Comments on: German Efficiency

By: Harry, ExposedPlanet

Harry, ExposedPlanet — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:57:59 +0000

It’s deceptive as the images should have been shot with the same angle/point of view.

And its much more deceptive as the cars should have taken up the space they do in reality. Nobody can park like this, how would you remove a car from the middle? I would say they will use at least double the space in real life and triple when actually driving.

@nathan: check http://www.flickr.com/photos/exposedplanet/3394029253/ for a photo of 5 very expensive cars + a bike (mine
Which is fittingly called: Guess which can carry the most luggage.
Cheers

By: Nathan Gess

Nathan Gess — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:27:27 +0000

Alright, now time for a picture depicting how much luggage/goods can be carried by each traveler. The ease of utility will speak for itself.

By: Here's why it's deceptive

Here's why it's deceptive — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 04:37:10 +0000

The 1st picture is zoomed in… look at the building tops.

The 2nd picture is zoomed out the most.

The 3rd picture is zoomed out a bit more than the first.

By: danc

danc — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 02:19:12 +0000

One more thing ….

Regarding the picture caption: poster in city of Muenster Planning Office, August 2001, Credit: Press-Office City of Münster, Germany not Munich.

Danke!

By: danc

danc — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 02:11:38 +0000

Oh my, is someone cutting that cheese again?

Muenster road space poster — check the numbers! from John S. Allen’s Bicycle Blog.

To summarize: The poster, and the caption “amount of space needed to transport the same number of people by bus, bicycle or car” are misleading, because the vehicles are parked, not moving. All in all, the Muenster poster and the US government publication that quotes it make an apples vs grapefruit vs. cranberries comparison – of dried fruit. Each mode — bus, bicycle or private motor vehicle, is preferable for some trips, but the comparison doesn’t get at why a person will choose one or another mode, and it seriously misrepresents the space requirements it purports to illustrate.

By: Nick

Nick — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 03:46:59 +0000

For the Obama inauguration there was concern that there would be massive gridlock. Crowds of over 2 million were expected, about triple a typical DC rush hour — and DC suffers from some of the worst traffic congestion in the country. The problem was solved with one simple step: private automobiles were banned from the downtown core. On Inauguration Day, if you wanted to go downtown you could do it on foot, by bike, via public transportation or in a cab. Three times the number of people of a typical day came into downtown, and it was easier to get around than normal.

By: Eric_RoM

Eric_RoM — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 02:45:45 +0000

OK, the Munster pix are misleading: five minutes with photoshop will make them comparable. Somebody get on that.

This is what happens when you use amateur photographers.

By: Yet another Matt

Yet another Matt — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:23:14 +0000

Don’t forget though, that city planning (or the lack thereof) has a profound impact on which mode of transportation is the most logical for people to use. Sprawl, design and hours of public transportation, and safety are all factors that lead to people choosing cars over other means of getting around. In cities like New York and DC, it is often more of a hassle to have a car than to use public transportation, but probably in a majority of other places in the US, that isn’t true at all.

By: nonplus no more

nonplus no more — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 16:31:53 +0000

Ok - so this is what I understand from the marketing campaign.

Given that there are only so many miles of roads available for cars, there will always be gridlock congestion during rush hour. See picture 1.

Pic 2 and 3 shows the impact of alternate modes of transport on that stretch of road. Imagine this as the surface street where you just attended a Rush Concert of your football/soccer game, packed with fans all trying to leave the venue at the same time.

If the consumer can intelligently modify their own behavior by choosing a combination of car+bus+bicycle as a society we’d all benefit by reducing congestion. By providing choice we all benefit.

It helps that people can bike/walk/take public transit for shorter trips and leave the street to those who must use it - this is NOT a zero sum game.

Thanks in advance for your thoughtful comments.

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:13:22 +0000

What an incredible inefficient use of space is created when cultures embrace private motorized vehicles. As stated by Mike and MU, motorized vehicles in motion take up much more space than bikes in motion and thus the pictures understate the advantages of cycling in urban environments. And then there are all those incredibly large FREE parking lots (not included in the pics) most businesses insist on for those motorized vehicles.