The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
I’ll get downvoted being in this community, but in extreme climates where it goes down to - 30 Celsius and has up to 230cm of snow a season, bikes don’t work.
Fall Spring summer, sure.
Laughs in Edmonton.
You’ll get down voted, but mostly for being wrong.
Laughs in Edmonton.
Love seeing this, Montréal needs to step up it’s winter cycling game
Tell that to Finland.
This is another version of the comment people are mocking. ‘Ah, but in this incredibly extreme situation, bikes are inefficient!’ Yeah, I know, mate. I wasn’t planning on biking to the south pole with a fridge on my back, was I? The point is not that bikes are the best solution for every single journey any human has made or will ever make, but that cars aren’t the best solution the vast majority of the time.
You haven’t been to Minnesota apparently, bike culture there is strong even in deep winter
That’s why cities in such climates also need really good public transit systems.
If you can clear the roads for cars you can do the same for bikes.
I’d be keen to know your (or others) experience of biking and driving in those conditions because in my experience cars aren’t well suited to those temperatures either. I don’t have direct experience of biking in that low but I know people who do and they swear by it.
Of course you could throw fuel at it and keep your car running all the time to stop it from freezing. 😷
https://www.rbth.com/lifestyle/329955-russia-cars-extreme-frosts
Anyway as others have said no one is actually saying cycling is the solution for all extreme use cases that’s a strawman.
I throw studded tires on my bike in about 15 minutes and go about my day as normal. It takes about 30-60 minutes to do the same to my car and I’m sore for a couple days after. Also, unless I’m driving 5+ miles, the car is usually slower or equal in time for the commute. The bike is faster and far easier to maintain. The commute isn’t much different, but I’m forced to ride sidewalks because my city plows into the bike lanes. Maybe if I had a car with heated seats, I’d miss the car.
On the bike, I fall probably once per season, but that’s always the result of doing something reckless like jumping over a small snow bank or riding into large chunks of ice that I should have gone around.
They work better than cars do. Not long ago on my bike commute in a blizzard I had to keep getting off to help get stuck cars moving again, then if happily ride off…
And handling the cold is easier when riding than walking to and waiting for trains and buses because you generate your own heat. People ski in those conditions. It’s just a matter of the right clothes and equipment and not being soft as fuck.
Similar experience here. Bike commuted year around for a decade and went through multiple blizzards. Helped more drivers get unstuck than i can count
Frequently did the commute sub-zero. If you have the gear it isn’t that bad. And i never had to worry about my bike not starting.
Montrealer here. When roads are unplowed, cars also struggle. When it’s too cold, cars also struggle.
I live at the top of a gentle slope and as soon as it starts snowing, cars are slipping and sliding down the slope. There’s even a famous video of exactly this kind of thing, with cars, buses, police and snow plows just sliding down the slope.
Cars need very well maintained roads to work in winter. Those roads can also be used by bikes. And if you plow bike paths and bike lanes, just like we do for cars, cycling in winter is usually no big deal. Sometimes while cars are slipping down I can observe cyclists being able to climb the same slope. Or they just push the bike up on foot and continue on their way.
I use my bike in winter and can assure you that it is working.
Addendum: I am a simple man. When is starts snowing I just sit by my window and watch cars struggle to go uphill. In fact, I record it.
Also, just to continue on your points. It’s not -30C every day and snow here is usually plowed within a few hours, AND removed within a few days. Extreme weather is extreme, and one should avoid driving in during heavy snowfall anyway. So either you’re on a bike, or in a car that you must dig out of a snow bank, or using public transit, if the weather is extreme, everyone is going to have a less than perfect day.
Ok, I guess some people are willing to bike in extreme weather.
I’ve never tried it, but I don’t think I’d like to be out in -30 + windchill on a bike instead of in a heated car.
I’m all for better public transit though.
I do 65 minutes in the morning to work, and 80-85 coming home.
I think you’ll find most !fuckcars members will also be big advocates for zoning reform that enables more people to live closer to their work. Nobody should be living a 65 minute drive from their work unless it’s purely by choice. They shouldn’t even be a 65 minute bike ride away from their workplace.
I know, unless you absolutely need the job and it’s the only one that accepted your offer.
In my case however, the company lied to me; they said at the start I can shift to full remote over time, but 4 months in and they’re saying that I need supervision to work (even though no one helps me with anything all day).
So I got fucked.
To be clear, I am in no way blaming you here. The fact that most people have to live a long way from their workplaces is a result of restrictive zoning laws that mean there aren’t very many homes near the centre of cities (where most jobs are located for practical reasons), and what homes there are tend to be very expensive. Better laws would make it so more people are able to live closer to work if they want to.
No worries, I understood your point.
But isn’t it better to have homes further from the heart of Main cities? I prefer the quiet of living in an area that only has residential housing.
A totally reasonable question, but in summary, the answer is no, it’s not better.
There will always be some people who do prefer to live rurally, that’s true. And they should have that option. But most people prefer the amenities of a city. The problem with how the US, Canada, and Australia do things currently is that the majority of the living area is “suburbia”, which tries to provide the peace of rural living with the amenities of a city. But it ends up doing poorly at both.
It’s particularly bad for people who cannot drive, like children, teenagers, and people with certain disabilities. Car-dependent suburbia is extremely restrictive on them compared to being able to, for example, hop on their bike a ride to their friend’s place, or to soccer practice.
You might say you want “only residential housing”, but isn’t it more convenient if there’s a cafe within walking distance? Or a community pub/tavern you can grab some food at? Isn’t it better to be able to stop off at a grocery store on your bike home from work, or the walk from the train station, than to have to take a dedicated weekly car drive to a large shopping centre 10–15 minutes by car away to do a single large shop (and hope you don’t forget anything on that weekly shop, or you’ll have to make a dedicated trip especially for that one thing!)? Wouldn’t most people be better off if they can walk or cycle conveniently to nearby sports clubs, community centres, etc. in order to partake in their hobbies and leisure activities?
There are also economic reasons behind it. More dense places like I’m describing have enormous economic benefits. People spend more in the local economy when they walk or cycle to shops, rather than driving. Because when driving they’re more likely to go to a big box store on the periphery where the profits go to a large national or multinational chain rather than a local business. Denser living costs a lot less for the government, because the cost of infrastructure like electricity lines, sewerage, and road maintenance are much, much lower than in lower density suburban or rural areas. And it makes the building and operation of public transport networks more feasible and affordable.
It’s also cheaper for the people who live there. Having a shared wall means you lose less heat in winter, reducing your heating cost. Being able to walk or ride most places means you don’t need a car, or maybe your family which would have had 2 cars now only needs 1, which dramatically reduces your transportation cost. (Seriously, an average car costs tens of thousands of dollars per year in petrol, maintenance, and the upfront cost. It’s a huge financial burden.) And, obviously, because of the above paragraph, your personal council tax/rates bill will be lower.
I’m not talking about everyone living in soviet-style concrete blocks, either. The ideal form of development is medium density. 2–3 storey townhouses and duplexes, 3–5 storey comfortable walk-up apartments. With modern building standards these are incredibly comfortable and quiet.
@_sideffect @Zagorath We all agree you got fucked.
But this community thinks you didn’t just get fucked by your employer but by zoning and planning and such too. Better zoning and infrastructure would have you looking at a 10m cycle plus a 15m train ride to the office of the employer that fucked you.
The only reason bikes don’t work in -30 is because there isn’t infrastructure to support them and if there is it isn’t maintained properly. I was going to link examples, but it seems other people already have.
It can’t be -30°c 2m of snow for 350 days a year, right?
That’s what I said?
Also why 350 days?
Because your concern seems to be disproportionately weighted on extreme weather?
Didn’t I day spring fall and summer are ok?
If that isn’t your intention, then i’m sorry, but i’m not the only one getting the same vibe, and i genuinely not sure why you bring out extreme condition where other mode of transport doesn’t work either.
Cars don’t either.
https://youtu.be/OdtR3T2Pg4s?si=YnWgYmCfCtiUDqgM