Carbon Trace

Tom Madigan, writing for National Journal, asks 10 experts if efforts to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians risks squeezing out cars. On first blush, considering the overwhelming odds in favor of cars (numbers plus massive subsidies), the question seems absurd.

Read the whole thing. Very interesting.

Several of the respondents do not like the question because, for example, the situation may not be a zero-sum game or because it creates a needless sense of altercation.

It’s getting asked, however, because we have seen high profile projects that have restricted the free movement of cars. For example:

And we’ve seen in the last few days how possible it is to waaaaay over-react to accommodating carbon-free transportation

I object to the question for the reasons stated in my lead: There is no balance of power in these choices. The vast majority of trips made in this country are by car — largely because people have no other choice (now there’s a problem). And our society massively subsidizes car travel.

Further, to suggest the car could get squeezed out is a typical rhetorical tactic of the powerful: Focus on a few, small instances suggesting salience and ignore the big picture; claim victimhood.

That said, I think we’d all be a lot better off if we squeezed out a few cars. Keep dreaming.

Technorati Tags: bicycle advocacy, bicycle culture, bicycle infrastructure, cycling, transportation, Transportation Planning, walking