved riding. It was more fun in the winter than summer.
Skinney 3y ago
> I wish they would stop spending major money on constructing bike paths and allocating more and more of the road to bikes, and instead invest heavily in improving and expanding public transit. Since it is useful for nearly all of the population all year around. They are, though. That’s where most of the money goes. All the trams are being replaced with higher capacity trams. Additional trams are being purchased as well. When this process is finished, Oslo will have doubled the tram capacity. A new metro tunnel is in construction between Fornebu and Majorstua, which will greatly reduce the need for buses on that stretch (it’s one of the most active public transit routes). The metro signal system is being replaced as well. When done, subway trains can travel closer to each other, increasing capacity on the same infrastructure. When it comes to bikes. Bike infrastructure is cheap. Most of the bike lanes come at the expense of roads to regular cars, not other public transport. It’s also become more popular with electric assist on bikes to help with the uneven terrain and, sadly, winters are only getting shorter. Bikes are becoming more popular. But most of the money, and people, are still going to public transportation.
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
I cycle like 1,000 miles a year, in UK, and last winter broke a few bones. Not sure I am doing that again. I feel cycling advocates get some strange tunnel vision, we can have other mobility solutions. Perhaps one that is more stable on ice. Current EU law is stupid - if it has pedals, it’s a bicycle even with 4 wheels, but a small scooter is an illegal motorised vehicle.
- ryukafalz 3y ago
  > I feel cycling advocates get some strange tunnel vision, we can have other mobility solutions. In my case it's because we already have decently good public transit in my area, but next to no cycle infrastructure. So I advocate mostly for the latter. That doesn't mean I don't think public transport is important too, they're a great combination - I cycle to the train station near me all the time! Public transport tends to have a last-mile problem and cycling is a great way around it. The two are additive.

grecy 3y ago

I biked to work every day for 4 years in Whitehorse, Yukon. (~61 deg North). It was -40 for a couple of months a year, plenty of ice. Whitehorse actually has the highest rate of bike commuters of anywhere in Canada, though that is likely just because everyone there is nuts about the outdoors. Studded tires were great, and I loved riding. It was more fun in the winter than summer.

Skinney 3y ago

> I wish they would stop spending major money on constructing bike paths and allocating more and more of the road to bikes, and instead invest heavily in improving and expanding public transit. Since it is useful for nearly all of the population all year around. They are, though. That’s where most of the money goes. All the trams are being replaced with higher capacity trams. Additional trams are being purchased as well. When this process is finished, Oslo will have doubled the tram capacity. A new metro tunnel is in construction between Fornebu and Majorstua, which will greatly reduce the need for buses on that stretch (it’s one of the most active public transit routes). The metro signal system is being replaced as well. When done, subway trains can travel closer to each other, increasing capacity on the same infrastructure. When it comes to bikes. Bike infrastructure is cheap. Most of the bike lanes come at the expense of roads to regular cars, not other public transport. It’s also become more popular with electric assist on bikes to help with the uneven terrain and, sadly, winters are only getting shorter. Bikes are becoming more popular. But most of the money, and people, are still going to public transportation.

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

I cycle like 1,000 miles a year, in UK, and last winter broke a few bones. Not sure I am doing that again. I feel cycling advocates get some strange tunnel vision, we can have other mobility solutions. Perhaps one that is more stable on ice. Current EU law is stupid - if it has pedals, it’s a bicycle even with 4 wheels, but a small scooter is an illegal motorised vehicle.

ryukafalz 3y ago
> I feel cycling advocates get some strange tunnel vision, we can have other mobility solutions. In my case it's because we already have decently good public transit in my area, but next to no cycle infrastructure. So I advocate mostly for the latter. That doesn't mean I don't think public transport is important too, they're a great combination - I cycle to the train station near me all the time! Public transport tends to have a last-mile problem and cycling is a great way around it. The two are additive.