this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
230 points (99.6% liked)

World News

22087 readers
154 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] psyonity@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

As a Dutchie, I can only agree. I do have to say the road infrastructure in a lot of countries will have to change too to make this feasible... I have been to Edinburgh, Scotland last week and it feels completely suicidal to ride a bike there, barely any bike lanes and a very big dislike towards cyclists.

If anyone wants to know more about how we do roads in the Netherlands, I totally recommend Not Just Bikes

I do question how this statement of carbon emissions reduction holds up with the large change towards electric bikes, but electric scales better to green energy then cars I guess.

[–] myself33@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago

During 40 years, everything has been done for cars. But it's ridiculous to use a 5 persons transport (car) for only one person. The ecological problem is not only thermal vs electric, it's also cars versus 2 wheels transport

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Abel@lemmy.nerdcore.social 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Don't put the burden on people. Cities worldwide are hostile to cyclists and even pedestrians.

[–] parlaptie@feddit.de 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's a chicken and egg problem, unfortunately. Cities won't improve conditions for cyclists if they only see car traffic and people will avoid cycling under bad conditions.

[–] Abel@lemmy.nerdcore.social 9 points 1 year ago

You know what, you're right.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RedMarsRepublic@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Cycling is cool but that's small-fry compared to if we all went vegan (or even just vegetarian)...

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one 9 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Vegan (or even just vegetarian) is cool, but that's small-fry compared to if we just stopped having freaking kids.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] atlasraven31@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It would also help if expensive private jets and yachts had to pay to offset their CO2 emissions. Oil industries and others need to pay for their pollution too and certainly can't claim government money as they pollute.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Scary_le_Poo@beehaw.org 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

When are these idiots (journalists/editors) going to learn that messaging matters? 690 million tonnes? Yeah, sounds like a lot. No context for that number in the headline which is all most people read.

Perhaps instead of listingn only statistics and pretending that laypeople care, help people see what that would mean for them personally. Get them invested in the idea. Help plant the seeds and allow them to come to the conclusion that things should change. It's like someone saying the government spent a billion dollars on something. Sure, that's a lot of money, but the vast majority of people have no real concept of what a billion of something even is.

It's a damn shame that the us isn't more bike friendly. I would kill to have a public transit system that didn't suck, but unfortunately,l unless there is a massive change, I don't see car usage going anywhere.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sir_Simon_Spamalot@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah right, keep putting this problem on "everyone" because those bigger poluting companies can do nothing to change their course of action.

[–] geissi@feddit.de 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think this shouldn't be read as an individual call to action as in 'everyone has to do their part and start cycling'.
Rather, it should be a call for governments to support a changing traffic and transportation infrastructure.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] P1r4nha@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Although the practicality is questionable, I think the takeaway is that we will have to rethink mobility and dense environments with good cycling infrastructure will be the most sustainable ones. Public transportation which is great too, also requires a certain density to be feasible.

[–] Yabai@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The practicality isn't questionable.

Of course there are outliers and places/people it wouldn't work for but the vast majority should be absolutely fine.

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Even if it's not practical right away, that's just a reason to vote to put people in charge who would make it practical and convenient.

It's also possible to join a non-profit that engage with the public and local governments to make bicycle-friendly infrastructure happen.

[–] rigo@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago (12 children)

It is questionable though in most states in the US atleast. Not sure how someone who lives a 20 minute drive from the nearest town in the middle of nowhere is supposed to ride a bike around. The whole world isn't urbanized

[–] anji@lemmy.anji.nl 11 points 1 year ago (8 children)

According to the 2022 Census 80% of US population lives in urban areas.

If could enable this 80% to use bicycles and public transportation we'd experience a massive shift in public health, energy efficiency and reduced emissions...

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Yabai@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You're right that currently it's hard many places in the US thanks to suburbs, terrible zoning, car focused laws and so on.
But it's not like biking itself is the issue here, it's that you are in dire need of better infrastructure, zoning, public transport and laws.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] deelayman@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago

I asked a couple with a 3 year old daughter how they get around without a car, and they said they cycle by default and use a car-share service occasionally for longer journeys. The amount they save on insurance alone pays for the car-shares and short term car rentals to get out of the city for a few days.

Suburbs and rural areas can benefit from electric bikes to an extent. And a more deliberate focus on building transit oriented communities should help quite a bit.

[–] ebike_enjoyer@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

From the article:

Dutch people cycle an average of 2.6 kilometres each per day. If this pattern was replicated worldwide, the study suggests, annual global carbon emissions would drop by 686 million tonnes. This mammoth figure exceeds the entire carbon footprint of most countries, including the UK, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Australia.

I think a lot of people see “cycle like the Dutch” and think it means we must all abandon all other forms of transportation. Instead this article says if every nation’s national average for cycle miles traveled per day was at least 1.62 miles, we could greatly curb our carbon emissions. 1.62 miles is a very achievable goal in my mind. It doesn’t necessarily mean every individual must reach that amount per day (unless I’m misunderstanding), it just means the average overall. Others may go more, others less. Others could forgo it entirely, opting instead for walking, public transit, electric car (if it’s the only option), or a combination of all four. I’m certain that not every single person in the Netherlands rides a bicycle, either. We need people to understand this and push for increased safety and funding for alternative forms of transit, so that people can choose to do so safely. Especially in sprawling countries like Australia, Canada, and the USA.

[–] lamentforicarus@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This would only be possible if the urban places really migrated to this kind of system since it isn't entirely feasible in certain places of the US.

For instance I grew up in the US South, specifically in farm country. The closest grocery was 30 minutes away by car. School busses took an hour or more from pickup to dropoff. No one in those kinds of communities are going to stop using a car for biking or public transport because it would take way too long to complete tasks. Switching to electric cars is theoretically a good idea, but we don't currently have enough infrastructure to support it (and these places in the South definitely don't). Plus, there are places still on coal and gas for energy, so by increasing their energy needs, you are essentially increasing that much more environmental damage. (I am not against electric cars btw, just see the pros and cons.)

On the other hand, where I live now is a suburb of a huge metro that has groceries, schools, and healthcare everywhere. It would be completely possible for us to use only public transport and/or biking because the community is more dense. These are the places that really need the push for more environment-friendly services, which would decrease our destructive tendencies enough for those places who can't jump on this to catch up.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lightswitchr@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, it's not possible for everyone to use a bike 100% of the time. Infrastructure does help, and I admit my UK city is certainly not very bike friendly, but even if it was it would be nearly impossible as everything is just too far away and/or you can't transport what you need to on just a bike. We still need cars of some propulsion method or another.

[–] mate_classic@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago

I hear where you're coming from but this isn't what the article said. Dutch people use other modes of transportation than bikes. Just not as much. There are use cases where cars are hard to replace but right now, we are using them for way too many things. Public transportation is another alternative to cars that is way to often overlooked.

[–] sanzky@fedia.io 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

why "people cannot bike 100% of the time" but"people cannot drive 100% of the time" is never an issue? There are way more people who cant drive than people who cant ride a bicycle and that didnt stop humanity from making ourselves dependant on cars.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] unceme@lemmy.one 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The great news is that infrastructure to make cities more walkable and bikeable is actually really cheap. Like, compared to car infrastructure that can move a similar amount of people it's nothing. It's mostly an issue of political will to actually build the stuff.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] idle@158436977.xyz 9 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Not really sure how well bikes would work where I live. The winters are harsh, and its steep hill after steep hill.

[–] Kapitel42@feddit.de 21 points 1 year ago

Its surprising how well bikes can work in harsh winter conditions, if the infrastructure is well build. Not just Bikes has a video on Oulu in Finnland that does this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU&t=1s

[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

A valid concern. Bikes are good for fair weather and close proximity. Not all of the world is set up for this. Trains and busses have been around for a long time and can help reduce emissions and work in bad weather. Trains could require costly new infrastructure but busses can use existing roadways. The big goal should be to move away from cars. Ten people on a bus use less emissions then 10 cars on thier own.

[–] juni@skein.city 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Out of curiosity, could you clarify "close proximity"? Because I certainly agree a bike is not viable if you are in the countryside. However having switched to bicycling and no longer driving my car recently, it has shrunk the world around me far more than driving ever has.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] idle@158436977.xyz 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed. they are so expensive let alone bad for the environment.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Cowbob45@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Yes but not everyone lives in a flatland like the dutch do, I believe I could fully transition to a bicycle if cars weren't the top priority on my city, but I know many friends that live in parts of the city that are basically mountains.

[–] karce@wizanons.dev 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ebikes are definitely the answer. Much easier to ride up hills and very accessible for regular people to start riding. Plus they are significantly cheaper than cars when you account for insurance and registration and maintenance, etc.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hex@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

There are plenty of people who bike in Seattle. Ebikes make it achievable for most people. Also, there are tons of cities that are flat. Why isn't Austin or LA as bike friendly as Amsterdam or the Hague? Hills aren't the problem.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Amiral_Poitou@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I wish we had more bike-friendly infrastructures on France, right now everything is still adapted to a car-centered lifestyle...

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] hex@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Here's the thing. Everyone will bike like the Dutch and the Dutch will bike even more. It's not a question of "if." We are already past peak oil. There will only be more wars and more climate change. Those who survive will be relying on bikes because petroleum won't be an option anymore and electric cars are not a real solution. Cities will become more dense, suburbs will decay, in all likelihood huge parts of the US will completely collapse because life will be impossible without cars. We know petroleum is finite and there is no other technology that will replace this.

We can prepare by rolling out infrastructure now, or we can just keep going and crash as hard as possible in to a wall. No matter what we do, we're going to stop using gas. I hope we do it on our terms rather than waiting for tons of people to die before we fix it, but I honestly don't have a lot of hope. But hey, some people are starting to wake up so maybe we can keep that going and save millions of lives.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] HisNoodlyServant@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago

But that would require a small amount of effort. Seriously though I get some cities aren't bike friendly (they could be though) but worked in a city that was pretty great for bikes. Small/medium sized manufacturing plant with a bunch of rednecks and almost all of them lived within 5 miles. Of course they were crying like hell when gas skyrocketed and other than me there was 2 people that biked. I think the best part is a good chunk drove gigantic trucks.

[–] Emirose@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

As someone who once HAD to commute for a 45 minute car ride to work... not all commutes work with this. Public transit can help with a lot of those, but unless we rezone and rebuild most cites for shorter commutes, it won't replace all cars.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Bnuttn@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hard to use bikes a lot here in Finland. If you live in one of big cities then yes maybe but even then the winters are long, snowy and cold.

[–] sidd555@toast.ooo 12 points 1 year ago

Oulu seem to have it pretty nailed down in their infrastructure, even in winter, a lot of people cycle

[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

Some cities winter cycle just fine. Oulu is often in the news about that.

But yes, it gets hard if there's distance and frequent bad weather and hostile traffic and bad road maintenance.

load more comments (1 replies)

I was in Copenhagen for a layover and left airport to go for lunch and a beer. I HAD to go get a beer. I have beer all over the globe.

Anywho....as I enjoyed the beer, it was fascinating to watch the bike lanes. Seperated from cars, own light controls...so many people. Cambridge and Boston are making improvements for sure.

[–] anthoniix@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

The problem with this is that while true, the solution for lower emissions will look different for every place.

load more comments
view more: next ›