Hacker News Reader

Comment by ljf | Hacker News Reader

If you think it isn't rainy in those locations... Amsterdam gets about 35 inches of rain a year vs 25 inches in London - plenty damp enough. Don't forget the canals often freeze up yearly or so in Amsterdam too, so it can be pretty cold there, and due to wet air feel pretty vile - but people still cycle as it is easy, fast and cheap.

View on HN

No, it doesn't get rainy, rainy, you don't get half of the city flooded in just 30 or so minutes [1], most of the times it's just a drizzle that's manageable with a decent raincoat.

[1] https://youtu.be/Ve-oExiwq_0?t=92

That's a strawman. Intense weather like a flooded city that would stop a car would of course stop a bike, but you're either stuck at home or stuck outside regardless of what you do. The only relevant weather is common weather you would have no issue with in a car (or would not allow you to do remote work that day).

It should also be noted that many Europeans have cars but bike in medium to good weather. I take the car in hail or snow for example, but bike as much as a car otherwise as I physically and mentally feel better after biking, I reduce pollution and I save money. Wins all around.

London https://youtube.com/shorts/Pvjm3NvJaWI?feature=share

Amsterdam https://youtu.be/1twXqpsDUIQ

- but a way, let's go back to what you said: Nor do you get pouring rain all that often.

Have you lived in either of those countries?

Raincoats work when you are walking, and the rain comes from above, but not when you are cycling, because the rain comes from the sides, and below.

It's really complicated to cycle in the rain, especially in cold winter rain. You have to have specialised clothing that will both keep you warm, and be waterproof. Special gloves, insulated rubber boots? And you still get sweaty underneath at the same time.

How do you cover your helmet? Your face? Have fun taking a shower in freezing water three times a week for 6 months of the year, ice bucket challenge on the way to work. I hope you don't mind those extra sick days.

It's not that complicated, you need a rain jacket, waterproof pants and you are already 90% there. If you want to be more comfortable if you are biking longer than 30-45 minutes in bitter cold before freezing (5C or less) it can be sensible to have insulated shoes but it's not a requirement at all, I usually don't wear any weatherproof shoes during spring/fall in Stockholm, rainy and windy around 5C or less and experienced no issues having a change of socks + shoes after a 45-60 minutes commute on a bike.

It's really not an issue if you just get used to it, every time I read similar comments to this I can only think of a picky child complaining about relatively minor issues, and mostly they are imagined ones by people who never really had to/tried to bike during these conditions...

It is an issue to have your hands, feet, head and face soaked in freezing water for 45 minutes.

> experienced no issues having a change of socks + shoes

Oh so now you have to carry extra shoes and socks all the time, "no problem" lol. You can just go into the subway and all of these issues disappear, and you will get to your destination faster, so cycling is bad in comparison.

It doesn't matter if you can find some person who likes it, the vast majority of people will optimise for practicality and efficiency, because that's what our society revolves around.

Building bike lanes is the easy part, the hard part is coming up with the extra time and patience for people to put up with a longer and more uncomfortable commute.

> Oh so now you have to carry extra shoes and socks all the time, "no problem" lol. You can just go into the subway and all of these issues disappear, and you will get to your destination faster, so cycling is bad in comparison.

I already have a backpack when biking, a change of shoes and socks is a non-issue, I don't know why this would be a problem for you but yes, if you are looking for "maximum convenience" instead of a balance of trade-offs.

Again, it's not faster for me to take the subway, the subway doesn't have infinite capacity, crowding during rush hour is a thing. There are issues with any mode of transportation, fighting against bikes and biking infrastructure is definitely the strangest position I have seen someone take.

I don't understand if you are just a contrarian or if you really believe that investment in biking infrastructure is an issue for transportation in dense cities... If so the only argument I read boils down to "it's not super convenient and hence is bad and no one does it". I don't see reality in that argument.

Yup, you want and can optimise for practicality, biking infrastructure is definitely not holding that up. Now trying to argue that biking is "bad" is way out, biking is bad for your constraints, I know tons of people who bike everyday in northern Europe and have no issues with it.

Not sure exactly what your point is... We shouldn't invest in biking infrastructure? Because... It's "bad" for your convenience constraints?

Biking is not convenient/practical enough therefore not enough people will do it to justify large investment. This is why billions for a subway station make sense while parking spots and bike lanes would be way better utilized as restaurant patios in dense cities.

Most dutch people own a raincoat and -pants for biking, you put it over your clothes and remain dry. They cost maybe €30. No-one wears a helmet, nor do you need to.

Most Amish people just ride a horse and it's just fine. Yeah so what, it's obviously impractical and we have better options.

The amount of adult dutch people who cycle to work in the rain is a small minority.

> but people still cycle as it is easy, fast and cheap

some people do cycle, but most people do not, because there are other options that are easier and faster.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com