this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
489 points (94.5% liked)

Bicycles

3146 readers
13 users here now

Welcome to !bicycles@lemmy.ca

A place to share our love of all things with two wheels and pedals. This is an inclusive, non-judgemental community. All types of cyclists are accepted here; whether you're a commuter, a roadie, a MTB enthusiast, a fixie freak, a crusty xbiking hoarder, in the middle of an epic across-the-world bicycle tour, or any other type of cyclist!

Community Rules

Other cycling-related communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Evkob@lemmy.ca
489
Cycling is ten times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities (theconversation.com)
submitted 11 months ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/bicycles@lemmy.ca
122 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Globally, only one in 50 new cars were fully electric in 2020, and one in 14 in the UK. Sounds impressive, but even if all new cars were electric now, it would still take 15-20 years to replace the world’s fossil fuel car fleet.

The emission savings from replacing all those internal combustion engines with zero-carbon alternatives will not feed in fast enough to make the necessary difference in the time we can spare: the next five years. Tackling the climate and air pollution crises requires curbing all motorised transport, particularly private cars, as quickly as possible. Focusing solely on electric vehicles is slowing down the race to zero emissions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] QuaffPotions@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago (2 children)

As an avid bicyclist who tried their best to live car-free: it's easier said than done for anyone living in the US. I used to make 7 mile commutes to work, even in winters that could go below zero some days. It's doable, but it wasn't easy either. I completely sympathize with anyone who wouldn't want to bike in those conditions, even if a whole bunch of people do so in places like Finland.

But the worst part is the infrastructure. Motor vehicles dominate everywhere. Motorists are routinely hostile to bicyclists. Despite my best efforts to be safe, I've had multiple close calls and was once nearly rear-ended by someone who was going about 50 mph. Technically I did get hit - I had veered to the right just in time to feel the side of their car brush on the side of me. Miraculously suffered no injury, and only one of the support bars on the rear rack had been dented in.

Point is, unless the infrastructure changes, I would never expect others to switch to biking. It is dangerous.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Exactly, we should be pouring money into infrastructure, not electric car subsidies. Make cars less important and emissions will go down.

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

The only public infrastructure the US will fund is to prop up the military industrial complex and the car industry.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 8 points 11 months ago

I love downhill mountain biking. There is no way I'd ever be biking in the road with cars. It's too damn dangerous. If you crash mountain biking, you are usually wearing armor and the crash is usually at less than 25mph and into dirt and bushes. Not quite the same in heavy traffic with people not paying attention :p

Big fan of rail networks though, and our city is taking steps to improve heavy and lighter rail options, even if it's not exactly perfect yet.

I'd love to see even more rail options in a euro-style circular rail network with multiple concentric rings, more pedestrian/bike/bus only roads, and a greater emphasis on public infrastructure investment (fun stuff like pools, parks, and stuff to get people moving).