
The best-kept secret of Dutch biking: the Dutch hardly bike at all - oftenwrong
https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/best-kept-secret-dutch-biking-dutch-hardly-bike/
======
coldtea
> _Is this an error? I asked around for a comparable estimate at the national
> level. As of 2017, that estimate is 2.5 km. So, 1.5 miles per person per
> day. Either way you count it, the Dutch hardly bike at all._

An average of 1.5 miles per person per day sounds huge.

What's the American average? 0.05 miles?

What's the baseline from where the author justifies the "hardly bike" line?

There are 17 million people in Netherlands, and 800.000 in Amsterdam.

If half of the people in Amsterdam go about 5km per day (they wouldn't need
much more, it's not a huge city, and they'd mostly go to/from
work/school/home) that's 2.5 km per person per day -- the number they post.

Half of the people of a city biking everyday is HUGE, and dwarfs any US town
5x easily.

Heck, merely 10% of the population biking every day would be huge, and that's
easily within the number given.

I'd say the same holds for other Dutch cities and villages.

So what are we are comparing with?

~~~
DoreenMichele
You've completely missed the point of the article. The point is that the Dutch
use bicycles a lot because their urban infrastructure means many of their
trips are the right length for a bike to make sense over either walking or
driving.

The Dutch are not insane fitness nuts biking 25 miles to work daily. They just
have a built environment where taking a bike actually makes sense because they
aren't going terribly far, just far enough that the hassles involved in taking
a bike (like locking it up) are worth it.

~~~
akgerber
Even in those parts of the US where we live at similar or higher density
versus the Netherlands, biking is far less common because the motoring
community has seized most of our streets for car storage, crowding out the
kind of bike infrastructure that's required for most people to feel
comfortable cycling short trips.

(Banning cars would also be a solution, as 'bike infrastructure' is really
infrastructure to protect bikes from cars, but it's not necessary when there's
large amounts of street space that could be repurposed from car storage)

US rail stations also generally have less, and less secure, bike parking
versus equivalent stations in the Netherlands, reducing their catchment areas
to a mile-wide 'walkshed' rather than a few-mile-wide 'bikeshed'.

~~~
Alupis
This only works if you live, work, and shop in a few mile radius.

I commute 30 miles a day each way (60 total) from my house to work. Even a
crazy fitness nut likely wouldn't cycle that many miles every day. My commute
isn't even long compared to some people's...

Trains aren't the answer either. The US is just too spread out on average.
Yes, they'll work in dense cities... but not in the suburbs or rural areas -
ie, where majority of the country lives.

People living in big, dense cities are too quick to forget most people don't
live that life. Out here, a car is pretty necessary.

~~~
inopinatus
Here lies the danger of arguing from a position of zero knowledge.

> Even a crazy fitness nut likely wouldn't cycle that many miles every day

Speaking as a crazy fitness nut, I have to tell you no, sorry, 30 miles is my
warm up/recovery distance.

> People living in big, dense cities are too quick to forget most people don't
> live that life

80% of the US population lives within an urban area.

> Out here, a car is pretty necessary

I live in the suburbs. When I have an early meeting, I ride to the train
station. I do have a car, but I still don't have to use it.

To sum up: car dependency is a self-fulfilling prophecy based on a combination
of wilful ignorance and unwillingness to change.

~~~
Alupis
> Here lies the danger of arguing from a position of zero knowledge.

> 30 miles is my warm up/recovery distance

That's absurd and you know it. Possibly spoken from someone that doesn't
actually cycle, or is greatly exaggerating. You ride 1-2 hours for a warm-
up/cool-down? You expect regular people to ride 1-2 hours to work each day?

You expect to maintain 20-30mph pacing with stop signs, street lights, riding
on regular city streets? Completely absurd and out of touch with reality.
That's insane pacing - that's race pacing.

Most cyclists will do 20-30 miles for an entire ride. Sometimes exceeding
that, but certainly not doing 60 miles a day (3-4 hours a day) 5 days a week.
That is, unless, you're training for something... which a daily commuter going
to an office job isn't.

Not to mention if you're someone doing that kind of mileage, you likely own a
bike that costs as much as a car, but is far harder to "park" securely,
doesn't work well in the rain, and requires you to carry work clothing,
laptops, paperwork, groceries, and more on your back.

> 80% of the US population lives within an urban area.

Source? If you're citing the WaPo article which cites Census data - they're
lumping Suburban and Urban together and calling it just Urban - that's super
disingenuous.

Most people live in suburban areas. There are certainly dense population areas
in true urban areas (SF, NY, Seattle, LA, etc), but that's not 80% of the
nation. Not even close.

> I live in the suburbs. When I have an early meeting, I ride to the train
> station.

You probably work at an area near the train station then - perhaps a Downtown
location or similar. What if this commute required multiple trains hops, with
distance between the train stations because you're commuting 3 cities over for
work each day? Feasible? Sure... but now you've taken an hour long commute and
turned it into 3 hours each way. That's not feasible for most people.

This narrative falls flat when faced with actual working circumstances for
many people... outside the ideal "just take the train" scenario. What if
there's not even a train?

~~~
inopinatus
> > 30 miles is my warm up/recovery distance

> That's absurd and you know it.

That is wilful rejection of facts. You defined the upper bound of possibility
by invoking crazy fitness nuts - well, here I am to tell you how wrong you
were.

> You expect regular people to ride 1-2 hours to work each day?

I know many people (who would not describe themselves as "crazy fitness nuts")
who do just that. Yes, they do rely on high quality end-of-trip facilities,
but many of our urban employers and councils now offer these.

I also know people who commute in a car for _longer_ than that. As commute
durations go, measurement in hours is far from unusual.

> Completely absurd and out of touch with reality. That's insane pacing -
> that's race pacing

It's true. I won at least one nationally sanctioned bike race every year from
2011-2015. Sorry, what was your problem with that? You invoke crazy fitness
nuts, we show up like Candyman.

> Most cyclists will do 20-30 miles for an entire ride

Again, I was speaking to your incorrect claim of the upper bound of the
possible. But sure, move the goalposts if you like, because:

> You probably work at an area near the train station then - perhaps a
> Downtown location or similar

I simply live in a country and a state that didn't pathetically lowball its
rail infrastructure and intermodal transit options.

> actual working circumstances for many people

You get what you voted for, based on what you believed was possible, and
suggesting things are impossible is just wilful, pig-headed rejection of what
can be achieved if the people actually want it, with the simple evidence that
it's been achieved elsewhere.

Cars are a useful tool, but the claim that they simply _are_ an essential
element of a functioning modern society begs the question of _why_ certain
societies are so automobile dependent, and wilfully ignores those that aren't.

------
bastijn
Nowadays a whole new trend is arising in the Netherlands. By introduction of
the electric bike the cut-off for taking a bike vs. car is much less steep.
Regular electric bikes (max 25km/h) make people bike to work for ranges 5-10
km single-trip now, speed pedelecs (45km/h bikes) are extending it as far as
35km single trip. Bikes are becoming more popular not only because people like
to live healthy but also because our roads are clogging up (again). Combined
with high-speed biking lanes being added to our infrastructure this drives
adoption.

I expect these graphs to change in the coming 5 years.

P.s. Our today's issue is having speed pedelecs which are not allowed on our
biking lanes in cities/suburbs/villages (big speed difference) but are just
about too slow for the regular 50km/h roads :).

P.p.s. Electric bikes are around 2000€ on average. Speed pedelecs start at
3500€ but quickly go to 5000€, and 8000€+ for premium brands is not uncommon.
We still love our bikes ;).

~~~
dv35z
For those like me who are unfamiliar with the word `pedelec` : "electric
bicycle where the rider's pedalling is assisted by a small electric motor"

~~~
namdnay
Isn't that all electric bikes? What other types are there? It's the only type
of electric bike I've seen

~~~
Scarblac
In the Netherlands there used to be electric bikes that go up to about 25
km/h, mostly for the elderly, but in the last few years there are also "speed-
pedelecs" that go up to 45 km/h and are popular with commuters.

Count as mopeds, and controversial because they are more dangerous (partly
because they look like normal bicycles and the rider is sitting upright but
they're going much faster than normal bikes, other traffic doesn't expect it).

But they do make it feasible to use a bike for longer commutes.

------
jedberg
I was recently staying with a friend in a suburb of Amsterdam. One night we
decided to go to dinner. She has three kids and I have two. She piled four of
the five kids onto her bike (it had a basket for kids) and headed over. My
wife and I and the baby rode in my car. She only got there one minute after me
despite it being a few miles away.

I think the reason is because she was able to take the inside passages that
are only for bikes, so her trip was much shorter than mine.

So not only are their buildings close together, but they are built around
walking/bikes, such that those modes of transit are actually shorter.

~~~
btrettel
Cyclist here. I've told people that this can be true in the US as well (taking
the exact same route even). I picked my current apartment because it has a
relatively short bike commute. Going from my current apartment to where I work
takes about the same amount of time by bike or car because the car is at best
5 minutes faster to the general area but that advantage is quickly lost when
one has to park and walk to the building. With my bike I park 100 feet from
the door.

Some drivers might say that counting time to park is "cheating", but I
strongly disagree. Time from door-to-door is what matters.

~~~
jpollock
When you factor in rush hour, it's definitely true for the Bay Area.

I live in San Jose, a morning car commute on the 101 is ~30mins, return is
~50-60mins. Riding my bike is 45mins (43-48) each way.

It's a complete wash and I get 90mins of exercise per day.

If you don't want exercise, get an e-bike and go faster for less effort!

~~~
zbrozek
I live a lot closer to work - 4.5 miles straight down Central Expressway. Even
though my route is no better than what I could do by car, both my average and
variance are much better by bike than by car. Typically 15 minutes door-to-
door by bike. I can't touch that by car, with evening commutes often taking 45
minutes. I wave at my coworkers when I bike past them.

~~~
soperj
You should be able to walk 4.5 miles in 45 minutes.

~~~
MichaelDickens
A 10-minute mile pace is definitely not walking speed--that's about twice as
fast as most people walk.

------
peteey
>This level of urban development isn’t just unusual in almost all of the
United States. It’s illegal.

Bang. In much of America, it is against the law to build dense cities where
people are statistically close to work and the grocery store.

Why do we have low density residential zoning in the first place? Preferring a
large yard is one thing, but how did it come to be that America legally
required houses to have yards?

~~~
xeromal
This is just a spit take, but American culture is a bit more independent-
minded and always has been since the founder. Having your own property is part
of that identity. That's why many went west rather than build up in cities.

~~~
kqr
How is being dependent on fuel/motorised transport more independent than being
able to transport yourself using your own body?

~~~
xeromal
We had horses and wagons before bicycles. I'm sure that's more car-like than
bike-like.

------
briga
Is 2.5km a day really hardly biking at all? When you consider the fact that
Dutch cities are so compact and densely populated, 2.5km of biking gets you a
whole lot further than it would in the US, where there is little bike
infrastructure and you might need to drive 20 minutes just to get to the
grocery store.

I wonder what other national biking averages are? Probably much lower than the
Dutch national average.

~~~
ferkad
Many people consider it a walking distance. If you go on foot both ways but
sit 8h at work you can still find it dificult to hit 10k steps per day (WHO
recomendation IIRC).

~~~
JohnFen
I'd consider it walking distance. Unless I was planning on carrying enough
stuff to warrant the use of a bike trailer, I wouldn't bother getting my bike
out for a trip that short.

------
dougmwne
The third graph showing the % of trips by foot, bike and car is amazing.
Almost 50% of trips .6 - 1.6 miles in NL are by bike and the percent falls
fairly gradually for longer trips. I wish I could see this data for other
countries.

------
aisengard
I wonder what the average trip is for Americans in large cities. For me in
Brooklyn, it's about 4 miles to my office in Manhattan. Even in an ideal world
with no cars, I still wouldn't really be able to bike to work (in terms of my
desire to bike that far). If I'm going out to eat in my neighborhood, it's
much easier and safer to just walk up to about a mile. So, there's not really
much use for me to bike anywhere other than purely for recreation. Maybe I'd
bike between a mile and four miles, I'm not sure. But it definitely would be
my least-used form of transportation.

Obviously this is anecdotal, but I am skeptical how useful a focus on bike
lanes will be to the general public in American cities as compared to things
like buses.

~~~
big_chungus
This is certainly a case where the small size and compact nature of European
cities give them advantages over American ones. Forget four miles, I have
drive forty each way for prior commutes. Biking is great if you're a yuppie
making six figures a year at a cushy, white-collar tech job. Not so much if
you have to go to a client, have to do something physical, or even work in an
office in the rest of the world. Let alone if you are a blue-collar worker,
and possibly have to bring tools, equipment, etc.

Telecommuting may mitigate this problem, but only for a small sub-set of
workers for now, and even long term the fact remains that people still need to
go into an office at least occasionally, and a good number of people can't get
to work feasibly by bike. Plus, most people want to go somewhere after work,
to the store and to church once a week, etc. This is orders of magnitude
larger than a mile and a half (apparently the dutch average).

I don't see why electric cars can't accomplish sustainability goals without
trying to force a demographic shift of that scale (which is very unlikely to
happen).

~~~
kqr
> I don't see why electric cars can't accomplish sustainability goals

Because anything resembling a personal automobile is

1\. Still enormously dangerous to everyone else on the same road;

2\. Takes up a ridiculous chunk of space;

3\. Doubly so when parked/not used;

4\. Does not navigate nimbly in traffic;

5\. Rips up tarmac and damages road surfaces;

6\. Makes a fair amount of noise still;

I could go on but I think you get the point. It's not only about CO2
emissions, it's also about its place among the humans it shares living spaces
with.

~~~
JohnFen
Not to mention that the environmental impact of manufacturing them is
substantially higher than that of manufacturing a bike.

------
mikeryan
It was kind of funny there was a company a few years ago that occupied some
prime Market St. retail space in SF that sold "Dutch Bikes". Dutch bikes are
pretty huge and make no sense in SF which has, you know, hills. They didn't
last long.

~~~
NeedMoreTea
You mean the big cargo bikes with the huge basket up front? I can't imagine
those being too popular in SF.

~~~
T-hawk
I think he means the Dutch bike style that encloses the chain and single-speed
drivetrain inside a case. Great for durability and enduring harsh weather, bad
for hills where you need gearing.

------
larrik
> So, 1.5 miles per person per day.

> Either way you count it, the Dutch hardly bike at all.

Whaa???? How is that "hardly bike at all"? That's an enormous average!

I'm guessing the National average for the USA rounds to zero. Honestly, I bet
the average for the USA _per year_ rounds to zero.

------
dr_dshiv
Big gains for biking "occur when you go from detatched houses to two-story
attached townhouses on side streets and four-story walkups on bigger streets.
In other words, the big gains for biking occur when you reach the density of
Europe’s famously beautiful and livable cities."

~~~
Finnucane
Also, it's only partly about density in terms of population but also how far
you have to go to get to stuff. Which is to say, mixed-use neighborhoods with
shops and restaurants nearby are going to be more ped/bike friendly than
'bedroom communities' where everything else is far away.

~~~
dr_dshiv
It's sad that mixed use is banned in so many places in the states. And, that
so many people think living in an apartment is for poor people.

~~~
Finnucane
Condos are for rich people.

------
the-dude
I've looked at the graphs, they may be right, but it doesn't feel right.

Right now, I am living in a city and working from home, so the 1.5km / day
figure seems to apply to me.

But when I was in school, many many moons ago, the roundtrip to school was
14km and I had a newspaper delivery round adding up to about 20km.

So basically as a teen, I did 20km a day, about 6 days a week.

disclosure: I am Dutch, living in NL

~~~
edejong
Neither to me. Perhaps the elderly, mopeds and weekends might bring the
average down, but still. We regularly go on long bicycle trips of +30km. Some
of my coworkers regularly race +80km.

disclosure: Dutch myself

------
undersuit
>Summary: Dutch biking rates are highest for trips of about 1 mile, and when
trips get longer than three miles, bike trips start to fall sharply while car
trips rise.

The summary and the graph supporting it are startling. I think in my city you
see a very exponential increase in car transportation starting past the
average distance we cross the parking lot, about 500 feet.

------
gwbas1c
I remember when I spent a few days in Utrecht: It was so dense that the walk
to the supermarket was about as far as walking across a typical American
Walmart parking lot.

------
w0utert
It would be interesting to split out the results between regular bikes and
electric ones, now that they are becoming very popular. On an electric bike,
distance is much less of threshold for choosing bike over car, and e.g.
weather or ‘amount of stuff to take with you’ become the main deciding
factors. Maybe electric bikes could bring opportunities for US cities where
everything is far apart?

~~~
naravara
The main advantage of an electric bike is less about distance and more about
terrain. The distance is nice too, but while electric assist it might have
some impact on how long a trip you're willing to make, it'll have a huge
impact on your willingness to take trips through hilly areas. This can open up
whole new parts of the city for accessing casually by bike.

~~~
Beldin
Of course, we're talking about the Netherlands here... the country is mostly
flat.

Sure, there are some places with hills, but the majority lives in the flatter-
than-pancake flat part.

Where e-bikes can really shine, is increased speed. If you can do 40 an hour
(km's), biking becomes a viable alternative to traffic jams. And that's
happening already in NL.

------
hn_throwaway_99
Wasn't clear to me from the article, but taking an _average_ of "bicycle miles
per day" is always going to be greatly skewed toward 0 _if it includes people
who never or rarely bike_.

Would be much more interested in the average bicycle miles per day of _only_
people who take at least, say, 3 or 4 trip a week by bike.

------
Mathnerd314
The first graph has a peak at 2010 and is much lower in 2011. I found a post
([https://www.bike-eu.com/sales-
trends/artikel/2012/04/netherl...](https://www.bike-eu.com/sales-
trends/artikel/2012/04/netherlands-2011-weather-conditions-slow-down-dutch-
market-1019848?vakmedianet-approve-cookies=1)) which says the weather was
particularly bad in 2011.

Statista's graph ([https://www.statista.com/statistics/620169/average-biking-
di...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/620169/average-biking-distance-per-
person-per-day-in-the-netherlands-by-gender/)) doesn't show any dip from 2010
to 2011 at all though.

The sources for these graphs are all in Dutch so it's hard to say where the
discrepancy lies.

~~~
stevesimmons
Here are the official Dutch stats on trips per annum, split by means of
transport.

[https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/83499NED/t...](https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/83499NED/table?ts=1572467201735)

vervoermiddel = means of transport

fiets = bike

per persoon per dag = per person per day

Verplaatsingen / aantal = Trips / number

Afstand / km = distance / kilometres

Reisduur / uren = Trip duration / hours

(source: I live part time in Amsterdam. My partner and I have 5 bikes there,
despite being there a few days a month)

~~~
Mathnerd314
That might be the source of the Statista data, as it too only goes back to
2010. The data on km traveled by bike seems to agree with the 2.5 km figure in
the original article.

The question is where the black-background graphs came from, as they have data
from 2006. Particularly the first as the 1.5 km average is very different from
the 2.5 km national average.

------
bagacrap
People choose a method of transportation based on personal convenience, moreso
than cost, sustainability, safety, etc. Dutch citiies make parking
inconvenient enough that biking wins out for short trips, and they're dense
enough that many trips are short.

What's the lesson here? It seems to be saying that no amount of new
infrastructure will make people ride bikes.

~~~
brlewis
I don't understand why you think people value safety less than convenience. I
think infrastructure that increases safety will encourage cycling.

------
JackFr
The article spends a lot of words talking about zoning and city structure
without any mention of how remarkably flat the country.

------
jordanpg
This is consistent with my use of bikes: if it requires any special equipment
or preparations whatsoever, I'm not really that interested. Helmets, special
clothes, water, locks, repair gear, whatever. That means short rides only.
Anything beyond that transitions the use case from "average, practical users"
to hobbyists.

~~~
JohnFen
Unless you're doing a biking marathon, the only equipment you really need are
a bike lock and helmet. Even the bike lock can be dispensed with if you have
another means of securing your bike.

Special clothes are entirely unnecessary unless you're racing.

------
mighty_bander
I was astounded when I mapped out a transit ride from a suburb of Amsterdam to
the city center - and discovered it was 15 minutes long. I'm not a fan of
compact European living (washing machine in the kitchen?!), but that's a hard
advantage to ignore.

~~~
jiofih
The washing machine is either in the bathroom, or a tiny closet in the
majority of houses I’ve seen :)

------
thiagomgd
I wouldn't say that biking 1.2km PER DAY is "hardly bike at all". What's the
average per day for US?

------
tschellenbach
the author must have not visited The Netherlands...

