Comment to “Sustainable transportation for better future” by Mudit Maheshwari
It believes that bicycle system is a trendy and sustainable transportation. It can not only alleviate road traffic congestion, but also save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But there are numerous cities where bicycles and bicycle traffic would be unrealistic. In some cities it is too cold for bicycles, but too hot in others. Gehl (2010) shows that policy is very important for traffic planning, because of the difference of social culture, people’s perception and use of transportation are quite different. For example, in Australia, most cities are car-dominated, which is due to local policies and Australian urban background. Most parts of Australia are not in the urban stage, and with a small population and a considerable distance between cities, cars and public transport can be the most suitable transportation (Dowling, Kent, 2015). However Copenhagen is a very representative bicycle city. It is a compelling example of a city whose longstanding bicycle tradition came under threat from car traffic in the 1950s and 1960s. Because of the oil crises in the 1970s, they were the catalyst to aware people the seriousness. Therefore, the government promulgated policies to promote the use of bicycles and built a series of bicycle road systems (Gehl and Gemzoe, 2000).
I think bicycle is a kind of sustainable transportation. It has a very beneficial impact on the environment and is also a convenient and comfortable exercise. This transportation is advocated, but not every city should regard it as the main transportation.
Dowling, R. Kent, J. 2015. Practice and public–private partnerships in sustainable transport governance: The case of car sharing in Sydney, Australia.
Gehl, J. 2010, Cities for people. Island Press; 1 edition (30 Nov. 2010).
Gehl, J. and Gemzoe, L. 2000. New City Spaces, Danish Architectural Press, Copenhagen.