Header

最近在中國大陸的報章也有討論香港的單車政策,我們在此也作出幾點回應。以下是南方都巿報的文章,接著是我的簡單回應。

2012-10-29南方都市報
公共交通發達,何須追求“單車城市”
作者:黎媛(深圳,前駐港記者)
摘要:近日,有港媒報導,近年倫敦、紐約等大城市正致力打造“單車城市”,而踩單車在香港也日趨流行,只是香港市區道路設計並不鼓勵單車行駛,但是,既然倫敦等城市可以做到,香港為什麼要對“單車城市”絕對地說不呢?
發現香港
近日,有港媒報導,近年倫敦、紐約等大城市正致力打造“單車城市”,而踩單車在香港也日趨流行,只是香港市區道路設計並不鼓勵單車行駛,但是,既然倫敦等城市可以做到,香港為什麼要對“單車城市”絕對地說不呢?
單車確是低碳、環保的出行方式,騎單車又能強身健體,但是“有些風你不必跟”。香港完全沒有必要成為所謂的“單車城市”,因為香港的公共交通已較成熟,它的最大亮點就是“無縫接駁”。
……(請按這連結閱讀這文章:http://gcontent.oeeee.com/d/68/d68a18275455ae3e/Blog/b08/06dc06.html)

回應

不錯,香港的公共交通比國內外的許多城市都發達,但是,是否香港的交通已經完美?香港就不需要單車作為交通工具的好處?

現在香港交通的壞處:

1.交通擠塞問題:當然香港的道路有暢通的時間,但是難道香港無交通擠塞問題嗎,這不用說了吧,人們看運輸署的即時道路情況報告是用來做什麼的,豈不是要在出門前留意交通擠塞的情況嗎?

2.交通費用:公共交通不斷加價,遠超過通漲,香港人是肉隨鉆板上,亳無其他交通選擇,貧窮人為省車資,寧願走路大半個小時不上巴士的大有人在。

3.空氣污染:香港的空氣污染主要來自汽車,包括公共交通,不要忘了地鐵用的電力也是燒煤產生的,這也算環保嗎?

4.使用公共交通費時失事:等巴士小巴、排隊、上上落落地面地底….普通的一個半小時車程,可能要加上另外半小時用來等車及上落地鐵等。而且車子不一定由門口直達門口,仍要轉車及走路。

5.公共交通人多擠迫:住在香港迫巴士迫地鐵是注定要受的苦嗎?每天這樣迫車真叫人累,也不利身心健康。

6.即使公共交通發達,香港的汽車還是太多:「按政府的2009交通統計年報 12,2009年全香港的登記和註冊車輛分別有642270和584070架,而其中私人轎車(Private Car)則為429754和 393812架,佔全港車輛67%之多,而公共運輸車輛(巴士、小巴、非專營巴士)則只有19739和19585架,只佔全港車輛約3.3%。所以,換句話說,私人轎車使用者,在市區土地中佔一至兩成的「道路」用地的使用分額,比沒擁有私人轎車的大眾市民,實在高出很多。」(趙智勳,無法使用單車的城市;文化研究@嶺南 第二十三期 2011年3月)

7.為大量汽車建大量道路浪費巿區珍貴土地:「香港佔地1108平方公里,農地、魚塘、林地、灌叢、劣地、水塘、墳場等按常理較少人使用或低度開發的土地佔了735平方公里,市區用地(概括的有住宅、商業、工業、機構/休憩、道路、鐵路、機場用地)則佔了約211平方公里。但是,單就市區用地中「道路」一項,就已經佔了42平方公里,差不多是兩成市區土地,比起「私人住宅」和「公屋」用地的總和(41平方公里)還稍稍多一點。」(趙智勳,無法使用單車的城市;文化研究@嶺南 第二十三期 2011年3月)

8.交通安全問題:小巴的車速高是好事嗎?2011年交通意外死亡人數為130人,絕大部分是由汽車直接引起,可是我們已接受了馬路的危機性,汽車為城巿帶來的危險是我們必須要接受的嗎?為什麼我們的小孩子在街上不可以自由走動,一定要由成人拖著手一刻也不可以放手?

單車卻正好可以解決以上香港的問題:

1.解決交通擠塞問題:有否留意路上的巴士不是所有都滿座的,而只有司機一人的私家車比比皆是。鼓勵使用單車可減少車輛,減少交通擠塞,外國正是用限制汽車及鼓勵單車的方法來解決交通擠塞。

2.節省交通費用:幾個月的交通費已經可以夠買一輛單車。

3.零空氣污染:單車是世上最環保的交通工具,只有踏單車者的二氧化碳排放,電力車及地鐵也要用煤發電,並不算環保。

4.巿區內直接及快速的交通:香港巿區面積小,單車十分方便,短距離比任何的交通工具都要快,因不用等車,不會塞車,而且是點到點直達門口,世上哪有另一種更方便的交通工具!筆者試過踏單車和家人乘的士比賽,家人上了的士之後我踏單車同時起步,10分鐘後我比他們還快回到家門(注意:我是等她們找到了的士,讓她們上了車才一同出發,足足讓了她們幾分鐘)。

5.享受旅程:踏單車是健康及開心的事,有些單車代步者寧願刻意踏長一些距離享受旅程。

6.減少汽車:鼓勵單車,自然可減少公共汽車及私家車。

7.節省珍貴土地:停泊著及在路面行駛的單車比汽車及巴士都佔用更少的人均面積,單單在泊車位上,單車已經可以為巿區省回許多土地。

8.改善交通安全問題:在城巿的街道限制車速,鼓勵巿區用單車,道路安全自會大大提高。

單車為城巿所帶來的好處這麼多,為何香港就必須要忍受倚靠汽車及地鐵的害處,為何獨有香港不需要單車這些好處?香港可能暫時不需要變成倚重單車的城巿,但絕對應該利用單車,配合城巿交通運輸,讓各種交通發揮所長。

現在香港所有長短途乘客都擠迫在同一輛巴士及列車中,全無分流,做成乘客擠迫及交通擠塞,如果城巿中鼓勵用單車,城巿內的中短途旅程絕對可以發揮單車的威力,而中長途可以用單車運載架來結合單車於公共交通如巴士及地鐵中,把短途乘客和長途乘客分流,自然能改善交通。「善用單車的城巿」不是比「無法使用單車的城巿」更好嗎?

space required to transport 60 people

space required to transport 60 people

 

Share This :

There’s a great new post on the Bikeyface blog, copied here for your enjoyment:

I bike pretty much everywhere in the city these days. But I also have a driver’s license and 16 years of driving experience. And occasionally I still drive. Like the other day I ended up driving across town to run an errand. Now, if you live anywhere near a city, you know that the driving experience is not exactly as advertised:

Myth of the Open Road

It’s a little bit more like this:

Myth of the Open Road

Which is not a good advertisement for cars. But this is exactly what I found myself driving in.

After my errand, I decided I wanted to stay out. I was hungry and there are great restaurants downtown. And some shops too. (I know, because I discovered them all by bike.) But in a car, I realized that I couldn’tcasually go to any of them. I was trapped…

Myth of the Open Road

…and had to pass them by. It was like I was carrying the weight of the car rather than it carrying me. And I was tired. So I went straight home instead. Cars are useful, but driving in a city is kind of like trying to thread a needle while wearing a boxing glove.

Share This :

From the NPR website comes an article about cycling infrastructure that we can dream of here in Hong Kong.

Every day, one-third of the people of Copenhagen ride their bikes to work or school. Collectively, they cycle more than 750,000 miles daily, enough to make it to the moon and back. And city officials want even more people to commute, and over longer distances.

So a network of 26 new bike routes, dubbed “the cycling superhighway,” is being built to link the surrounding suburbs to Copenhagen.

Lars Gaardhoj, an official with the Copenhagen capital region, says the routes will be straight and direct.

“It will be very fast for people who use their bike,” he says. “This is new because traditionally cycle paths have been placed where there is space for them and the cars didn’t run. So now the bike is going to challenge the car.”

The first highway, to the busy suburb of Albertslund some 10 miles outside the city, was completed in April.

To test it, I got a rental bike and went out for a ride.

No Place For Slowpokes

One of the first things you learn about these bike lanes is that you have to move in fast. This is not leisurely biking — this is serious stuff in Copenhagen.

It’s a parallel world of transportation: You’ve got the cars on the roads and the people on their bikes. There are thousands and thousands of people on their bikes here in this city.

NPR reporter Eleanor Beardsley rides in one of the new bike lanes in Copenhagen. The city is building more than two dozen lanes from the suburbs into the city. They cater to cyclists by including such things as rails and footrests at stoplights.

EnlargeCourtesy of Eleanor Beardsley for NPRNPR reporter Eleanor Beardsley rides in one of the new bike lanes in Copenhagen. The city is building more than two dozen lanes from the suburbs into the city. They cater to cyclists by including such things as rails and footrests at stoplights.

As commuters pour into Copenhaghen on the new highway, I stop biker Cona Endelgo at a red light. Endelgo says he used to drive his car to work, but biking is better.

“It gives you more exercise and motion, and it’s more free, and it’s quicker. When I pass the harbor, I wave to the cars,” he says.

Each mile of bike highway will cost about $1 million. The project is to be financed by the city of Copenhagen and 21 local governments. And in a country where both right- and left-leaning politicians regularly ride bikes to work, it has bilateral support.

Addressing The Needs Of Bikers

Several innovations are being tested, like “green wave” technology, which times traffic lights to suit bikers. If you maintain a certain pace, you can ride all the way through into the city without stopping. There are also footrests with bars to lean on at traffic lights, and a bike pump every mile in case you have a flat.

Outside the city, the pace is slower and people talk to each other as they ride. Jacob Messen, 33, is on his way to a water park with his kids. He says support for the project runs deep.

“Bicycles are a very essential element in most people’s lives in Denmark,” he says. “We have them as small infants and all the way up through the ages.”

He’s not kidding. Another rider, 83-year-old Soulva Jensen, is using the highway to visit her daughter in a neighboring town.

“The trains are too much trouble at the moment, so I thought it was easier to take the bike,” she says.

Once the highway network is completed, an estimated 15,000 additional people will switch from driving to biking. And that, say officials, will have a direct impact on the environment, public health and finances. The bike highway alone is expected to save Copenhagen’s health care system some $60 million a year.

Share This :

HKCAll has surveyed candidates in Sunday’s (9 Sept) elections for the Legislative Council for their views on cycling.

The results show that many strongly support the substantive development of cycling for Hong Kong.  Some are better informed than others, but this is an important time for progress in many areas, with important decisions being made about key development projects, such as West Kowloon, Kai Tak and Northern District, as well as the sluggish development of the New Territories Cycling Network.  Moreover, we believe that now is the time to address the yawning policy void that the government has with regards to cycling.

It is vital that the new Legco is able to press our government to implement the visionary policies we need if Hong Kong is to properly serve the increasing number of cyclists of all stripes, and more importantly to justify its ‘world city’ label with planning and administration that integrates cycling, to ease traffic congestion, facilitate personal mobility, improve the quality of our environment (air pollution, noise pollution, excessive concrete and roads) and raise health and wellness levels for our whole population.

See what the candidates had to say.

 

 

 

Share This :

單車在馬路上行駛會阻慢交通嗎?

許多人以為單車會阻礙其他車輛及阻慢交通,所以單車不應在馬路上行駛,即使在馬路上騎單車也要行在路邊不應阻礙其他車輛。

事實是怎樣呢?

一般人踏一輛普通的單車能輕易保持以時速20至30公里前進,快者可達到時速40至50公里;而巿區馬路(除高速公路外)一般限速是時速50公里。

假設單車像所有其他車輛一樣在行車線中央行駛,單車在馬路上和其他車輛的互動會有以下的情況出現:

第一個情況:如果路面暢通,車輛速度高於單車­,所有高速的車輛都應該利用快線安全地超越慢線上相對慢­的車輛(這包括巴士、單車、工程車等),如果單車前進速度高,也應如此安全地超越停在慢線的車輛;正因為路面暢通,慢車­和快車都能按照自己的速度在適當的線道前進,誰也不阻礙誰;即使單車的極速不及汽車的極速快,事實上單車只是路上其中一輛會使用慢線的車輛,而且相較不時要停站上落客的巴士、小巴、的士及上落貨的貨車等等,能夠保持20公里至30公里不斷前進及靈活流動的單車一點也不構成對其他車輛的阻礙。

第二個情況:如果路面多車,車­輛行駛速度和單車相若,單車跟本不會阻礙任何車輛,因為­大家一樣速度;

第三個情況:如果是塞車,車輛以龜速前進的情況下,單車可以在車輛之間爬頭超越所有車輛,當所有車輛的引擎仍空轉著燒燃料時,單車可能已經到了­目的地了!

單車經過正在擠塞中的汽車龍;路上是太多單車還是太多汽車?(攝於九龍金巴利道)

單車經過正在擠塞中的汽車龍;路上是太多單車還是太多汽車?(攝於九龍金巴利道)

唯一的一個單車可能會阻慢其他車輛的情況,是在只有一條行車線而行車線的闊度不足夠讓車輛及單車並排行駛的情況,那麼後面的車輛就要跟在單車之後等待可以安全超越的機會。然而這情形並不常見,而且在如此狹窄的行車線上,即使沒有單車阻礙也是不適宜以高速行駛的。當然,駕駛人仕應互相禮讓,如果在造成後面車輛較長時間等候或慢駛的情況下,騎單車人仕在這安全情況下也可停靠一邊禮讓後面的車輛超越。

本人在馬路上踏單車時就經常遇上被汽車超越之後,在下一個交通燈位置再追上甚至越過那汽車的情形。要知道造成交通擠塞的是汽車而不是單車,誰還能說是單車阻礙其他車輛呢?也可以說是汽車在阻礙單車罷!單車不但不會阻礙其他車輛,在巿區鼓勵使用單車其實有助於減少交通擠塞,當巿民減少駕駛汽車而使用單車時,交通擠塞自然減少。

所以,下次當你看見單車在馬路上行駛,你要慶幸他駛的不是一輛製造污染的汽車,更要感謝他為減少城市交通擠塞及環保所作的貢獻。

Share This :

The following is reproduced from a great article on the European Cyclists’ Federation website.

Many cyclists already know they are faster than cars, particularly in peak hour traffic. Yet even cyclists may be surprised at how much time bicycles can save in any city when all time costs are considered. Dr. Paul Tranter, who has written a chapter in the upcoming “City Cycling” book, tells us why.

You may already know it, but in most cities throughout the world, cycling is a “faster” mode of transportation than the car. But for those that still aren’t convinced, it’s time to learn about “effective speed”.

“Effective speed is calculated using the standard formula: speed equals distance divided by time. Time here includes not only the time spent moving; it also includes the time devoted to enabling the movement to occur,” explains Dr. Paul Tranter, a geography Professor at the University of New South Wales, and an author from the upcoming City Cycling book.

“For car drivers, a significant (and usually ignored) time cost is the time spent at work to earn the money to pay for all the expenses associated with the mode of transport.”

And he’s right. All too often, car drivers rarely consider the total time devoted to their machines. If you’re not convinced, here’s a little anecdote that Tranter tells to make to change your mind:

Imagine that you live in a village in the 1800s and that your job each day is to collect water from a nearby stream. This task takes you an hour each day. To “save time,” you construct a machine consisting of a system of pulleys, cables, levers, and springs to collect the water for you. With this machine, simply by pulling a lever, you can send your bucket to the stream and have it returned full of water. You appear to have saved yourself an hour each day. However, to get the machine to work, you must spend an hour each day winding up the spring that powers the machine. Should you consider this time in any decision about the effectiveness of the machine?

“Many motorists—and city governments—seem to ignore this time spent earning money to pay for the transportation costs, that is, the time spent winding up the spring,” explains Tranter.

We shouldn’t forget this concept of effective speed is nothing new. Ivan Ilich, in his 1974 book “Energy and Equity” outlined it perfectly:

“The typical American male devotes more than 1,600 hours a year to his car. He sits in it while it goes and while it stands idling. He spends four of his sixteen waking hours on the road or gathering his resources for it. … The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles: less than five miles per hour.”

How fast is your city?

Tranter, in the upcoming “City Cycling” book, has gone to the trouble to finding just how fast cars really by crunching data on income and travel times. The results almost beggar belief.

Effective speeds for car speeds varied from 18.3 km/h in Canberra, Australia, to a mere 3 km/h in Nairobi. When the external costs are taken into account, the effective speeds for car drivers range from a high of 15.9 km/h (Canberra) to a low of 2.2 km/h (Nairobi).

“We then used these estimates to calculate how slow cyclists could cycle and still be effectively faster than a car. When both direct and indirect costs are considered, cyclists in Canberra would need to average only 18.3 km/h to be faster than a car driver. In New York, Los Angeles, Tokyo, and Hamburg, cyclists would not need to travel faster than 13 km/h to be faster than a car,” says Tranter, before adding:

“To be effectively faster than the number-one-selling car in Australia, a cyclist in Canberra would need to cycle at only 12.7 km/h. In all other Australian cities, the cyclists could travel slower than this, and still be faster than the top-selling car.”

So what does this mean for governments?

If city governments wish to invest wisely in transportation, they need to understand that increasing the average trip speeds of private motor vehicles doesn’t actually save time. This argument applies to any city in the world.

“Those cities that invest most effectively in cycling infrastructure will find that their cities become the fastest cities in the world,” says Tranter.

Thankfully, when we’re on a bicycle we don’t always have to rush. Taking it slowly is part of the fun. But we can still feel smug as cars go past knowing who’s really the fasted.

Share This :

If the Government were to treat the roads in the same way as they treat  the cycle paths, what problems would drivers experience that cyclists see?

We don’t have the same number of cycle lanes/paths as in the UK, so in some ways it would be nice to have these problems to deal with, but it does clearly show that cycle lanes and paths need to be well designed to be useful to cyclists.

This is extracted from a post on the London Cycling Campaign blog



Share This :

Who hears more of the traffic buzz – a driver using his in-car music system or a bike rider using an iPod and earphones?  Cyclists are often criticised for listening to music as they ride.  It turns out that they likely hear much more of the road environment than a car driver does, even when that driver has no music playing.

It does depend on what kind of earphones you use, and of course the music volume.

But a driver who has the stereo playing certainly hears less of what’s going on than any cyclist listening to music.  (And of course, not mentioned in this research, is that the driver also sees less, because of his vehicle blind spots.)

RideOn, “Australia’s most widely-read bike magazine”, did the research.

 

 

 

 

 

Share This :

運輸署剛剛發佈了新一段「單車安全」短片。此14分鐘短片將在各學校及警署、車輛牌照事務處等政府場地巡迴播放。

網上版本共分為6段:裝備、騎單車基本技巧、實戰篇–單車徑上、實戰篇–馬路上、駕駛者須知、行人須知。

訴說本同盟會對影片意見之前,何不由你來評論?

Chinese version

The Transport Department has just released a new ‘Cycling Safety’ video.  It’s 14 minutes long and will be shown in schools and at government offices open to the public, such as vehicle licensing centres and police stations.

This online version is split into six sections: Equipment, Basic Skills, Riding on Cycle Tracks, Riding on the Road, For Motorists and For Pedestrians.

Rather than telling you what we think of it, immediately, why not take a look and tell us your view?

English version

Share This :

interesting debunking of the 10 biggest questions people have about cycling… 10 common questions.

Share This :