An area does not become walkable because there are no cars. First you have to ensure that journey distances are within walking range. That means having stores, work locations, and living locations all within a kilometer or two at most (not everyone is capable of riding a bike at race speeds every day). Paris, at least some parts of Paris, might have that in place. So too maybe NYC or SF. But a great many places are not setup that way and don't have mass transit infrastructure to convert quickly.

With eBikes the number of folks who can go at bike race speeds is incredible. I also know a lot of disable folks who can use eBikes but cannot drive. It’s an incredible technology.

I think people seriously underrate the safety benefits of micro cars, and the necessity of car like vehicles for older people.

encouraging most people 80+ to stay behind the wheel to shop and socialize is a pretty bad plan. maybe waymo and uber changes this..

But yeah motorcycles are probably an order of magnitude more dangerous then cars... Specially with cars around.

Pony is yes even at lower speeds collisions can be dangerous.

It would only be incredible if that number is higher than 0. An ebike has higher friction than a racing bicycle and even the fastest ones have a top speed of 45 km/h (30 mph). "Bike race speeds" (road races) are up to 65 km/h, so 40 mph. I don't think even a Tour de France-level cyclist could reach bike race speeds on an eBike.

During the summer months it's great though.

According to wikipedia, average lows in Oslo are about -5. That's pretty warm. Salt still melts snow at those temperatures. Even sunlight will melt snow on pavement at -5. But below around -10/-15 salt stops melting ice, vastly increasing the manpower needed to clear roads/sidewalks. Clearing ice at proper winter temperatures requires mechanical means, hammers, if not propane torches.

Biking was practically impossible (and very dangerous), and sometimes even walking a few blocks was a challenge. That being said, I’d still advocate for places like Edmonton being “15-min” cities, and in-fact it would make it much easier in the winter when transportation is more limited.

In heavy bike using cultures, people have gear ready to go. Spending a minute to put it on is not really a barrier, an inconvenience. If there is a practice. If your environment supports it, by having plowed routes for bikes, bike parking.

I think we overrate the convenience & comfort factor. Don't knock it till you be tried it. You might like it! There is some real difficulty when your society self selects to only support & assist one mode of transit, doesn't have bike parking readily available, doesn't have safe paths for biking. And trying to embrace biking on your own, learn how to do it comfortably & safely, when few others do, that's hard. But I think the inherent comfort g convenience of cars is somewhat/greatly overrated. The mindset is that biking is inconvenient, but so many who successfully live it will tell you, it's easy & it feels great.

there's also the issue of those with pre-dawn and night commutes, these people are disproportionately lower income and live farther and farther away from gentrified city centers. it is not uncommon to see as much as a 20+ degree drop once the sun goes down and you'd better hope there's no windchill on top of that.

It's good to have warm clothes for your extremities, but your core gets surprisingly warm when you bike with any kind of coat on. I often just wear a think goretex jacket till it's in the single digits fahrenheit. I wear winter boots, warm gloves or mittens (depending on how cold it is), and a balaclava or gaiter. Also ski goggles for really cold/windy weather. If you don't start off feeling somewhat cold, you've overdressed.

I tried studded tires, but found they didn't help much. Black ice is rare here compared to layers of snow and slush, which don't give studs much to bite into. For me, three inch tires with an open tread pattern at low pressure -- plus an upright riding position that distributes weight evenly between the wheels -- gives me the most confidence.

Regarding the cold, I'd say windproofing is most important, and expedition-style mittens are well worth the investment. You won't need much insulation (except maybe at the extremities) once you start generating body heat. Multiple top layers, each with their own full length zipper, will let you regulate your temperature without getting off the bike. That's especially helpful if you have long climbs and long descents.

Cars are a tool to overcome that in the same way that air conditioning allows businesses to operate in Arizona summers.

Which places are you thinking about? I'm from a place that's quite cold during the winter (-15C some days) plus can have quite a bit of snow.

I don't find cold places to be as unwalkable as hot ones. You get used to the cold, the snow/ice are generally cleared after a few days.

If anything, walkability is frequently about how a place looks and winter time can look quite nice with all the snow.

I now live on the other extreme in Phoenix, AZ and during the summer, you'll see 115F (46C) or higher for ~2 months a year with no cloud cover. That's hot enough that you don't even really sweat while walking; it evaporates so quickly that it can't do its job. We've had people at my office go for walks during lunch and collapse after 15 minutes due to it. And Phoenix is one of the most unwalkable places to live imaginable from a layout/distance standpoint to boot.

But I will admit both of those are in the extremes and most of the country isn't like that, although many areas will have quite a few days that go subzero (-17C) and over 100F (38C) each year. I think a big thing the US needs to do is start rezoning areas and rely less on everyone living on a half acre of land 2 miles from the nearest non-residential building. Unless that happens, much of the US won't be able to realistically implement policies like Paris is.

> If anything, walkability is frequently about how a place looks and winter time can look quite nice with all the snow.

Why do you walk? Is it to go for a purposeless, leisurely afternoon stroll? Or to on a daily basis, go to your job, the grocery, to the dentist, the hairdresser?

In order for a place to be walkable, you should be able to safely, and predictably, with 99% confidence, be able to purposefully walk to that job, that grocery, that dentist, and that hairdresser, at any time of day - not just on a sunny weekend afternoon, after all the snow has been shoveled.

Any place with snow on the ground for 4-5 months out of the year is a misery of walkability. Maybe your job starts at 7 am, and walking to it sucks, because the snow hasn't been shoveled yet. Sometimes, you need to avoid patches of black ice (Good luck when you're carrying heavy bags of groceries). For weeks, at the start, and the end of the season, you are dealing with absolutely atrocious slush, that has a habit of freezing over-night.

I don't really care about the cold - I can solve that problem by putting on more clothes. I do care about all the other problems of walking in snow.

I now live in a mild climate, where snow isn't an issue. I can, with full confidence, walk anywhere I want on any day of the year, any time of day, and predictably get there at a good pace. I couldn't say the same for when I lived in a cold climate.

You have to be a lot below freezing before mere temperature makes a city unwalkable. Very few places actually get that cold with any regularity. If sidewalks are maintained and it isn't crazy windy, you really don't need to change your walking behaviour much at all.

Heat is in practice often worse for walkability, especially when combined with humidity.

I've heard that this is already true of everywhere except the US, and the main reason it's not true of the US is zoning laws.

Lived there 12 years ... 120k miles less gas & maintenance. Miss it a lot now (one bus, nearest stores 2 miles, nearest transit station is a 15 min ride away. Perfect for Covid I guess.)