• juliebean@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    one thing they don’t mention in this article, is that bikes also cause essentially no wear and tear on road surfaces compared to cars and trucks, and re-paving is a pretty oil intensive and expensive process. the long term oil savings of reducing car usage in favor of bikes should therefore be even greater than their numbers suggest.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They also just need less street to begin with because they take up less space. Considering that it’s the ‘need’ to shoehorn in wide roads and parking lots that makes places car-dependent in the first place, the positive impact of more people switching to bikes is even greater than “even greater!”

    • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not only are bikes a great way to get you killed on roads near me, ebikes are illegal on roads here. I would totally commute on one if I could.

        • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          In your comment you speak of policy but your only way forward is putting it on the individual. The individual must try alternate methods of transportation. The individual must not drive to the corner store. I’m saying this individual cannot do those things. You didn’t propose any policy changes, you just said you’re angry at individuals who don’t do the things you want them to do. Being a jerk to people who can’t do the things you would like them to do isn’t going to convince them to try harder.

          • bluGill@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Different places have different problems, so stating it is all policy or all individuals is both wrong. If you live where ebikes are not legal, then there is a policy problem. If you live where ebikes are legal, but they are not safe to use then there are policy problems. If you live where their are safe bike paths but they don’t connect to anything you have a policy problem. If ebikes are legal and safe, but people think they are not safe/legal then there is an individual problem.

  • lntl@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    they’re illegal on the US interstate system. i don’t say this because i think riding from Chicago to NYC on a ebike would be fun or is a good idea but because lots of people use the interstate to go one of two exits from the suburbs into the city.

    the interstate system needs a bike lane

    • bassad@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, or a nice “green lane” separated from interstate but as efficient.

      In Europe we layed out intercity bikelanes on secondary roads, it is very efficient as there are less traffic lights than roads.

      Plus, I would prefer not to breathe gas vapors and tires wear during my daily commute, especially with kids to bring to school or activities

      • lntl@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In America, we layed out highways to segregate and displace minorities and maximize economic gains related to the consumption of oil.

    • CCatMan@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Riding a bike on I-95 would be miserable due to the noise and wind, but also amazing biking past all the traffic.

  • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    NGL I’m really close to convincing myself to buy an electric bike

    In all honesty I’ll probably do it this spring once there’s less ice

    The cycling infrastructure sucks where I’m at so weather is something I have to factor for

    But even riding it only 2-3 days a week it’d pay for itself surprisingly quickly in gas savings

    • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      How far do you travel and how much is your gas that you’re going to save 5 or $600 quickly on 2-3 days a week?

      • bluGill@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is reasonable to save $5/day on gas alone. So $1000/5 = 200 days, or 100 weeks. That is just on gas savings alone, you will save on maintenance costs as well.

        If you can get rid of a car completely, then there is much more because you are not paying insurance and license fees (these are generally fixed costs that you pay even if you don’t drive), and most people don’t have a paid off car so even more savings (plus the income from selling the car).

        Note that I said sell one car, not all cars. Most families have more than one car, so bikes can enable you to keep one car for those trips where the bike won’t work, and be majority bike. (this is important to point out as you don’t want people to feel like there is a war on their cars)]

        I haven’t tried to quantify the health benefits of a bike, but they are there too.

  • Onihikage@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    One other nice thing about electric bikes is they’re extremely simple, enough that a moderately savvy individual can convert an ordinary bike into an e-bike with a kit from Bafang or other manufacturers. Converting a gas car to electric is much more complex, expensive, and time-consuming.