Why don't you cycle?

[Trainbike46]

Often there's issues with poor policy related to cycling, however articles like this (arguing that there should be less cycle parking in London) don't help:

Office cycle bays risk being spectacular 'eco-own goal'

An industry group has warned that London's cycling policy is harming the environment, with too many cycle bays and not enough cyclists.

www.cityam.com

Basically they say there's a carbon cost to building cycle parking and this is increasing carbon emissions.

However there's a few things they argue which don't help their case.

First up they say the cycle parking is set at about 1 space per five people, yet argue this is over provision as only 32% of people live within 10km of where they work.

Given that 32% is virtually the same as 1 in 3 that's appears to be a weak argument.

They also complain about how each parking space requires 1.29 tonnes of carbon to provide, however given that these will be there for the lifespan of the building, the per km addition to those cycling is going to be low, even if the spaces are under used.

Let's say that there's 3 spaces for each cycle which uses them and the building lasts for 15 years and the cyclist travels 2km each way to get to work (all fairly low values). That would be 12,000km (based on 200 days of work) or 32g per km.

Currently a large EV but built in Sweden (where they use a green energy for the production) and charging from solar (so almost as green as you can get) produce 33g per km.

And of course, if you did a fair comparison and included the fact that the car would also need a parking spot, which also would produce carbon to construct, the bike would win by a massive margin.

Unless they're doing something really weird, I can't imagine a parking space could be constructed in London for less CO2 emissions per square metre than the bike parking spaces, and given you can easily fit 5 bike parking spaces in the space of a single car parking space, the bike would have lower emissions even if we only considered the emissions from parking provision.

 

[Krokodil]

And of course, if you did a fair comparison and included the fact that the car would also need a parking spot, which also would produce carbon to construct, the bike would win by a massive margin.

As it's London I imagine that the default assumption is that people arrive via public transport.

 

[The Ham]

And of course, if you did a fair comparison and included the fact that the car would also need a parking spot, which also would produce carbon to construct, the bike would win by a massive margin.

Unless they're doing something really weird, I can't imagine a parking space could be constructed in London for less CO2 emissions per square metre than the bike parking spaces, and given you can easily fit 5 bike parking spaces in the space of a single car parking space, the bike would have lower emissions even if we only considered the emissions from parking provision.

I wasn't trying to do a fair comparison, if I was I would probably look at a 25+ year design life for the building.

 

[MoominAndChips]

I don't cycle because someone stole my bike!

Again.

Getting your bike nicked is practically a requirement for citizenship here (Oulu, Finland), but twice?!

This place is world-famous for its cycling infrastructure, so there are no excuses from a safety standpoint. But since I've moved to within five minutes' walk of work, and the supermarket's on the way, I just haven't felt the need to replace the bike.

 

[johncrossley]

I don't cycle because someone stole my bike!

What sort of locks do people in Finland use? Do people always lock to a fixed object? I was really surprised that Dutch bike insurance pays out even if only a rear wheel lock is used.

 

[MoominAndChips]

What sort of locks do people in Finland use? Do people always lock to a fixed object? I was really surprised that Dutch bike insurance pays out even if only a rear wheel lock is used.

It varies widely, though it does seem that most people trust the rear wheel locks for something like popping into the shop. I suppose "safety in numbers" is the idea.

When mine got nicked, they were chained up, one to railings and one to a bike rack. Proper beefy chain as well.

My friend once chained her bike to a bollard and wondered why I thought it was funny, until I lifted the chain over and started riding her bike away!

 

[brad465]

Debris, leaves, overgrown vegetation are all very common reasons that cycle paths go unused. Other countries treat them like proper roads and salt/grit them, cut away vegetation and use small roadsweepers. We (usually*) don't.

* I have seen a small sweeper on a cycle lane and it stood out with me thinking 'is it lost?'. Not anywhere near where I live though.

I've also heard that since so few cyclists use dedicated cycle paths, a lot of debris gets scattered across the cycle paths such that any cyclist using it would soon get punctures, hence they don't use them. So yes, probably an idea with good intentions, but a waste of money.

Putting this into a more sensible thread:

As a prominent road cyclist this is one of my main gripes with cycle lanes. I would add that bike tyres are not powerful enough to scatter debris (being thin and are usually moving slower), so even if they were well used, cars and larger vehicles would still send stuff into the cycle lanes. In contrast, a number of cycle paths well away from roads, particularly ones following old railway lines, in my experience are not so bad.

Shared cycle paths next to roads are also something I usually avoid, because they are the worst of everything. Oncoming cyclists are a recipe for an accident, especially if a sudden hazard emerges that leads to one inadvertently swerving into another; I know a cyclist who has a metal implant in their arm after a bone-breaking crash because of such an accident. Then all the minor roads/driveways that paths intersect are extra collision risk points, plus pedestrians walking in the cycle part of the path, and the aforementioned debris being a puncture hazard.

 

[DM352]

We have shared pathways and they work when people play by the rules. It is 20kph and you ring a bell to let pedestrians know.

What does happen is people jog but many with headphones so they don't hear the bell, walk dogs with what appears to be a 50m tape measure leash and users going double/triple file with starbucks cups!

Of late there have been an assortment of derestricted e-scooters/skateboards with some users wearing motorcycle helmets which would be a cyclist hospital visit for a head on.

 

[The Ham]

Putting this into a more sensible thread:

As a prominent road cyclist this is one of my main gripes with cycle lanes. I would add that bike tyres are not powerful enough to scatter debris (being thin and are usually moving slower), so even if they were well used, cars and larger vehicles would still send stuff into the cycle lanes. In contrast, a number of cycle paths well away from roads, particularly ones following old railway lines, in my experience are not so bad.

Shared cycle paths next to roads are also something I usually avoid, because they are the worst of everything. Oncoming cyclists are a recipe for an accident, especially if a sudden hazard emerges that leads to one inadvertently swerving into another; I know a cyclist who has a metal implant in their arm after a bone-breaking crash because of such an accident. Then all the minor roads/driveways that paths intersect are extra collision risk points, plus pedestrians walking in the cycle part of the path, and the aforementioned debris being a puncture hazard.

I suspect that the move towards having more "stepped cycleways" (where the cycle lanes are 50mm higher than the road and 50mm lower than the footway) will help with reducing issues with debris in cycle lanes, especially as the cycle lane will also likely fall towards the road.

 

[Via Bank]

I suspect that the move towards having more "stepped cycleways" (where the cycle lanes are 50mm higher than the road and 50mm lower than the footway) will help with reducing issues with debris in cycle lanes, especially as the cycle lane will also likely fall towards the road.

The really good ones are the ones with substantial buffers between the track and carriageway - be they kerbs or rain gardens or even loading bays or bus stops.

 

[The Ham]

The really good ones are the ones with substantial buffers between the track and carriageway - be they kerbs or rain gardens or even loading bays or bus stops.

Indeed.

 

[aavm]

Why don't I cycle any more? Realised that undertaking lorries on Hammersmith gyrotery on a regular basis wasn't likely to end well. Not having a garage or hallway to conveniently store my bike. Too many crazy drivers around (Bad enough in a steel cage). Used to do one ways with trains in my youth.

 

[Bikeman78]

I have been meaning to post these for weeks. This is what passes for a cycle lane in Cardiff. Not too bad here in the first picture but still a bit narrow for vehicles to pass at a safe distance in lane one.



From this point forward, it's basically useless. They just painted the bike lane onto lane one without changing any other road markings, so lane one is too narrow for any vehicle without driving in the cycle lane.



The cycle lane ends where the silver car is emerging from the left. Given the massive wide pavement, the cycle lane would be better there.

 

[johncrossley]

View attachment 178334
I have been meaning to post these for weeks. This is what passes for a cycle lane in Cardiff. Not too bad here in the first picture but still a bit narrow for vehicles to pass at a safe distance in lane one.


View attachment 178335
From this point forward, it's basically useless. They just painted the bike lane onto lane one without changing any other road markings, so lane one is too narrow for any vehicle without driving in the cycle lane.


View attachment 178336
The cycle lane ends where the silver car is emerging from the left. Given the massive wide pavement, the cycle lane would be better there.

It is crackers that a mere broken white line used to be considered adequate cycle infrastructure. That was probably put in over 20 years ago. At least nowadays there is an understanding that you need proper segregation for a busy road like that.

 

[JamesT]

It is crackers that a mere broken white line used to be considered adequate cycle infrastructure. That was probably put in over 20 years ago. At least nowadays there is an understanding that you need proper segregation for a busy road like that.

Oh, I wish that was true. I give you this particular delight of a cycle lane, which was put in less than 3 years ago. The road is barely wide enough for buses to pass each other, never mind trying to squeeze another lane in.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl