Those of us who ride regularly know that the bicycle is anything but a toy.  In fact, the bicycle has become the most reliable form of transportation in our increasingly congested, aging cities.  The temporary failure of New York’s transportation infrastructure on Wednesday spotlighted the bike’s prowess.  With the subway system flooded, buses overcrowded, and cabs in short supply, much of the area’s commuter population was paralyzed.  Except for those on bicycles, who found their morning commute undisturbed, except for a few more obstacles on the roads and sidewalks.  I’m a big public transit fan, but still find the frequent delays on buses and trains maddening.  The bike is my insurance policy against delays; I bring my bike on the bus on most trips so I have an alternative means of getting around if the buses are late or don’t arrive frequently enough. 

Even on uneventful commutes, the bike is more than a match for other forms of transport.  Bikes easily achieve similar speed as stop and go traffic, avoiding the traffic jams that befuddle cars and buses.  When traffic is free-flowing, bike commuting displays the same predictability as driving a car, and, on distances under ten miles, the bike is not far behind the car in travel time (and with zero parking hassles on either end).  But you can’t ride a bike in inclement weather, the critics claim.  Any car driver who has witnessed someone riding home in a rainstorm insists that riding to work isn’t worth the hassle.  Yet, regular cyclists in any locale with tell you that, on most days, the conditions are fine for riding a bike.  The same can be said for safety or fitness concerns.  Most rides are sufficiently safe and not too strenuous for even the most timid cyclists.  And since roughly 40% of all car trips are less than 2 miles, distance is an overrated concern as well.

How does the bike’s supreme practicality compare to the car, that cherished symbol of American progress and ingenuity?  Even ignoring the fact that the basic technology of the car hasn’t been updated in nearly a century, the car in its current form is a model of inefficiency, wasting vast resources to perform a fairly simple task.  Cars use most of their energy transporting not people but the car itself.  Cars, with their ever-expanding girth, waste limited road space.  Every other form transportation – bus, train, bike, walking, rickshaw – makes far better use of the same resources, including precious road capacity, than the car.  The bike, of course, hasn’t changed much since its inception either.  But, unlike the car, it’s economical in its resource consumption and doesn’t profess to be anything more than a practical, inexpensive means of transportation.

To the shock of incredulous Republican politicians, the bike is poised to assume a prominent role in U.S. transportation policy.  And why shouldn’t it?  The bike is already the centerpiece of transportation policy in the Netherlands and Denmark, and was the de facto policy for urban China for many years.  Countries like England and France are turning to the bike, as well, to help solve congestion problems in their urban areas.  No, the bike as a critical cog in transportation policy is no joke.  It’s our attachment to the profligacy of the car that’s laughable. 

Photo Credit: Kurt Rogers/San Francisco Chronicle