Growing up in Detroit (a city built for 2M people with only 0.62M today, and with a natural affection for cars), I used to think cars were obviously right and only contrarian hippies, crust punks, and ultramarathoners would assert bikes are viable mass transit.

But then I went on vacation to Copenhagen and found I could safely get anywhere in the city in under 30 minutes on a bike. And I was constantly getting passed by people of all ages including many 80+ year olds. People were so fit! It was shockingly liberating to get around this way! I assumed it was a fluke, but no, Amsterdam, Oslo, and Rotterdam were all equally great to bike in.

You should experience it. You won't be able to see how superior that transit mode is until you experience it.

I've spent a decent amount of time in Singapore, where forget biking - if you're quick you can rock most of the way across the city state on foot.

It's really cool, but Singapore isn't exactly a model for the world.

Similarly - you should consider that Copenhagens all bike infrastructure both supports and is supported by the society around it, and a lot more would have to change than just the surface level things that you find good to make it happen.

> Similarly - you should consider that Copenhagens all bike infrastructure both supports and is supported by the society around it, and a lot more would have to change than just the surface level things that you find good to make it happen.

So let's start doing that and maybe our kids will have awesome cities.

Those changes are not ones that would be politically popular in the same groups that are demanding urbanism.

You need transit to be safe and clean so you get ridership from people who are middle class and up, and urban living to be a safe, clean, desirable experience.

This is very challenging, because the combination of increased policing and social programs needed to get there would not be plausible under either Democrat or Republican administrations.

The transitions in the Dutch cities that were triggered in the 60s (safer biking routes mostly through grade separation and traffic calming retrofits) really began to bear fruit in the 1980s.

I’ve been visiting Copenhagen long enough to see the same transition over a couple of decades there too.

Start now, and even in US urban areas you’ll see the payoff in the next couple of decades, which is an absurdly short timeframe for urban planning outcomes.

Biking shouldn’t be only for those wearing lycra!

Yeah, I figure it would take at least 10-15 years to significantly increase the number of daily bike trips in a city (like in NYC, where there were ~170k daily bike trips in 2005 up to ~510k in 2018 [0]).

The most magical part of Copenhagen was that its bike infrastructure was so incredibly attainable. Over ~30 years, they built ~350km of curbed off bike paths, ~25km of on-street bike paths, and put out consistent bike traffic light signals [1]. None of the things were hard, and roads have to get redone every 10-20 years anyway, so it's super easy to start updating a city. And it doesn't just make the city more pleasant to live it, it also saves many lives and adds years to biker's lives.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_New_York_City

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_Copenhagen

> You should experience it. You won't be able to see how superior that transit mode is until you experience it.

I definitely believe you, but I live in Texas. It was 103 degrees Fahrenheit today. Riding a bike to work in Texas in the summertime is decidedly not superior than driving to work in an air conditioned car, I can assure you.

It was about that here too. I biked to work. The thing is, it was 103 at 8am, when I biked to work. I definitely got sweaty on the way home, but that's pretty much fine.

Cool! Does your grandma bike to work too? Heat stroke is real, and it is deadly.

No. She doesn't get around much these days. Thanks for your concern.

I wasn't concerned! I was asking because you seem to be sure that humans won't die in the heat while riding bikes.

Not universally. But in some circumstances.

I don’t know where you live, but 103F in even moderate humidity can kill or injure even fit athletes surprisingly quickly.

Always check the wet bulb temperature before going out in conditions like that.

Greater Sacramento region. I don't know how to check the wet bulb temperature at the moment. Humidity is relatively low here. It would be different in Florida or something.

It isn’t just inferior here, it is legitimately dangerous to human life. We regularly get black flag weather here in the southern U.S., where the wet bulb temp is so high that the human body can no longer shed heat via perspiration.

I love being outdoors, but I am very careful in conditions like we’ve had recently with 100+ temperatures and high humidity. Even fit persons can get heat stroke very easily. The UV index has also been incredibly high lately, I have to soak sunscreen on or I burn and my skin type is normally easily tans rarely burns.

> where the wet bulb temp is so high that the human body can no longer shed heat via perspiration.

What the parent poster just described is a very serious and real affliction that is capable of extinguishing human life. Believe it or not.