Cycling Myths: Debunked!
Bikes are the most efficient form of urban transportation, and we should be making it as easy as possible to get around by bike.
“Stop right there. My grandmother with her bad knees can’t ride a bike! How am I supposed to get groceries? Cyclists are a bunch of a****** who run through stop signs! Besides, why should my taxpayer money go to pay for someone else’s hobby?”
I’m glad you asked! I understand the frustration. It can be scary to see your hometown change in unfamiliar ways.
Regardless, it’s important to make informed opinions based on facts. And, operate with the understanding that most problems have a solution. Please let me know what you think in the comments!
Cycling is just a hobby.
Bicycles aren’t just a hobby; they’re a form of transportation - and just as legitimate as cars.
It’s been shown that whether or not people cycle for transportation mostly depends on whether they feel safe doing so.
Actually, we should stop thinking of cyclists as a type of person, and recognize that the vast majority of people, of varying ages, races, genders and abilities, are capable of riding a bike for transportation, given the right supportive infrastructure, gear and knowledge.
Cyclists break traffic rules and therefore don’t have a right to the road.
People break traffic rules. Almost all drivers admit to speeding, texting or otherwise breaking the law while driving. And of course, when drivers exhibit these unsafe behaviors, they have much more severe consequences in the event of a crash. Cyclists breaking the rules can be annoying; drivers breaking the rules can be deadly. So yes, cyclists need to engage in safe behaviors. We need to develop a culture of good cycling habits. But that can’t happen until a critical mass of people feel safe enough to actually start riding.
Bike lanes are elitist.
This is a complex issue. Valid arguments can be made that bike lanes are often correlated with gentrification, and lack of access to bikes, bike gear, weather-protective attire, and privilege of living close to work and amenities can make bike riders seem like they belong to an exclusive club. There is also the issue of bike lanes, and safer street designs, being more concentrated in whiter, wealthier nieghborhoods. And, recreational cycling paths in the Hudson Valley, which are often inaccessible to people without a car, receive far more support than utilitarian bike lanes meant for travel. If we want equity, we need to address these imbalances.
At the same time, many people cycle because they have to. In Kingston, 17% of households do not own a car, and many local families are severely cost burdened by transportation costs. Neglecting to design streets with protected biking infrastructure is actually pretty elitist. In a way, protected bike lanes are a way of redistributing community wealth, by giving access to the streets at a lower cost.
It’s also essential that “green“ community investments are accompanied by investments in truly affordable housing (ideally, de-commodified housing) and equity programs to prevent displacement due to gentrification.
Bike lanes are ableist.
First, let’s acknowledge that no one is being forced to ride a bike. We want to expand the options available, but driving will continue to be an option.
To start, 40% of disabled folks do not drive. So let’s stop pretending that car centric development is accessible for all.
In addition, many disabled people do cycle, or could… if safe infrastructure existed. In Cambridge, a quarter of disabled commuters travel by bicycle.
Let’s also acknowledge that disability takes many forms. For some, a bicycle is their preferred mobility device; take this low-vision vlogger for example.
Our current transportation system does not provide adequate protection for bike riders of all ages and abilities. If it did, you would see people of all ages and abilities out there riding, like in countries that have invested in their bike networks.
Also see: older people won’t cycle.
Biking is for white, middle aged men.
Biking is for everyone. Let’s not gatekeep! Although it is totally understandable if you have that impression… because the current infrastructure does serve the white, male, middle aged, able bodied, upper middle class demographic better than any other, and that goes for biking as well as driving.
Bike lanes cause traffic.
I know it sounds totally fake, but there’s this phenomenon called “traffic evaporation.” Counter-intuitively, when space is taken away from cars in order to increase space for more efficient modes - those would be walking, cycling and transit - traffic actually decreases. On the other end of the spectrum, induced demand (or Braess’s paradox) is a well-documented effect - adding more car lanes actually makes traffic worse in the long run. But that doesn’t stop us from wasting billions of dollars on highway widening projects that make traffic worse.
We can’t afford bike lanes.
First of all, let’s face the fact that cars are subsidized. Some money for roads comes from registration and other fees, but a lot of it comes from the general fund. If you don’t drive and only ride a bike, you’re actually subsidizing drivers. It’s math!
Also, building for bikes just costs way less than cars - like less than 1% the cost. Portland calculated that the city’s entire bicycle network, consisting of over 300 miles of bikeways, would cost $60 million to replace (2008 dollars), whereas the same investment would yield just one mile of a four-lane urban freeway.
When I said that bikes were the most efficient form of urban transportation, I meant it!
No one will bike in the cold/rain.
First of all, no one is forcing you to bike in the cold or the rain. But I think that many of us (I’ll even include myself in that) can overestimate the suffering, and underestimate the joy to be had when experiencing the elements. Just the other day, I biked in 25 degree weather; it was pretty sweet.
Most bike rides will take thirty minutes or less, and are going from one heated building to another. If you dress for the weather, you’ll be fine. And if you’re not up to it, no one is forcing you to bike! :)
No one will bike on hills / biking is hard.
The advent of the electric bike is a game-changer for hilly landscapes. For less than a cost of a rusty used car, you can buy a new e bike which reaches speeds of 20 mph. I’ve heard many glowing reviews.
You can’t carry kids/ groceries/ fridges/ work tools on a bike.
Cargo bikes were made for this very purpose. Sure, not all conceivable trips will be made like this… but a good percentage of trips could switch to bike.
Bike lanes slow down emergency vehicles.
A recent study found that it was car congestion, not traffic calming measures, which delayed emergency vehicles during the pandemic in London.
And, I’m just going to leave this here… It’s mostly pedestrians but the same principle applies to bikes.
Places are too far apart for biking.
It is true that most development in the past century has been sprawling, which is not ideal for bike travel. On the other hand, towns such as Kingston, New Paltz and Ellenville were laid out more compactly, prior to the takeover of car-centric design. In Kingston, you can bike from Forsyth Park to the Rondout in about 15 minutes; driving takes 10-20 minutes depending on traffic and time of day, according to Google Maps.
People don’t want to use a bike for transportation.
Maybe you don’t want to cycle for transportation, and that’s fine. Nobody is going to force you to ride a bike. But many people already do ride a bike out of necessity. Many others would like to bike in their community, but are concerned due to the lack of safe bike infrastructure.
We don’t need bike lanes, people can just ride in the street with the cars.
If we want cycling for transportation to be an option for children, inexperienced riders, people with disabilities, and anyone else who does not want the stress of dodging multi-ton vehicles on their commute, we need to make riding as safe as possible. That requires physically protecting people on bikes from cars via protected bike lanes and protected intersections.
Another option is to create slow streets. This is where streets are closed to through-traffic, cars are slowed down to a walking pace, and people outside of cars take priority. Slow streets are easy and cheap to create, and they were proven a success when they popped up all over the world during the pandemic.
Thanks for reading. Let me know if I missed anything. Do you think any of these retorts will be useful?
Yayyy critical thinking!
Excellent information!
As an aside, "induced demand" is nothing more than a modern application of Say's Law from classical Keynesian Economics, i.e., the notion that supply creates it's own demand. Say's Law first appeared in print in 1803!
Wonderful article! I would love to ride a bike but for many of the reasons you cite, I can't. And wouldn't dare. Walking is good but won't get me around in a reasonable timeframe.