View Full Version : More bicycles than cars sold in US past 12 months
Frank
10-02-2005, 10:10 AM
Bicycle sales boom in US amid rising gas prices Sat Oct 1, 9:15 AM ET
Yahoo News
More bicycles than cars have been sold in the United States over the past 12 months, with rising gas prices prompting commuters to opt for two wheels instead of four.
Not since the oil crisis of 1973 have bicycles sold in such big numbers, according to Tim Blumenthal, executive director of Bikes Belong, an industry association.
"Bicycle sales are near an all-time high with 19 million sold last year -- close to the 20 million sold during the oil embargo in the early 1970s," said Blumenthal, whose association is based in Boulder in the western state of Colorado.
The US Chamber of Commerce says more bicycles have been sold than cars over the past 12 months.
In a country where most of the population still relies heavily on cars, some 87 million people have climbed on a bike in the past 12 months, Blumenthal said.
While less than car sales, bike sales generate about five to six billion dollars of business a year, he said.
Bicycles are back mainly because the sharp increase in gas prices has made them a practical alternative, said Paul Gaiser, owner of Scooter Commuter in Bethesda, Maryland.
"Above all it's the higher price of gas, but also it's concern for the environment and the cost of another car," Gaiser told AFP.
The average price of gas in the United States has increased 47.3 percent in a year, according to figures published last week by the American Automobile Association.
Gaiser believes the bicycle trend is no passing fad.
"Our sales have quadrupled in the last two months," he said. "I think it's a major paradigm shift. It's here to stay."
Cyclists on the streets of the US capital agreed.
"I bought my first bike six months ago to go to college. I could not do without it. It's faster in traffic and less expensive," said Erik Lubell, a student at George Washington University wearing a multi-colored helmet.
Near the affluent district of Georgetown, Stella Hardwood said she had a different motivation.
"I don't want to put on weight and my bike forces me to exercise," Hardwood said.
The superstar status of cycling champion Lance Armstrong, who has won the Tour de France seven times, has also helped spark interest in the sport.
The US government has also done its part to promote a more bicycle-friendly environment. Some 3.5 million dollars in federal money has been set aside to create cycling trails over the next four years.
The US government has also done its part to promote a more bicycle-friendly environment. Some 3.5 million dollars in federal money has been set aside to create cycling trails over the next four years.
Although what is said above is the only part I have a little problem with.... I know that this is a start, but I wonder how much the government spends on the Federal Highway System every year.
As for me, I have made a point of living in a one motor vehicle home and I walk to work often...
You see, there is a little problem called Peak Oil that this and most industrialized countries are ignoring. Let's see what will happen in the next couple of years.... $3.00 a gallon will look like the good old days!
Russ,
I believe this article is incorrect. I'll try to find the correct information shortly, but as I recall the new Federal Energy Bill sets aside as much as 3.5 - 4 BILLION in bike paths/routes.
If that went to new bikepath construction not on the road, I estimate it to be about 12000 miles.
Rick
Blastinbob
10-02-2005, 04:36 PM
The Gov't should give us a tax break for bike purchases !!! :D :D
I believe this article is incorrect. I'll try to find the correct information shortly, but as I recall the new Federal Energy Bill sets aside as much as 3.5 - 4 BILLION in bike paths/routes.
I wondered if it is 3.5 to 4 billion or 3 to 4 million. That's my confusion... and thanks for the clarification!
The Gov't should give us a tax break for bike purchases !!! :D :D
I agree with Bob, I just don't see it happening in this administration. Or any other in the horizon for that matter. Remember, today Public Enemy #1 is not the SUV, it is the large trucks that use our highways and Diesel so much. Whatever happened to the rail system for shipping and for passengers???
How about tax breaks for:
1) Having less cars per household?
2) No new car purcahses/leases at all in a house hold?
3) Smaller or more energy efficient house sizes?
The list goes on...
This is way too radical! Our governments are not known to do anything too radical....
Russ & Bob,
It IS 3.5 billion plus. I've found a number of sites that refer to the amount, but I tried to slog my way through the actual bill, and its beyond my ken. Whether the money is actually spent is the question, and for that, I refer you to your pork-gathers, 'er, representatives. That'll be my phone calls and emails tomorrow, and I'd urge you to do the same (Serotta James - I hope that's not a political statement). I'd really like to understand how that mileage will be spent, and i'm hoping some of it will work for bikes + mass transit solutions.
Dense urban housing is a feasible solution. It's also one that folks really resist. In California, its easy to build a solar-energy-break-even house for about 5% more than standard construction, which is recouped in 8 years. CA offers nice rebates for this. This is entirely independent of the size of the house.
I admit that I drive more than I should, and live in too large a house. My commute is 25 miles each way. We just bought our first hybrid - and it's our first SUV. Next year I'll buy a proper hybrid and look at ultra-mileage conversions. There's an outfit here that looks to get 100mpg on converted Priae and they should be shipping next year.
Russ, I'm worried about Peak Oil, though that may be sufficiently political and OT that we shouldn't dive into it here. The 'food mile' concept is concerning - there just isn't enough energy at a reasonable cost to continue to ship food around the world as part of the equation.
I'd fully support bike tax credits, by the way.
-- rick
Fixed
10-02-2005, 05:26 PM
bro I don't own a car and hope I never do...... unless it's a early 70's 911 fat chance of that.cheers :beer:
Russ,
You started it! Railroad infrastructure and economics were a passion of mine in college, and years later that passion is coming back.
What is missing here though is the economics that make rail worthwhile. If we can have *electric trains* then it makes a lot of sense. (and, yes, I'm an engineer and not a nitwit that thinks that electricity magically appears - its just that there are abundant non-petroleum sources). We have right-of-way which has had little ability to electrify it - we live in a big country. There is research going on right now that makes it feasible - battery / super capacitor hybrid trains. Here's a representative study (http://leiwww.epfl.ch/publications/destraz_barrade_rufer_pesc_04.pdf). The interesting thing about this is that you can electrify about 5% of the track - 1 mile live, 20 miles dead, and recharge while running the trains at full speed through the live mile. For those who haven't taken a train apart in recent years, there are electric motors which are used for braking, with resistive heat dissapation on the tops of the engines. This is just wasted energy, as it was in cars before regenerative braking.
i should spend more time on the bike, and less on the soapbox,
-- rick
Russ, You started it! Railroad infrastructure and economics were a passion of mine in college, and years later that passion is coming back.
Hey just like there are many ways to find alternates to fossil fuels, there are many ways to continue a post and threads without getting (politically) nasty!
We are civil, educated people, no?
Keep up the good work and enthusiam, rwl!!! ;)
BumbleBeeDave
10-03-2005, 07:03 AM
. . . but I agree with Russ that this subject can easily be discussed with civility and intelligence. This is indeed a political subject, but I don’t see it as a Republican or Democrat problem. At it’s core it is a culture problem and in general, the politicians of both parties try to give the public what they want because that’s how they get re-elected. The paradigm shift here can be assisted by politicians, but the true change must come from the people creating the culture the politicians serve. In this case that’s the wide base of American culture that has for years glamorized big fast cars and the supposed freedom they confer on their owners--us.
And it’s plain old economics of the market that will force that paradigm shift. Highway spending outranks bike-related spending by a factor of hundreds to one, and that’s not going to change anytime soon. But the gap doesn’t have to narrow that much for cyclists to still get a great deal, since building a bike path per mile is enormously cheaper than building a pre-stressed concrete expressway.
I have read many places for many years that world oil production will peak in the next 20-30 years, then gradually decrease as drilling and recovery technology fails to keep up with the market need. Is this what you’re talking about, Russ?
SOMETHING has gotta give and we’re gonna find out what it is in the next fifty years. While I don’t like paying the price now for gas, I have privately also thought for years that the best thing that could happen in this country for alternative energy and transportation would be for gas to go up--a lot. Whack the mule in the head with that 2x4 and it can’t help but notice you. I just hope that the American public is not so stupified by video games and reality shows that they can make the paradigm shift before we get into yet another war.
BBDave
While this is potentially political, I think it's also quite on-topic for a bicycle board, although perhaps not for specific groundrules of this forum? But I'll jump in for now.
Dave, you're right about the concept of peak oil, but there's a growing consensus that we're a LOT closer than 20-30 years away. Some people think we may be there now - others think its within the next 5-10 years at the outside. And with China and India ramping up their oil demand as fast as they are, prices are going to go up a lot regardless. The only questions are how fast and how high. We're not going to run out anytime soon, but the impact is likely to be pretty severe and we have to start the transition away from oil dependence yesterday. Which we didn't do. Regarding food, it's not just transporting it - think about how much oil is used in modern farming - including all of the oil based fertilizers and pesticides. Food production costs are going to go up as much as food transport and our population is very possibly already bigger than we can sustainably feed.
Rail is one of many parts of the solution, but the problem is that we've built a nation of burbs around automobile infrastructure and rail is just too centralized to effectively serve it without transitional trips to the rail centers/stations. There's a lot of room for ramping up bicycle use in this equation, including for mixed-mode commutes.
There's more than plenty to think about regarding energy issues.
-Ray
Andreu
10-03-2005, 08:00 AM
not get too excited about the rate of bicycle sales. The rate of bicycles sales is huge in Europe but does not necessarily mean there is a sea change to huge amounts of cycling (but I expect that in general bike use is greater here than USA). Many households have more than 2 bikes.
I suppose at least this is a good start that people are buying bikes but
whether they will use them and continue to use them is another matter.
A
...And with China and India ramping up their oil demand as fast as they are.... Regarding food, it's not just transporting it - think about how much oil is used in modern farming - including all of the oil based fertilizers and pesticides...
-Ray
The 3,000 mile salad and the 12,000 mile shirt don't look so cheap these days.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.