B Peter

There can indeed be injustice when cyclists abuse their freedom but your proposals would only make matters worse. It is your proposals that lack reality and my objections which are based on practical experience.

In order to give a remedy against the occasional injustice, you would burden every cyclist with registration, licencing and insurance.

It is particularly insurance that would destroy cycling. Look at the law courts. Filled with spurious or inflated claims by those who know that insurance companies will pay.

Petrol and diesel become rationed! Big drop in number of you-know-whats, vat and excise receipts, etc. etc. BIG, BIG HOLE in revenues!!! So who is going to fill this excavation? Pedal Cyclists? Pedestrians? Road surfaces start to deteriorate moment they are laid. Replacement anybody? Yep, call the cyclists!

Won’t happen any time soon - but it is inevitable. Happy New Year!

This comment stream is about Dublin Bikes - and jolly useful they are. Lets keep it at that. Signing out.

B Peter

You welcome laws that police a persons right to jump on a bicycle only by passing his NCT, sorry NBT. Has the world gone mad!!!?

The train of axiomatic logic I’ve witnessed on this profound rant-ad-absurdum of a comment section is so ridiculous that I’m ashamed to post here, apart from a sick curiousity as to your reply to my thoughts.

Next there will be people who will tax us for the speed we walk on the footpaths. Why not have a good ol’ rant about how cycling is the choice of the degenerate promenader next eh? Why not proclaim: “those bikers, they just don’t know what a good ol’ walk feels like, oh the purity of it all…”.

Heck, why not go the whole nine yards and introduce that law against jay-walking that those pedantic upholders of common decency (predicated on such sound axiomatic logic) strive for so ardently.

As a cogent member of the human race I sincerely hope you continue to be frustrated whence you see me cycling past a red light with no hands on my handlebars, I’ve assessed the possible risk and chosen to take my chances, you focus on not speeding over the limit so that you wont kill me for making a split second mistake. I don’t believe one should be punished so brutally over a stupid mistake.

But all judgements of the absolutes of decency and morality on the roads aside, Why do you care whether a person chooses to use one of the new dublin bikes or run a red light, on or off of the new bikes? Most motor accidents are not caused by jay walkers or the running of a red light, they are caused by incompetent motorists, (who should not be at the helm of such a vicious machine known as a car), crashing into other motorists, (who have every right to be at the helm of a car).

Why not direct your moaning against what actually causes the loss of life as opposed to your frustration about having to step aside from a bicyclist every now and again? It’s a strange twist of fate to find how one (or many) can accept one evil so blindly and then proclaim trivialities as adsurditites.

As I predict a torrent of responses to something I didn’t actually say I’ll clarify, a poster above quotes a drop from 14 to 7 cyclist deaths. Tell me what the number of car related deaths is… The tv and radio force these fiugures down our throats yeat we continue to ignore the message, (absurdities anyone?).

You are injured, your cloths are torn because you (a pedestrian) are struck (accidently) by a pedal cyclist. Your remedy is … ?? Seen this happen. Cyclist re-mounted and rode off leaving the unfortunate lady lying on the sidewalk. Her remedy …? None!

Your vehicle is damaged when struck (accidently) by a pedal cyclist. Your remedy is …?? Seen this happen. It is quite costly to repaint a scraped wing and door panel. Cyclist just rode off - in the opposite direction! The motorist’s remedy? None!

A pedal cyclist has no legal (but perhaps a moral) obligation to provide you with any personal details in the event that they are responsible for TP damage. In fact, they can just ride off. This is equitable? I fancy not!

I agree about the essay question. Theoretical construct. I am discussing reality: real people, real property, real damage, real re-instatement costs.

I am immovable on the need for mandatory registration and TP insurance for all pedal cyclists who take their vehicle into a public place. This is just plain common sense.

B Peter

You are right in that there are some dangerous cyclists out there that perhaps shouldn’t be allowed on a bike (I vaguely recall having to take some kind of cycling proficiency test when I was a kid before my Dad would let me out of the drive). I could actually make the same criticism of some car drivers and some bike riders too. Some, not all. Some shouldn’t be allowed on the road in/on any form of transport.

I made a short (very short) film about the Dublin Bike Scheme just before Christmas. I will get it up on youtube in the next couple of days and post the link here. I’m told that they are indeed intending to increase the radius of the scheme - fairly soon too by the sound of it.

I spoke to several people/users during filming and have to say, the popularity of it seems almost universal (except with taxi drivers).

I was so impressed I’ve started using it myself! I hasten to add that I haven’t ‘wobbled’ once yet though I think I may need to get the thermals out.

Your proposals for compulsory insurance, registration and licensing of cyclists are profoundly wrongheaded.

A useful essay for an undergrad jurisprudence class: justify the existing legal restrictions on automotive vehicles and distinguish bicycle use. I wouldn’t be surprised if some pedantic law students saw merit in extending automotive restrictions to bicycles but it is strange that your ideas have not been challenged more forcefully on an economics website.

Of course cyclist have to be subject to rules when cycling and lax enforcement is leading to serious risks for all roadusers but registration/ licencing and (above all) insurance are not solutions.

“Johntheoptimist comments on the improvments in Irish roads. This is all a bit irelevant as you cannot (legally) cycle on many/most of the new roads that have been built around the country and in any event Dublin Bikes is Dublin-based where the road conditions are as dangerous as ever for cyclists.”

The fact that some new roads are barred to cyclists doesn’t mean that cyclists don’t benefit from them. They take traffic off the roads that cyclists use, particularily large vehicles like lorries, which are the most dangerous for cyclists. The Dublin Port Tunnel is the best example of this.

The Irish Times today reports the figures for cyclist road deaths in 2009. It fell from 14 in 2008 to just 7 in 2009. That is for the whole country (26 counties), not just Dublin. Of course, that is still 7 too many. But, it is the lowest number since records began half a century ago.

The registration and TP insurance I am adamant about. Its just plain sense to me. As an experiment, (but please DO NOT attempt this at home!), have an adult ride a pedal cycle into you at approx 2 x walking speed (8 kph). Very interesting experience.

The Lana Busanna (some, but not all) contribute significantly to congestion, fuel wastage, decreased productivity for commercial traffic, increased air pollution and ’speeding’ by taxis - not to mention the bus-bunching. I recently counted 7-in-a-row on the Stillorgan Road. Talk about un-intended consequences!

In my original OP I described what you need to do in respect of the ‘commuters’ - though somewhat obscurely. Who commutes? Whence they come and go? When they come and go? I have never seen any detailed stats on these questions. Now ask the same questions of the non-commuters - and WHY they come and go as well. The answers may give pause for a radical traffic management re-think. I do not know the answers - hence my interest.

Personally I would wish to see ‘between-the-canals, and from Grand Canal Dock inland for approx 2 - 3 km as an area of very limited vehicular traffic. Could be done - the pols are just to cowardly. WRT less ‘cars’ in Dublin, the ‘cow-pat’ style build of the city makes this a very problematic matter. Also, less ‘cars’ means less excise duties and VAT revenues! Who will pick up the tab on that one?

Once again, thanks for the comments. These matters need to be discussed.

B Peter

Also I don’t understand the line of thinking of your OP which criticises buslanes and then appeals for mandatory cyclist registration. Perhaps you were too irate to form a linear argument?

You raise interesting questions and appear to have formed your own conclusions about the answers. It would be interesting if there was some data to indicate whether buslanes have 1/ altered journey times for bus commuters and 2/ have altered passenger numbers … controlling as much as possible for other variables, eg. the fact that the population/ working population of greater dublin area has declined significantly in the last 18mths. Personally, as a ‘car person’ but one who likes on occasion to take a bike to work or to social events, I’d be very happy for a continuation / extension of buslanes if their positive discrimination in favour of commuters leads to a more rational mix of private car / public transport use in Dublin or other Irish cities and one more comparable to some of the European cities (Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Brussels) where to my mind they get these things right.

Regarding your proposal for mandatory registration for cyclists, I’d be interested to know what the objective of the proposal is, whether it has been implemented in other cities and if yes what the outcomes were.

Increasing the number of pedal cycle users in the city may or may not be a useful traffic option - its a tad contentious. I have no interest whatsoever in participating in this type of ’spitting match’.

All road-users have a duty of care to each other, and this includes the many Kamikazi pedal cyclist red-light jumpers that I encounter with depressing regularity. Failing to stop at a red-light is an offense. I recently witnessed a pedal cyclist knock over a pedestrian, then just rode off. If that were a motorized vehicle the driver would have committed a criminal offense by leaving the scene of an accident.

Pedal cyclists must be subject to mandatory registration and have mandatory third-party insurance. No ifs, no buts, no exceptions.

As I requested at the outset. Please re-read my original comment - in toto.

B Peter

The health benefits of cycling are unclear. Cycling is a more exercise that driving/being driven, but less than walking (per kilometre). The air that cyclists breathe is more polluted and cycling is more dangerous than walking or driving. I am not aware of (Irish) data that would allow one to test which of these effects is most important.

I hesitated to say anything about “welfare” in the original post, but then people (incl. you) complained I was too negative.

It is clear that consumers love it (+). As JCDecaux is so keen to roll this out anywhere, the producer must like it too (+).

My hesitation is because I do not understand the implications for the government. JCDecaux and Dublin City Council have a complicated contract that specifies that JCDecaux run DublinBikes and a public information compaign in return for access to public displays and a sum of money. I do not know whether this deal is advantageous to Dublin. (I do not know in the sense of “I do not know” rather than in the sense of “I doubt”.)

So I also do not know whether overall welfare is up or down. It may be that JCDecaux has captured a rent rather than earned a producer surplus, and that the bikers are enjoying a subsidy. Then again, this may not be the case.

Would cyclists pay motor tax on the same basis as other road users, namely carbon emissions? On that basis I’d pay €0.

There are some bad cyclists on Dublin’s streets so training for cyclists and other road users is a good idea. Effective training and licensing of car drivers sounds like it would be a very helpful place to begin so maybe we should start there. Compulsory licensing, registration and insurance for cyclist are not good ideas:

http://www.copenhagenize.com/2008/12/bike-licences-are-stupid.html
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2008/05/rewarding-cyclists.html
http://www.transformscotland.org.uk/towards-a-healthier-economy.aspx
http://www.environment.ucf.edu/bikepath/27%20Reasons%20to%20Bike.htm

Your proposals would be a great way to get cyclists off the streets, but then that might be exactly what you want. Will you be wanting pedestrians to be registered, licensed and insured if they want to walk across your road?

On the subject of the original post, the health benefits of promoting cycling would need to be factored into any long-term cost-benefit analysis. Also, if the bike scheme and cycle-friendly planning can have a role in getting private cars out of the urban core then they will help improve public transport emissions and costs: witness the improvements seen by Dublin Bus when the College Green bus gate was operating. The idea that bikes increase congestion relies a lot, I think, on the bike being slower than the vehicular traffic. My experience of cycling around the centre of Dublin is that over any appreciable distance the bike is usually quicker than other city centre traffic and it’s the mechanically propelled vehicles that are causing the congestion.

Bikes are still the fastest way around Dublin, so this is individually rational.

To see a traffic jam of bikes, you’d need to visit a city in the Netherlands, just before school starts.

Dubland will never be CPH.

Granted, Dublin Bikes have replaced travel around town on foot to an extent in my case.

It’s when it’s late or I’m late that I would have taken taxis, but no longer generally do.

Also, if I am travelling out of town for a short period, it’s cheaper to take a bike than a taxi, and puts me in an all round better mood. Even if all docks are in town, it does not follow that all journeys are in town (though I understand that I am in a pretty small minority so far in doing this).

There’s something else that you say, that I would question. You say that the bikes are increasing congestion. Well maybe they do to a very marginal extent. But I have yet to be in a bike traffic jam in this city - and don’t really see that bikes slow down the rest of traffic too much. Meanwhile, I get around town faster, which seems to me more efficient than walking.

If the concern about congestion is that people are slowed down, I am not really sure that it’s a valid concern when travelling by bike is faster than on foot - and there is little evidence that the rest of town is slowed down.

which is why I can’t help thinking that in your characterisation of dublin bikes you are, perhaps, being just a little too clever. The fact that uptake has been so huge is not because all those people are irrational.

Increasing bike numbers will force motorists to watch out for them, hence a likely decline in the incidence of accidents.

I was recently in Utrecht where the bike rules. Envigorating.
http://www.photopol.com/utrecht/cycles.html

Glitches will be ironed out in time.

All the best to the economist/biking community in 2010.

“I have not found any data who rents these bikes and why. I would suspect, though, that the majority of replaced trips is by foot or bus, rather than by taxi, because a taxi would take you door-to-door in the same time or less so I don’t see how a rental bike would be much of a competitor in this segment of the market. I may be wrong.”

In my case, you are. Short ride taxi trips are very expensive relative to the service offered - dublin bikes are free. So, unless it’s lashing, dublin bikes it is.

Anyone know the rationale for this?

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/06/safety-in-numbers.php

Apparently, as the number of cyclists in New York doubled the number of accidents actually decreased.

The largest contributors to traffic congestion, carbon emissions, energy inefficiency, air pollution, ‘bus bunching’ and excessive speed in Dublin are the Lana Busanna. They should be dismantled ASAP - not all, but most of them. I am not a ‘car person’ - I’m a Biker and a very irate citizen. Where is the integrated ticketing? Where are the Sat Navs on the busanna? Is there some object of veneration in O’Connell Street? Or is it, as usual, just plain vanilla political ineptitude (aka: cowardice).

For you pedal bikers: Please lobby your TDs to legislate for the following:

1. Mandatory registration of all pedal bikes, with an annual Road Tax of - say, 100 euro.

2. Mandatory License and testing to ensure you are ‘fit’ to ride. Regular inspection of your bike to ensure it is ‘fit’ to be ridden.

3. Mandatory safety features to be installed by manufacturer/wholesaler before bicycle may be offered for retail sale.

4. And, mandatory third-party insurance.

Any of you ‘bikies’ not likey - tuff! If you wish to pedal around this metropolis, please pay your way - like all other road users. Thank you.

B Peter