3 ms·

> Cars and bikes don't mix except when cars are going bicycle speed. Which is why infrastructure in cities should not mix cyclists and cars. That is the real r

> Cars and bikes don't mix except when cars are going bicycle speed. Which is why infrastructure in cities should not mix cyclists and cars. That is the real reason why cycling is safer in the Netherlands with separate bicycle paths and bicycle traffic signal.

bluecalm 2y ago
I don't agree. Some of the safest places to cycle have about 0 infrastructure. What matters are driving culture, speed limits (and enforcement of those) as well as lesser numbers of "modern" cars on roads (cause those have bad visibility, a lot of distractions and too much insulation causing people to underestimate their speed.
- scott_w 2y ago
  Given the person cited the Netherlands, a nation widely lauded and know for its excellent infrastructure and low pedestrian/cyclist deaths, I’m going to need you to cite some evidence here. And no, I’m not going to accept statistics showing a small town in the middle of nowhere is safer. It’s self evident that you’ll not get run over in a place where there are no cars to run you over.
  - bluecalm 2y ago
    I don't know why you think Netherlands is known for ow pedestrian/cycling deaths. Here is some data: https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-07/facts_figures_cyclists_final_20210323.pdf https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021... You can say more people cycle in Netherlands but then a lot of people cycle in Spain or Northern Italy as well and those are more populous countries/regions. It's just very hard to get data that include all factors but the data we do get is not so good for Netherlands. I have cycled in many EU countries and in many areas of those as well. I am 500+ hours on the bike throughout the year and talk to a lot of people who do the same. This is experience worth more than some stereotypes about Netherlands being good for cyclists or whatever. What is good for cyclists are drivers who are careful, don't speed and respect your right to be on the road. This is why Spain doesn't have as many cycling deaths even though tons of people cycle there. It would be even more apparent if you split Spain into regions. Same with Italy (North is good, South not so much). Poland gets quite a bit of cycling infrastructure now (because that's the only way to get EU funding for roads for cars - what the government really wants). The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. People die and get hurt because of it every day. It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". Now when you have both the data and words of someone who is actually experiencing it every day are you willing to reconsider?
    - scott_w 2y ago
      > Now when you have both the data and words of someone who is actually experiencing it every day are you willing to reconsider? No because the data has a gaping hole: it records cyclist deaths per capita, not cyclist deaths per cyclist. The UK looks “good” but cyclist uptake is like 1% compared to Dutch uptake which is FAR MORE than 1%. You expect more people to die doing a thing if more people do a thing. Dutch cyclists are also more common than Spanish cyclists, again so you’d expect to see higher numbers. There’s no breakdown by country and by other party involved in there. Just separate charts, so you can’t say more drivers are running over more cyclists because it’s just not in the data. Also, I’ve experienced cycling in different European countries and you don’t need 500 hours to see the stark difference between countries that get it and countries that don’t. > The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. This doesn’t surprise me, most countries are shit at it. > It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". This is the law in the UK. Read some Twitter threads and you’ll see drivers don’t appreciate it. The only thing keeping us safe is cameras with good police enforcement.
    - Mawr 2y ago
      Oh my. First of, the statistics you point to are terrible. It's not the first time I've seen EU statistics on cycling be utterly incompetent either, it's weird. Anyhow: "Although there are no data available at EU level on the trend in cycling kilometres travelled, it is widely recognized that cycling has increased in popularity over the past decade." There you go, the entire dataset is invalid. As a curiosity, please point your attention to the graph of the distribution of fatalities over age categories. > It's just very hard to get data that include all factors but the data we do get is not so good for Netherlands. The data is easily accessible and robust: [1] [2]. > This is experience worth more than some stereotypes about Netherlands being good for cyclists or whatever. Relatively to basically everywhere else, the Netherlands is good for cyclists. That's a fact, not a stereotype. > Poland gets quite a bit of cycling infrastructure now (because that's the only way to get EU funding for roads for cars - what the government really wants). The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. People die and get hurt because of it every day. It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". If the infrastructure is terrible, the solution is to make it not terrible. Changing laws is a lazy, ineffectual cop-out. It is always more effective to change the infrastructure. Regular people are not going to be cycling amidst vehicles. --- [1]: https://english.kimnet.nl/publications/publications/2023/11/30/summary-mobility-report-2023 https://english.kimnet.nl/publications/publications/2023/11/... [2]: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2024/03/06/cycling-safety-in-the-netherlands-understanding-the-challenges-and-searching-for-solutions/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2024/03/06/cycling-safety...

bluecalm 2y ago

I don't agree. Some of the safest places to cycle have about 0 infrastructure. What matters are driving culture, speed limits (and enforcement of those) as well as lesser numbers of "modern" cars on roads (cause those have bad visibility, a lot of distractions and too much insulation causing people to underestimate their speed.

scott_w 2y ago
Given the person cited the Netherlands, a nation widely lauded and know for its excellent infrastructure and low pedestrian/cyclist deaths, I’m going to need you to cite some evidence here. And no, I’m not going to accept statistics showing a small town in the middle of nowhere is safer. It’s self evident that you’ll not get run over in a place where there are no cars to run you over.
- bluecalm 2y ago
  I don't know why you think Netherlands is known for ow pedestrian/cycling deaths. Here is some data: https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-07/facts_figures_cyclists_final_20210323.pdf https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021... You can say more people cycle in Netherlands but then a lot of people cycle in Spain or Northern Italy as well and those are more populous countries/regions. It's just very hard to get data that include all factors but the data we do get is not so good for Netherlands. I have cycled in many EU countries and in many areas of those as well. I am 500+ hours on the bike throughout the year and talk to a lot of people who do the same. This is experience worth more than some stereotypes about Netherlands being good for cyclists or whatever. What is good for cyclists are drivers who are careful, don't speed and respect your right to be on the road. This is why Spain doesn't have as many cycling deaths even though tons of people cycle there. It would be even more apparent if you split Spain into regions. Same with Italy (North is good, South not so much). Poland gets quite a bit of cycling infrastructure now (because that's the only way to get EU funding for roads for cars - what the government really wants). The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. People die and get hurt because of it every day. It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". Now when you have both the data and words of someone who is actually experiencing it every day are you willing to reconsider?
  - scott_w 2y ago
    > Now when you have both the data and words of someone who is actually experiencing it every day are you willing to reconsider? No because the data has a gaping hole: it records cyclist deaths per capita, not cyclist deaths per cyclist. The UK looks “good” but cyclist uptake is like 1% compared to Dutch uptake which is FAR MORE than 1%. You expect more people to die doing a thing if more people do a thing. Dutch cyclists are also more common than Spanish cyclists, again so you’d expect to see higher numbers. There’s no breakdown by country and by other party involved in there. Just separate charts, so you can’t say more drivers are running over more cyclists because it’s just not in the data. Also, I’ve experienced cycling in different European countries and you don’t need 500 hours to see the stark difference between countries that get it and countries that don’t. > The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. This doesn’t surprise me, most countries are shit at it. > It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". This is the law in the UK. Read some Twitter threads and you’ll see drivers don’t appreciate it. The only thing keeping us safe is cameras with good police enforcement.
  - Mawr 2y ago
    Oh my. First of, the statistics you point to are terrible. It's not the first time I've seen EU statistics on cycling be utterly incompetent either, it's weird. Anyhow: "Although there are no data available at EU level on the trend in cycling kilometres travelled, it is widely recognized that cycling has increased in popularity over the past decade." There you go, the entire dataset is invalid. As a curiosity, please point your attention to the graph of the distribution of fatalities over age categories. > It's just very hard to get data that include all factors but the data we do get is not so good for Netherlands. The data is easily accessible and robust: [1] [2]. > This is experience worth more than some stereotypes about Netherlands being good for cyclists or whatever. Relatively to basically everywhere else, the Netherlands is good for cyclists. That's a fact, not a stereotype. > Poland gets quite a bit of cycling infrastructure now (because that's the only way to get EU funding for roads for cars - what the government really wants). The infrastucture is terrible and dangerous. People die and get hurt because of it every day. It would be much better to just change the law to: "cyclist can be on the road whenever they please and can take the lane when they think it's for their safety". If the infrastructure is terrible, the solution is to make it not terrible. Changing laws is a lazy, ineffectual cop-out. It is always more effective to change the infrastructure. Regular people are not going to be cycling amidst vehicles. --- [1]: https://english.kimnet.nl/publications/publications/2023/11/30/summary-mobility-report-2023 https://english.kimnet.nl/publications/publications/2023/11/... [2]: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2024/03/06/cycling-safety-in-the-netherlands-understanding-the-challenges-and-searching-for-solutions/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2024/03/06/cycling-safety...