On: Cycling is more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities

[twiddling]

Because most US cities are not compact and flat as Copenhagen

[helicalspiral → twiddling]

ebikes, though a bit more expensive, make getting over the hills in even SF doable

[com2kid → helicalspiral]

I'm not willing to spend thousands on an ebike while living in a city where I expect my bike to be stolen at least once a year.

(and all of my bikes that were stolen, were stolen out of locked garages!)

[s0rce → com2kid]

Even 1 bike per year isn't that bad if you have insurance, car maintenance + depreciation is probably more. Not to mention when your catalytic converter gets stolen.

[umeshunni → helicalspiral]

SF is a very compact city (7 miles across)

[bryanlarsen → twiddling]

The cycling rate in Århus Denmark is almost as good as Copenhagen and it's quite a hilly city.

[twiddling → twiddling]

eBikes definitely help with the topography issues ( Seattle , Pittsburgh ). You still have the sprawl and separated land use patterns in a lot of cities though.

Of course summer commuting in Houston or Phoenix is going to suck no matter what your bike is

[SketchySeaBeast → twiddling]

Don't ebikes bring in a lot of the enviromental concerns as an electric car? Less for sure, but it probably starts to close that 10x number.

[s0rce → twiddling]

Millions numbers of people live in urbanized flat valleys in California (Oakland, San Jose, Redding, Sacramento, Fresno, Bakersfield, parts of LA/SGV/Inland Empire/OC).

[glial → twiddling]

Today, they aren't. But we could and should alter zoning laws to encourage density.