Mass transit means waiting outside for a bus or tram, and waiting outside when it's either +35 or -30 sucks. Many people will prefer cars for that reason. It isn't the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.

As for bike lanes, winter is a major factor. It's certainly possible to bike in the winter, I've done it for many years, but it isn't easy. In Canada as it exists now, biking in winter means biking in traffic most of the time. Bike lanes exist, but often in winter they just shove the snow to the side of the road and block the bike lanes. I don't know of anywhere in Canada where they clear bike lanes as a priority. That could be done. It is done in some places in Finland, for example. But, there's a catch 22. It's not worth it to clear the bike lanes because there aren't enough winter bikers; there aren't enough winter bikers because it's dangerous and unpleasant to bike during winter because they don't clear the bike lanes.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

As for bike lanes, winter is a major factor.

Yawn

But actually, even in Canada. And even with bike share programs.

So actually:

Canadian cities aren’t doing enough to build mass transit [and bike lanes]

Is all you need. End of post.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The video says that there were more than 500,000 bike share trips in Toronto in the winter months. Let's be conservative and say that "the winter months" are just December, January and February. The reality is that there's ice on the ground until May pretty often, but let's just pretend it's 500,000 trips in 3 months to make the numbers seem as big as possible.

Is that big? Not really, 500,000 trips in 3 months is 167,000 trips per month. Meanwhile in the summer it's 1 million trips per month. So, cycling drops by a factor of at least 6 in the winter. That's massive.

And yes, I've watched that Not Just Bikes video. It makes the point that in order for people to bike in the winter, you need massive infrastructure that Canada refuses to spend on. The city in question in the video, Oulu, makes it a priority to clear the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall. Theoretically could that be done in every rich city in the world? Sure. Is it realistic it will ever happen anywhere in Canada? Doubtful.

I stand by what I said, "winter is a major factor". Do you have any idea how much it would cost to commit to clearing all the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall? You could argue that the cost is worth it, and that the cost is smaller than doing similar things for cars, but it remains a major factor.

Besides, it wouldn't even make sense to have snow clearing like Oulu unless they first built a dedicated bike network for the city. There's no point in just clearing the "bike lanes" which are just a tiny strip of pavement next to the gutter.

Canadian cities aren't doing enough to build mass transit and bike lanes. But, even if they did, the weather sucks in the winter. And Oulu, is colder than Toronto. But it's slightly warmer than Ottawa and Montreal, and significantly warmer than Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary. So, even if you replicated all the bike lanes from Oulu, committed to clearing the snow as quickly as they do in Oulu and made cars and fuel as expensive as they are in Europe, Canada would probably have nowhere near the number of winter bikers as Oulu per capita. Canada is much colder, cities are designed around cars, and people have "car brain".

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Snow plows for roads exist and often just run and run and run to keep roads open.

This is the counter to your whole point my guy.

It’s will not ability

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago

Snow plows for roads exist and often just run and run and run to keep roads open.

Which is very expensive, but necessary because of the shitty climate. What's your point?

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

All the problems you've described are infrastructure abd policy problems We can build climate controlled mass transit stations. We can maintain separated and safe bicycle networks in the winter. We can clear pedestrian pathways of snow instead of plowing the car lane snow onto them. Its all policy and infrastructure. If you make transit the fastest while being convenient and clean, people will use it over cars because it takes less time, not everyone, but certainly enough to make it worth it.

We can't fairly use the there are no cyclists now argument because we haven't given them any real options. We need to provide safe and effecient cycling infrastructure to truly see how many people would prefer to bike. If a city had no roads you could make the argument not to build any roads because nobody drives anyway.

[–] TheSaddestMan@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's not just that. Trains don't run as well or brake as efficiently in cold weather, they have slippery metal rails for a reason. That's why we switched to cars and trucks too readily, and as sad as that is, I think we might need electric cars more than Americans ever needed any cars.

(That said, electric cars should be thanks to electrified smartroads, not stuffing the car itself full of computer hardware.)

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

trains are the most reliable mode of transport in winter conditions, the fact that they're so monstrously heavy and have tiny points of contact with the rails means they will simply squeeze out snow and crush ice, no plowing needed.

go ahead and try to drive a car through 20cm of slushy snow, it ain't happening.

[–] TheSaddestMan@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You're right, except in British Columbia where all the most expensive highways were built. Not better, but affordable because Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna dgaf about the rest of the province and outnumber everywhere else. If we didn't have all these tourist-focused roads, they'd have still torn up the rails and left us to drown.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do you have a source for this? Our cargo trains run through some pretty frigid winters. Many European countries have a similar climate and they have trains. Aren't the swiss famous for sending trains through snowy mountains?

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They certainly are. They have some of the steepest adhesion railways in the world on those mountains.

[–] TheSaddestMan@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes, and tunnels too. The issue's not just the temperature but the altitude, at least on the west coast, and lack of adhesion rail or deep bore passenger train tunnels on Canadian mountain routes. On the flat lands eastwards it's mostly that passenger engines are built differently than freight locomotives that makes the difference.

The problem can be fixed, but is it worth it? Maybe. Sadly, no politicians here seem too interested in building rail services in BC, unless it's to feed the KelVicVanSeaTac metro-economic machine.

I will say I was trying to make something resembling small talk, so I admit I'm wrong if you know otherwise. Just as far as I've seen, that's what seems to be the truth.