I've given up my car for over a year now. I put roughly 200 miles on my bike every month, and I utilize transit when unwilling/unable to bike. It's very stress-free not needing to park/store, insure, and maintain a machine that largely sits idle. I can do most bike maintenance myself, and for anything I can't manage myself, there's a half-dozen bike mechanics within a 10 minute bus ride of my apartment.
Don't know where you live, but in many of the places I have lived it would not be stress-free owning a bike considering how often they get stolen and how little the police care.
fwiw, a stolen bike is about 500usd to replace (i have my dad's 1970s Schwinn as a backup for when i am doing maintenance or loaned out my daily rider) vs a stolen car... i know a half-dozen people who've had their kia or hyundai cars stolen in the last 2 years, usually the car is completely totalled, one of those people had their same car stolen 3 separate times before it was finally totalled, and in some cases a friend (doordasher) lost their job and then housing due to not having transportation.
How do you get the groceries? Just buy a day or two's worth at a time?
In Holland (and in fact much of Europe) huge malls are rare, cities a structured as shops intermingled with housing. In fact it's often shops on the ground floor, housing above them. So buying a day or two's groceries one the trip home is a matter of turning into a door on the way home.
Also they have "cargo bikes", which is a push bike designed like a kangaroo (google it). The cargo space in the front is mum's taxi, used for groceries and kid transportation.
How do you keep from stinking all the time?
Holland and many of these places are cool and flat. But if you go to Asia it's the same deal. I don't recall anyone stinking there.
I used to ride a motorcycle in the US and other drivers were dangerous as hell. It's even worse for bicyclists. How do you deal with that?
No one travels far (because of the city design described in 1st para), so no one has to travel fast. Literally. In places like the USA and Australia even the push bikes move at 20..30km/hr. Not in these places. It's one of the things that stick out when you visit, actually. In non-bike countries the bikes you do see are fancy, the riders dress in Lycra to suit the sporty image, and they ride fast. But in bike countries the bikes are boring, people ride them sedately, and women in evening dress on a push bike is a common sight [0]. Push bike accidents do happen all the time, but aren't serious because of the low speeds.
Another way to explain your puzzlement: Cities in Australia, Canada and USA are designed for cars. Cities in other places are designed for bikes and walking. These are two Nash equilibrium's to the transport problem. Once a system has settled into a Nash equilibrium it's very hard to change. So in a place designed for cars, riding a push bike is taking ones life into your own hands so everyone buys a car. In a place designed for push bikes, trying to drive a car is an exercise in frustration: you drive as slow as a push bike, and there is nowhere to park when you get there. You are living in one Nash equilibrium, but there is another. Try travelling for a bit.
Try googling "airbag bicycle helmet". They are a thing. Why are they a thing? Initially it was because a traditional bicycle helmet mess with a woman's hair do, and these things are worn around the neck. When you are dressed to the nine's riding your bike to the opera, you don't want your hair messed up after all. But it turns out they are safer than regular helmets.
i cook a decent amount, because it's easier to get bulk stuff that fits in my combo pannier-backpack from the grocers, than say frozen pizzas or boxes of cereal. even eggs seem to have less spoilage due to transport by bike than via car!
i live in Minneapolis, so when it's hot i just take it a little easier so as to not work up a sweat, and in the winter biking is shockingly warming (i am consistently surprised to be able to bike in subzero temps with my normal jacket, jeans and long underwear on)
as for automobile drivers, it's kinda a combo of defensive driving tactics, along with knowing bike lanes, bike boulevards, and parkways. (bryant ave and the midtown greenway are pretty nifty for all cardinal directions of travel)
Because the wear and tear of a bicycle on a road is anywhere near that of a car? Roads would last forever if they only had bicycles on them.
A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) determined that the road damage caused by a single 18-wheeler was equivalent to the damage caused by 9,600 cars. ... The study found that essentially, road damage was related to the 4th power of the relative loads.
https://www.denenapoints.com/relationship-vehicle-weight-roa...
Interesting. EV are 10 to 20% heavier than a comparable ICE vehicle. So, if we follow this 4th power law, an EV impact on the road would be 50 to 100% more than its equivalent ICE. For me that's yet another new data to factor in the equation EV vs ICE.
Basically all of that's a rounding error compared to commercial traffic (heavy trucks). They're heavily subsidized by non-commercial drivers, and a Tesla being 20% heavier than a Mustang (or whatever) isn't really making a big difference in that balance.
Commercial traffic is basically the consumer goods be it groceries or ipads, so taxing it is basically a sales tax which is almost always regressive against the poor.
The worst offender here is cyclists, who eat up road space and then buy goods offloaded from 18 wheeler, massively transferring axle weight portion of damage cost to the poor dude in beat up civic.
A road, totally unused, still requires construction and maintenance. Even simple walkway last 50-100 years. My claim is not the cost of cycle only road would be the same, it is the free-riding aspect vs cost to build and maintain cycling road.
What you're citing is only the fraction from axle weight, exclusive of other damage impactful including weathering.
You would only need to build it once and not resurface and pave it every 5-10 years. So yes we'd still need people to pay for roads.
But for the current roads we already paid for, the average car is apparently around 4100 lbs whereas the average bicycle weight is 30 lbs, so 30^4/4100^4 means that a bicyclist should be paying around 1/350,000,000 of the cost comparable to the average car driver... so litterally a rounding error down to zero.
Again you've fallen into fallacy of excluding weathering and construction costs not 4th order to axle weight. Your calc safely discarded.
But wait, it's even worse. Cyclists and drivers are benefactors of 18 wheelers. So the cyclist is the worst of all. He gets same benefit of 18 wheelers bringing him goods while offloading unequal axle damage costs on car drivers taxes. Cyclist is ultimate leech in this equation you present.
No I'd say we have a moral imperative to auction off the roads for privatization to let market force us to efficient transport options and more accurately capture their costs. I believe this will also reduce pedestrian and bike fatalities by pushing people to smaller vehicles and stuff like commuter rail.
Car drivers don't pay for the damage that 18-wheelers do to the roads in any different way than bike drivers.
When taxes are approximated as first to second order of weight and damage is fourth, the calculus is lower weight cars are shouldering unequal cost of 18 wheelers vs everyone else including cyclist consumers. Effectively part of this is shouldered of free riding cyclists consumption of 18 wheeler goods.
Comments
I've given up my car for over a year now. I put roughly 200 miles on my bike every month, and I utilize transit when unwilling/unable to bike. It's very stress-free not needing to park/store, insure, and maintain a machine that largely sits idle. I can do most bike maintenance myself, and for anything I can't manage myself, there's a half-dozen bike mechanics within a 10 minute bus ride of my apartment.
I've also never been healthier.
Don't know where you live, but in many of the places I have lived it would not be stress-free owning a bike considering how often they get stolen and how little the police care.
Minneapolis, MN!
fwiw, a stolen bike is about 500usd to replace (i have my dad's 1970s Schwinn as a backup for when i am doing maintenance or loaned out my daily rider) vs a stolen car... i know a half-dozen people who've had their kia or hyundai cars stolen in the last 2 years, usually the car is completely totalled, one of those people had their same car stolen 3 separate times before it was finally totalled, and in some cases a friend (doordasher) lost their job and then housing due to not having transportation.
Few questions:
How do you get the groceries? Just buy a day or two's worth at a time?
How do you keep from stinking all the time?
I used to ride a motorcycle in the US and other drivers were dangerous as hell. It's even worse for bicyclists. How do you deal with that?
Serious questions, not being sarcastic.
Yes I get groceries from popping into the whole foods one block away, or get them delivered from amazon fresh or whole foods.
You don’t really sweat on an ebike.
It’s trivial when you live in a dense city where drivers don’t feel entitled. They are rather respectful of pedestrians and cyclists here.
In Holland (and in fact much of Europe) huge malls are rare, cities a structured as shops intermingled with housing. In fact it's often shops on the ground floor, housing above them. So buying a day or two's groceries one the trip home is a matter of turning into a door on the way home.
Also they have "cargo bikes", which is a push bike designed like a kangaroo (google it). The cargo space in the front is mum's taxi, used for groceries and kid transportation.
Holland and many of these places are cool and flat. But if you go to Asia it's the same deal. I don't recall anyone stinking there.
No one travels far (because of the city design described in 1st para), so no one has to travel fast. Literally. In places like the USA and Australia even the push bikes move at 20..30km/hr. Not in these places. It's one of the things that stick out when you visit, actually. In non-bike countries the bikes you do see are fancy, the riders dress in Lycra to suit the sporty image, and they ride fast. But in bike countries the bikes are boring, people ride them sedately, and women in evening dress on a push bike is a common sight [0]. Push bike accidents do happen all the time, but aren't serious because of the low speeds.
Another way to explain your puzzlement: Cities in Australia, Canada and USA are designed for cars. Cities in other places are designed for bikes and walking. These are two Nash equilibrium's to the transport problem. Once a system has settled into a Nash equilibrium it's very hard to change. So in a place designed for cars, riding a push bike is taking ones life into your own hands so everyone buys a car. In a place designed for push bikes, trying to drive a car is an exercise in frustration: you drive as slow as a push bike, and there is nowhere to park when you get there. You are living in one Nash equilibrium, but there is another. Try travelling for a bit.
Try googling "airbag bicycle helmet". They are a thing. Why are they a thing? Initially it was because a traditional bicycle helmet mess with a woman's hair do, and these things are worn around the neck. When you are dressed to the nine's riding your bike to the opera, you don't want your hair messed up after all. But it turns out they are safer than regular helmets.
i cook a decent amount, because it's easier to get bulk stuff that fits in my combo pannier-backpack from the grocers, than say frozen pizzas or boxes of cereal. even eggs seem to have less spoilage due to transport by bike than via car!
i live in Minneapolis, so when it's hot i just take it a little easier so as to not work up a sweat, and in the winter biking is shockingly warming (i am consistently surprised to be able to bike in subzero temps with my normal jacket, jeans and long underwear on)
as for automobile drivers, it's kinda a combo of defensive driving tactics, along with knowing bike lanes, bike boulevards, and parkways. (bryant ave and the midtown greenway are pretty nifty for all cardinal directions of travel)
Even after factoring those risks in, cyclists on average live longer than non-cyclists.
As well as people who drinks expensive whiskey
If everyone does that the system collapsed, as you're free riding on gas and registration fees that fund road you bike on.
Because the wear and tear of a bicycle on a road is anywhere near that of a car? Roads would last forever if they only had bicycles on them.
A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) determined that the road damage caused by a single 18-wheeler was equivalent to the damage caused by 9,600 cars. ... The study found that essentially, road damage was related to the 4th power of the relative loads. https://www.denenapoints.com/relationship-vehicle-weight-roa...
Interesting. EV are 10 to 20% heavier than a comparable ICE vehicle. So, if we follow this 4th power law, an EV impact on the road would be 50 to 100% more than its equivalent ICE. For me that's yet another new data to factor in the equation EV vs ICE.
Basically all of that's a rounding error compared to commercial traffic (heavy trucks). They're heavily subsidized by non-commercial drivers, and a Tesla being 20% heavier than a Mustang (or whatever) isn't really making a big difference in that balance.
Commercial traffic is basically the consumer goods be it groceries or ipads, so taxing it is basically a sales tax which is almost always regressive against the poor.
The worst offender here is cyclists, who eat up road space and then buy goods offloaded from 18 wheeler, massively transferring axle weight portion of damage cost to the poor dude in beat up civic.
what are your thoughts on road shoulder parking lanes?
A road, totally unused, still requires construction and maintenance. Even simple walkway last 50-100 years. My claim is not the cost of cycle only road would be the same, it is the free-riding aspect vs cost to build and maintain cycling road.
What you're citing is only the fraction from axle weight, exclusive of other damage impactful including weathering.
You would only need to build it once and not resurface and pave it every 5-10 years. So yes we'd still need people to pay for roads.
But for the current roads we already paid for, the average car is apparently around 4100 lbs whereas the average bicycle weight is 30 lbs, so 30^4/4100^4 means that a bicyclist should be paying around 1/350,000,000 of the cost comparable to the average car driver... so litterally a rounding error down to zero.
If you look at Chernobyl (search "Chernobyl parking lot" https://www.vecteezy.com/photo/3732091-pripyat-ukraine-2021-... ) you'll see even 40 years later with no care paving is actually completely usable.
Again you've fallen into fallacy of excluding weathering and construction costs not 4th order to axle weight. Your calc safely discarded.
But wait, it's even worse. Cyclists and drivers are benefactors of 18 wheelers. So the cyclist is the worst of all. He gets same benefit of 18 wheelers bringing him goods while offloading unequal axle damage costs on car drivers taxes. Cyclist is ultimate leech in this equation you present.
So your argument is that we have a moral imperative to drive cars in order to pay taxes to support the roads that are mainly damaged by... cars?
As opposed to simply changing the tax code to better reflect road usage and wear and tear?
No I'd say we have a moral imperative to auction off the roads for privatization to let market force us to efficient transport options and more accurately capture their costs. I believe this will also reduce pedestrian and bike fatalities by pushing people to smaller vehicles and stuff like commuter rail.
Weathering is marginal as the Chernobyl photos are proof of.
Car drivers don't pay for the damage that 18-wheelers do to the roads in any different way than bike drivers.
When taxes are approximated as first to second order of weight and damage is fourth, the calculus is lower weight cars are shouldering unequal cost of 18 wheelers vs everyone else including cyclist consumers. Effectively part of this is shouldered of free riding cyclists consumption of 18 wheeler goods.
Weathering varies widely by climate. Drive around Michigan in the early Spring and look how badly damaged the roads are due to frost heaves.
I have a feeling we would change the tax structure long before the system "collapsed".
Car infrastructure is stupidly expensive. The dutch save SO much money by building simple bike paths.
Hurr durr you guddurn hippies not paying your ROAD TAX