Red light guy

Most days that I ride my bike there are good things that happen. But some days, there are things that just make me a bit awestruck about the human condition (and not necessarily in a good way).

Take today for example. I'm riding along on my electrified Big Dummy in the nice sleepy town of Carrboro, NC. I'm doing a reasonable clip down a two-lane road (no bike lane), around 20 mph, because I'm late for a meeting. I'm coming up to an intersection, and this big dude comes flying out on his bike, without stopping at his stop sign (my direction had no stop sign), and proceeds to turn right then take the lane in front of me. Ok, slight bonehead move, but no problem, I cruise around him to avoid slamming into him. A few blocks later, I stop at a red light. Here comes "the dude" again, this time cruising right through the red light I am waiting at.

It always makes me a bit angry when I wait at a light and some other cyclist cruises through. My reason for this is that I think it is important for cyclists to give a good impression to drivers, because if we act like regular vehicles, we are more likely to get the respect that other vehicles on the road get. The number one complaint I hear from non-cyclist drivers is that cyclists never obey the rules and do stupid things. In many drivers' minds, that is an excuse for doing obnoxious things back to cyclists. I'm not saying that it is right, I'm just making an observation. And in a war of obnoxiousness, the cars are going to win - they are a lot bigger and more deadly. So, I try to counter that, by showing that cyclists can actually manage to follow the rules and act like a regular vehicle on most occasions. I find that I get far more courteous treatment from the drivers around me, when I do that.

So, back to the story. It is not long before my light turns green and I catch back up to "dude." In the past, I've on occasion made some comment as I went past people about their red light running. However, I'm not perfect. I make mistakes. So these days, I'm trying to not be "holier than though," so I just keep my mouth shut. I figure that yelling at people or lecturing them is not going to be conducive to them seeing my point of view. (So instead, I write on the blog, where there's actually opportunity to discuss my point of view without it being a yelling match). Anyway, I cruised past the guy, by moving into the main traffic lane (he was in the bike lane), and I thought, that was that. Hopefully he'll figure it out someday.

Now, get this. After I go past, he yells a lecture at me: "let other cyclists know when you're passing!". Ok, dude, come on. Do you expect every single car passing you to yell? It's not like I went past him inside his bike lane with 2" to spare. No, I was at least 3 feet out from him by going into the main traffic lane (there were no cars, I checked before entering the lane). I think he was just angry because a woman on a big cargo bike was passing him for the second time. But anyway, that was enough to set me over the edge. I yell back "don't run red lights!".

I figured we are fair and square. He lectures me, I lecture him. Enough, right? No. I get to the next red, where I stop, then turn right. As I get going, he pulls up to the red and again says loudly: "It is common courtesy to let other cyclists know when you're passing." Hey dude, I get your point, did you get mine? I yell back "It is common courtesy to not run red lights!"

This interaction has me baffled. Where does this dude get off lecturing me about how I pass him (in a perfectly legal way, like any other traffic would pass him, giving him plenty of room)? This is a guy who ran a stop sign to turn right in front of me (and I would have hit him if I hadn't moved out into the lane), and he passed me while I was waiting at a red, then he feel justified in lecturing? Sure, it would be courteous to say something to cyclists as I pass, and I often do if I have to pass closely. But if I'm 3-4 feet away in the main traffic lane, I feel no such compunction. But the bigger point is this: here is a guy who violated the law twice, and endangered my own physical health once, and he has the gall to tell me this?

(Shake head). Sometimes I pity our race. It is no wonder we keep getting ourselves into problems like financial meltdown/peak oil/war/whatever. So many people do not have one ounce of introspection. And that's really all I would hope for. Again, I am not perfect - but at least when I do something, I think about what I did, and what effect it might have on others. And I try to use that to better guide future actions. Why isn't that one simple skill taught in our families or our schools?

Cars are expensive

Last fall, we had a visitor at our house, who had driven there. She had a little accident backing up in our driveway, resulting in a crunched fender on her car and a crunched door on our car.

The total cost of repair? $2,400

Sometimes people ask me how much my bike costs. When I tell them (some number > $1k), they often seem aghast that I would spend that much on a bike. How can bikes be that expensive?

Some people don't seem to realize that bikes are inexpensive compared to cars. This accident is case in point. The cost of that one little fender bender is more than my whole bike, motor kit and all. Our insurance has a $500 deductible. So our out of pocket cost, if we cause the accident, is that much. That is less than $2,400, but it still isn't cheap. Plus those insurance bills keep coming, every 6 months. And if someone has an accident? Rates go up.

It is interesting to observe the psychology behind this. I think that because people get used to just regularly paying that insurance bill, paying for gas, paying for tune ups, paying for tires, paying for oil, and so on, that the familiarity leads to people ignoring the true costs. The true costs of a good, reliable bike are not tiny, but they are only a fraction of the true costs of a good, reliable car.

2008 wrap up

We want to thank all our customers and friends for support over the last year of our venture here to spread bicycle love, and in the process, rethink transportation.  We wouldn't be here without everyone's support, we truly appreciate it.

It has been an amazing, and challenging year. On the broader scale, 2008 will go down in the history books as a year of substantial change, most of it for the negative.  The financial world has been in turmoil, dragging the economy with it.  But some changes have not been bad.  The crazy ups and downs of gas prices have a lot of people thinking more deeply about America's dependence on foreign oil.   While various sides of the political spectrum are not necessarily in agreement about how to solve the problem, the important thing is that there is increasing consensus that something needs to be done.  

Cycle 9 was founded in 2007 after we decided that we didn't just want to complain about oil dependency, but to do something about it.  It always feels better trying to fix a problem than just to complain about it (even if that involves mortgaging ones house to the hilt to get a business going).  Bikes won't solve every problem.  Cars are useful conveyances for many purposes.  But the more we use bikes and watch our energy usage in getting around, the more it becomes clear that moving a 3,000 pound hunk of steel around to transport a single human is a huge waste of energy.  Many kilowatt hours of energy, for even a short trip.  And bikes can be one piece of the puzzle, along with more walking, more public transit, high speed trains, and etc.  At some point in our future, when oil is more scarce, I bet most of us will prefer to have that oil go towards producing our food and other necessities.

So, if we can have one wish for 2009, it is that the incoming administration realizes the importance of developing better infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists in our towns and cities.  By far, the biggest complaint we hear about cycling is about its "danger."  While statistics show that it is probably not nearly as dangerous as many people think, statistics don't change most people's minds.  Regardless of the highly controversial subject of whether bike lanes are good or bad safety-wise, it is a simple fact that bike lanes/paths promote more people biking.  I was recently in Madison, Wisconsin, which has developed a network of rail-trails around the city.  In warmer months, those are very well used, I saw other riders out at all times of the day.  

But, here in the Southeastern USA, we have the double whammy of fast drivers and narrow roads.  For many people, even if they want to bike, they just don't feel comfortable doing it on these kinds of roads.  And so they get in the car.  Sadly, our state's department of transportation has often been actively anti-cyclist in their road planning.  Talk about lack of foresight.

When Obama announced plans for new infrastructure, he mentioned roads and bridges.  I really hope he does some more thinking about this before implementing it.  Certainly, some roads and some bridges do need work - those that represent the central transportation corridors should be brought to modernity.  But beyond that, it is a matter of priorities.  I hope we place more priority on making our cities easier to navigate by non-car means, rather than just spending willy-nilly on automobile infrastructure.  

Two thousand and nine will be a challenging year.  But often it is the challenges that cause people to become engaged, rise up, and work towards solutions.  We sincerely hope that in trying to meet the challenges, the solutions that get implemented aren't just "more of the same."  We've tried that for the past 30 years.  Let's try something new - livable, walkable, bikeable cities and towns.  Places where children can play in their neighborhoods again, walk to school safely, breath clean air, and not become obese by being driven everywhere.  If we as a country put our minds to something, we can usually do it.  I hope we will put our minds to this as our new year's resolution.

Taking the train

Here I am in Montana near Glacier National Park, riding on one of the more fuel-efficient modes of transportation: the train. While gliding along and looking at the spectacular scenery, I couldn't help but run some numbers through my head about the efficiency of this mode of transit.

This train is carrying 340 +/- 20 people from Chicago to Seattle, Portland, and points between. So due to my compulsive quantitative bent, I had to figure out how many miles per gallon per person this represents.

My estimate of the fuel usage is about 2,000 gallons, plus or minus 1,000. I got that estimate because I found out the Diesel tanks in the engine are 2,500 gallons, and they topped them off once for the trip (but they certainly weren't empty). Since the train travels a total of about 2,000 miles on its journey, this represents approximately 1 gallon per mile (or mile per gallon for those who like it like that!). After I calculated that number, I talked to one of the personnel, and he said that sounded about right for fuel efficiency.

Ok, so let's say we're in the ballpark. In fact, let's imagine that the fuel usage is

twice

what I estimated, just to be safe. If the train uses 2 gallons per mile, the math is easy. That means it gets 170 miles per gallon per passenger.

Let's figure out how else we could get that kind of mileage. A bicycle would do it, but then, pedaling from Chicago to Washington state takes a while - a lot longer than the train. But the cool thing is, I have my bike with me (a folding bike that I can just carry onto the train free of charge). So I can be fuel efficient for the whole trip.

What about a Prius, the gold standard for green transportation? There are only two ways a Prius could match that mileage. One: drive really slow, like 40 miles per hour, so that the Prius gets 50-60 mpg, and carry 3 passengers and their gear. Well, you could do that, but it would take a lot longer than the train, and be a whole lot less comfortable. The other way is to carry more passengers and drive faster. Driving the prius 70 mph, a loaded prius with bikes on the roof gets at best 35 mpg (I owned one and did cross country trips with it). So, it would require carrying 5 passengers and their gear. Nope, no folding bikes are going to fit in that prius.

Well, for an airplane, fuel efficiency is right out the door. I've seen various estimates, but 30 MPG per passenger would be generous.

Why don't more people use the train in the USA? Well, a couple reasons. The first is that people don't know about it. I told several people that my family and I were doing a train trip who had no idea that there was a train to take a trip in. I guess Amtrak doesn't advertise much.

The second is the train is perceived as slow. Well, it is slower than an airplane. But it is a whole lot more comfortable, you get to see a lot of great scenery, and enjoy the travel. But the real issue is that the US has not invested in high-speed rail like many other countries. If we had a 200mph bullet train like Europe and Japan, it would be possible to go from coast to coast within 12 hours. I've seen people on the internet claim that the US is too spread out for useful train service, except population dense centers. I don't buy that. There are many large cities spread out throughout the US. If connected by high speed rail, these corridors would be used. If we just had three major east-west routes (North, middle, south) and 4-5 North-South routes, it would cover a large portion of the US, with busses acting as the local links to these stops.

While I still use airplane travel for many business trips, if practical train service were available to get me to the destination, I would use that. I like the comfort, the scenery, the ability to relax, and the fuel efficiency of the train. I just wish the US would get its act together and start building a real, large-scale rail system that shows we can once again be leaders in transportation and innovation.

New blog pages focused on sustainable transportation in High Point

We love to hear about local folks who promote alternative transportation, particularly if it involves bicycles. We recently had a visitor in our Chapel Hill shop from High Point, NC, who is one of the most enthusiastic bicycle proponents we've met in a while. He has been working to organize a group of riders in High Point who use bikes as every day alternatives to cars. He's started a blog,

Revolution Cycling

, that is doing a great job of raising awareness of bicycles as alternatives to cars. We hope that he and people like him can really help promote bicycles as one alternative to the US oil addiction.

This same fellow was really enthusiastic about RANS bicycles, which use the "Crank Forward" design. The idea behind crank forward is to have a more relaxed riding position that is closer to the ground, so that when you stop, both feet can be placed firmly on the ground. While bikes like the Electra Townie have advertised this feature heavily, there have been a number of companies who were doing this long before, including RANS, and more recently Day6.

We think this is an interesting concept. While we don't personally own any crankforward bikes ourselves, we certainly see the potential benefits for those riders looking for a more relaxed and comfortable arrangement.

So, we've decided to test the waters by bringing in some of the Day 6 bicycles first, to see how that goes. These are designed for the utmost in comfort at a very reasonable price, and are particularly focused on the female riders and over 50 crowd. If designs like this encourage more people to ride a bike in their daily lives, we're all for it. So, as of next week, we'll have two of the Day 6 bikes in the shop for test rides, the 7 speed internally geared Journey, and the 21 speed Dream. There are also a few different seat options, one with a backrest and one that looks like a normal bicycle seat, but has some very thick padding. If you've been looking for a more comfortable and safe way to ride a bicycle, stop by sometime and check one out.

If this market goes well for us, we may explore additional options like the RANS bikes.

News from China

So I'm in China.  Bicycles are everywhere here, still a lot of people use them for transportation.  Last night I saw a guy riding his bike with 3 mattresses on his back!  It was an amazing balancing act, and a testament to the determinedness of the people.

But car use is on the rise.  Here there are many car ads, and cars are seen as a wealth and status symbol - a sign of the good life.

Every society seems to go through an evolution with cars - in the first phase with cars being a luxury item only for the rich, in the second phase cars being something the middle class aspires to have to show wealth and status, in the third phase, society reaching saturation where the number of cars is so large that it puts strains on the system, causing health problems, air pollution, and traffic congestion. There also appears to be a fourth stage, where countries realize the detrimental aspects of cars, and work to reduce their usage, replacing them with age old solutions like bikes, public transport, and walking.  My perception is that China is still in stage 2 - the broad middle class acquiring cars as part of the rapid growth of wealth here.  But already traffic problems are great - and so are pollution problems.  In Bejing, it is gridlock during rush hour - and that with only 1 in 3 people owning cars.  Also, there is an almost constant a haze over the city, which during my stay, only broke after some heavy rain.

When I was in the city of Shenzhen, I inquired with several locals about bicycle rental.  I love to see new cities by bicycle, because I can see more on bike than on foot, yet it is still much more intimate than in a car.  It is also good exercise, to offset the extra eating I tend to do when visiting new places.  However, when I inquired with one of the young students, she said, "Why would you want to bike?  Shenzhen is a modern city!" The implication was that in a "modern city" nobody would bike.  She seemed dumfounded that anyone would prefer to ride a bike, especially a "rich westerner". She viewed bikes as a contrivance only for the poor.

Ultimately, countries like China will continue the evolution to more and more cars, until the problems start becoming so apparent that there is a push to go back to other modes of transportation for the masses.  If oil prices continue to rise, this may happen sooner rather than later.