Why I don't like cars much

[RogueMale]

Apologies in advance if this sounds like a rant, because it is one.

I don't think electric cars are the way forward. They're being promoted because people have become lazy and expect to travel around at speed and for long distances without expending any energy. Conventional cars burn fossil fuels and electric cars use energy obtained from burning fossil fuels, with a small contribution from nuclear and renewables.

While the vast majority of car/lorry drivers are safe and often considerate, about 1% of them are arseholes and a menace to those of us who choose to travel by other means, specifically bicycles (though pedestrians and motorcyclists are often also put at risk too). I have to put up with frequent abuse by this 1% just for being on the road. And replacing the internal combustion engine by an electric motor isn't going to dearseholify them. Either they're arseholes to begin with or are made one by their transportation choice.

Another point: after I ride my bike and as long as I don't encounter any of the aforementioned arseholes, although I may be physically exhausted and badly in need of a shower, I'm mentally alert and relaxed (more so after I have my shower). When I have to drive my car, afterwards I often feel mentally drained from the stress of driving. I don't understand how anyone faced with the choice between driving a car and riding a bike, chooses to drive the car, but that's because I'm not them and I accept they must somehow like it.

Rant over. Feel free to write a counter-rant on why cyclists are smug gits.

[JohnB]

I do find a motor vehicle quite useful, but cars are pretty pointless. There's no room in them for a kitchen, loo, shower, and a bed. I don't know how people can can travel in those tiny boxes without somewhere to eat, drink, have a doze etc, when they want a break. They rush off somewhere, and then rush back again, when I can spend a few days wandering to somewhere, and stay there until I've got somewhere else to wander off to. And they rush around at such high speed, that they miss most of the scenery. Unless they're following me . A nice cosy live-in vehicle, and a bike for rushing around and some exercise, is much more sensible .

[Kentucky Fried Panda]

motorbikes, much more fun than cars and more exhilarating than cycling... Unless it's downhill MTBing...

[adam2]

Whilst I would agree that a significant minority of motorists behave badly, especialy towards other road users, I suspect that the widespread use of electric vehicles will improve matters.

Most electric vehicles have limited range, acceleration, and top speed.
In the case of lightweight neighbourhood electric vehicles, for example there would be no question of endangering children and cyclists by doing 60MPH in a residential street since the vehicles are not capable of such speeds.
Full size/full specification EVs can be driven too fast for safety in side streets, but still have a lower top speed and slower acceleration than most petrol vehicles, which reduces the risks.
Harsh or needless acceleration substantialy reduces the battery range, as drivers will soon dicover, which will encourage careful driving.
EVs are generally cheaper to insure than similar size petrol vehicles, the insurance industry has obviously found the risk of expensive accidents to be less, which implies less risk to other road users.

A minority of electric vehicles such as the Tesla sports car have similar performance to petrol vehicles, and can be driven just as selfishly. These are however very costly and most unlikely to ever become popular.

I suspect that most EVs in a lower technology, lower energy future will be simple, cheap, powered by lead acid batteries, user repairable, and cabable of 30MPH at most, with many not exceeding 20.
For private vehicles probably based on golf carts, and for deliveries based on milk floats.
Long distance transport of persons or goods should be mainly by rail or ship, not road.
For occaisional deliveries of very heavy items (prefabricated buildings, wind turbines, transformers, large boilers and the like) I suspect that very costly diesel will be used in the near term, with an eventual return to steam power.

[the_lyniezian]

Somebody else makes almost the thread I wanted to make... just as well really.

I think that cars, including electric cars, are probably equivalent to barking up the wrong tree. Consider:

1. The prolifration of large numbers of fairly bulky (less easy for one to pass another) vehicles is partly responsible for traffic jams and gridlock, increasingoverall journey times un-necessarily.

2. Many towns and cities were not designed for large volumes of traffic. Durham (where I went to university) is a prime example- there were not only very stringent limits on car parking (as to how many cars per house were allowed, and restrictions were worse for students) but a lot of very narrow roads. The fork to the right just past the Students' Union was a right pain to try and cycle onas if something wanted to overtake you (mind you, it probably was a bus or truck) I'd pretty much have to pull over. Also, parking on the street also narrows streets even further, and pulling out of a side street onto a main road can be dangerous- leading to awkward one-way systems (which also exist to manage traffic flow, and are a nightmare).

3. Large volumes of motor vehicles inconvenience pedestrians too- you have to wait ages to cross the road, and some roads are completely uncrossable due to high levels of fast-moving traffic.

4. And the same with bikes, perhaps unless you're experienced. And to complicate matters further, TPTB don't even let you cycle on the pavemnts, as you're a danger to pedestrians- not that many cyclists, especially kids, actually care!

5. And of course, there's the energy/CO2 impact. A lot of vehicles are just going to strain the dwindling energy resources- buses prbably use less energy per head when full, and bikes don't need to be charged up or re-fuelled at all!

6. The limited range of electric cars makes them a rather unsuitable replacement for conventional cars on long distances- given the above, they're not really the ideal for short-distance, mainly urban travel either. Better to stickto a mixture of (possibly small in some parts?) buses and trains...

[Janco2]

Unfortunately there are areas in this country where cycling and walking any great distances is not always safe or easy.

We have no bus service near us and live at the top of a very steep hill.
Eden is not that far away and many people use their Sat Nav to get there without using designated routes. Many of these people drive at ridiculous speeds and as the roads are very narrow and winding..................

It is not always possible for older/infirm or very young people to walk and cycle everywhere and the infrastructure that was around many years ago has long since disappeared.

That said, basically I do agree that EV's should not replace all cars. We do need to drastically reduce the number of vehicles on our roads.

[emordnilap]

I don't think electric cars are the way forward. They're being promoted because people have become lazy and expect to travel around at speed and for long distances without expending any energy. Conventional cars burn fossil fuels and electric cars use energy obtained from burning fossil fuels, with a small contribution from nuclear and renewables.

I too came to the same conclusion a good long time ago. The pale green politicians we have promote electric transport as being within their remit and the answer to all our problems but fail to see any bigger picture.

Promoting such business as usual is a cul-de-sac. Humanity has had a quick blip of lazy excess and eventually we will be back to doing things largely sun powered. This cannot include fast, mass, at-whim personal transport.

Sure, there are people who cannot use a strenuous mode of getting around, the disabled and very elderly. These people need to be catered for. Privatising bus and train services reduces options, as does encouraging out of town shopping and - a huge cause of increase in traffic - building more and more roads.

Also, those who complain that they're too far from public transport...errrm, move nearer it. Or do something, lobby the authorities, whatever. Personal fossil-fueled transport is a dead-end. Prepare for its demise now and be ahead of the pack.

While the vast majority of car/lorry drivers are safe and often considerate, about 1% of them are arseholes and a menace to those of us who choose to travel by other means, specifically bicycles (though pedestrians and motorcyclists are often also put at risk too). I have to put up with frequent abuse by this 1% just for being on the road. And replacing the internal combustion engine by an electric motor isn't going to dearseholify them. Either they're arseholes to begin with or are made one by their transportation choice.

It's all the usual modern full-of-excuses/want-it-all/take-no-blame mentality. Add in the fact that restrictions to our freedom are often there to curb the excesses of a selfish few - the same in so many walks of life. Total sympathy to you, RogueMale. I've been abused on the road so many times and you don't develop the necessary thick skin. It's a shock and annoyance (as well as dangerous) every time. One of those times, it's the end of your life. This does not feature in tosspot calculations.

Another point: after I ride my bike and as long as I don't encounter any of the aforementioned arseholes, although I may be physically exhausted and badly in need of a shower, I'm mentally alert and relaxed (more so after I have my shower). When I have to drive my car, afterwards I often feel mentally drained from the stress of driving. I don't understand how anyone faced with the choice between driving a car and riding a bike, chooses to drive the car, but that's because I'm not them and I accept they must somehow like it.

Yep, I've said it before and no doubt say it again: a car is a millwheel round the neck and fecks up your health too in more ways than one. A car is a cumbersome burden, needing feeding and looking after, finding where to park it etc etc.

And if you're in a rush in a busy area, forget it. What a waste of time cars are!

There is no way to get your average punter out of cars, as far as I can see, let alone the arrogants. It takes a particular type of mentality, even just to walk, never mind cycle. Again, it's a litany of excuses, it's not worth the effort. Pity them but don't waste effort on them.

LOL: I was in shorts and t-shirt to go out at lunchtime from work: one guy said, "I hope we get the kind of weather you're expecting!" He was thinking of sun, I was thinking of rain - those clothes suited either.

Rant over. Feel free to write a counter-rant on why cyclists are smug gits.

Not me: I'm with you. Carry on cycling up there, on the high moral ground!

[the mad cyclist]

I'm sorry RogueMale, but I don't agree that 1% of motorists are arseholes. The problem is, cars produce Red Mist.

[JohnB]

Can you imagine this happening in Britain?

Germans have been throwing an enormous party on one of the busiest stretches of the country's famous autobahn (motorway) network.

As many as three million people turned up for a giant banquet at picnic tables along 60km (40 miles) of motorway between Duisburg and Dortmund.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10676728

[emordnilap]

Yes, but it would be raining.

[JohnB]

Yes, but it would be raining.

Not necessarily. We had a mini dry sunny spell on Saturday afternoon for the local carnival. Shame the carnival suddenly finished early when someone discovered they didn't have the right licence .

[MrG]

Can you imagine this happening in Britain?
Quote:
Germans have been throwing an enormous party on one of the busiest stretches of the country's famous autobahn (motorway) network.

As many as three million people turned up for a giant banquet at picnic tables along 60km (40 miles) of motorway between Duisburg and Dortmund.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10676728

It used to happen quite a lot John, they called it 'Reclaim the streets'

Unfortunately it kind of spiralled out of control a bit and turned into something totally different.

[MrG]

And yeah emordnilap / RogueMale I do hear what your saying especially regarding the danger of being on the roads on a bike. I have to admit that I avoid the roads as much as possible especially the busy ones. That's by a combination of cycle paths, back alleys / lanes, going through parks etc. and using the pavement.

I've seen discussions on hear along the lines of "cyclists should be on the road, cycling on the pavement is a menace etc." evolving into bitchyness and black / white arguments and sweeping generalisations to which I haven't bothered to contribute.

The thing is its all about the way you cycle on the pavement.. you just need to be aware of what you are doing. When I cycle on the pavement then if I see for example an old lady or someone walking with kids I'll drop back on the road for a bit. If that means dropping back onto the road in front of a massive jugernaut I'll stop I'm not in a hurry. If I'm cycling on the pavement and pass anyone I'll slow to walking speed. Again I'm not in a hurry and you can avoid busy pavements as well as avoiding busy roads. Its all about choosing your route (and time of day).

On a bike the fact is you are kind of between being a pedestrian and being traffic. You can't simply say "your traffic you should be on the road" as some powerswitchers have done. That's the kinds of black and white nonsense that I'm talking about. Life isn't that simple and nor is cycling. In the less than ideal world in which we live the roads are dangerous for cyclists and as a consequence you move along your way kind of switching between being traffic and being pedestrian (which includes getting off and pushing when the alternative is a super dangerous super highway or a super massive hill!)

All you need to do is do it with respect for other pedestrians AND other road users.. interact with pedestrians.. ring your bell, say 'excuse me, no after you' It isn't hard.

[RenewableCandy]

There is no way to get your average punter out of cars, as far as I can see, ...

Tin-opener and a venteuse?

I've come to the conclusion that a lot of today's motorists are in fact poorer than a lot of today's cyclists (or at least feel that way). They're the people who have to live far away from work because of high house prices anywhere decent. And on what evidence do I base this? There are 7 professors in the department where I used to work, and all of them either walked in or cycled.

So, there's Fred Bloggs commuting from his house, which isn't where he'd really like to live, to his work, which is either under threat, or which he doesn't like, because he's in enforced competition with all his workmates. The time spent in his mental metal box constitutes the only time of day (apart from sleep, but like most Brits he's insomniac) he has to himself, when he's not being "got-at".

I feel sorry for him, but people like that are a bloody menace on the roads.

[RogueMale]

Whilst I would agree that a significant minority of motorists behave badly, especialy towards other road users, I suspect that the widespread use of electric vehicles will improve matters.

Most electric vehicles have limited range, acceleration, and top speed.
In the case of lightweight neighbourhood electric vehicles, for example there would be no question of endangering children and cyclists by doing 60MPH in a residential street since the vehicles are not capable of such speeds.
Full size/full specification EVs can be driven too fast for safety in side streets, but still have a lower top speed and slower acceleration than most petrol vehicles, which reduces the risks.
Harsh or needless acceleration substantialy reduces the battery range, as drivers will soon dicover, which will encourage careful driving.

Interesting point. I think there's a case for adding a basic physics module to the driving theory test, so that drivers have to understand concepts like kinetic and potential energy, and how they relate to speed and gravity, power, and how it relates to fuel consumption, and so on, so that drivers have the necessary understanding to improve their fuel efficiency. All these are learned intuitively when you're on a bike, riding up and down hills. I'd also like them to practise energy efficient driving as soon as they can drive safely, perhaps by a short course after passing the driving test.

The other requirement I'd make is that before being allowed to drive they have to be a competent bicycle rider, perhaps by making the cycling proficiency test or something similar a prerequisite.

A point I didn't make in my "rant" is that as well as peak oil/climate change, there's also an obesity problem, and a major contribution to these is the rise of the motor car (sedentary occupations and children playing indoors are also important). Yet the wobbly finger of blame rarely points at those, but instead at the food industry, which though it might play a part, is probably less significant than the sharp reduction in exercise over the past few decades.