Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Step, Baby, Step

In thinking about sustainability and urban design, I'm not sure how change on a massive scale comes about. Catastrophe is certainly an attention-getter, but with the outcomes being pretty unpredictable it's not really the policy tactic of choice.

The oil spill in the Gulf is in that category, but with the "Drill, Baby, Drill" crowd somehow using that disaster to further their agenda we are clearly in up-is-down world.  I hear them bleating, "We should drill everywhere so we can be independent of foreign oil but oil is an international commodity and the oil companies are driven by profit not national allegiance so another 2% in the international market doesn't make any difference at all but it's a cudgel to beat Obama with which is a feature not a bug and now that crude is loose in the Louisiana wetlands we can blame him since our followers have no intellectual honesty or memory or honor and it makes us look populist and even though the obvious conclusion of our hysteria about Obama not plugging that hole is regulation of the industry we'll fight that tooth and nail and ask rhetorically why Obama hates America and as soon as the oil-soaked birds are off the front pages we'll be yelling Drill, Baby, Drill again." At least that's the way it sounds to me. Spill, Rinse, Repeat.

So in the face of our society's logic on this front it's hard to see how small, local, good ideas can ever get a foothold and evolve and grow into any real change. Change that is literally essential to our success as a species, a success that is hardly assured.  And Bob Herbert accurately points out that even Obama has some kind of corporate-funded, campaign-financed amnesia about the oil companies historical tendency to be shocked, shocked that something could go horribly wrong.  As John Cole of Balloon Juice often says, "Hoocoodanode". (That Balloon Juice lexicon is some fine reading, "political humor" category.)

Who knows what this latest spill-catastrophe's effects are going to be?  No one, that's who.  As chemical dispersants are ladled generously over the muck an infinite number of toxic bits will find their way into the local environment - and by "local environment" I mean "the ocean and everything it touches".  Eating high on the food-chain seems ill-advised these days - as those carcinogens begin working their way north who knows what fun they are going to have.

But I do see small changes out there, green shoots through the concrete, and they do give me hope. I saw this piece the other day that here in beautiful downtown Santa Monica they are instituting a "Bike@Work" program, that The Argonaut describes thusly:

"Bike@Work, provides city staff access to a fleet of branded city bicycles to ride to local meetings and between city facilities. Eight new and five retrofitted bicycles are available for employees to check out during the day for commutes between city facilities from the Santa Monica Airport to the Santa Monica Pier and other offices around town.

The collaborative effort of the Planning and Community Development Department and the Office of Sustainability and the Environment is intended to help fellow employees bicycle more and drive less, city officials note.

Having more staff ride locally supports the Land Use and Circulation Element’s transportation demand management goals, bicycle awareness and environmental stewardship as well as healthy habits among staff..."

That sounds great to me.  The little acorn that becomes the oak.  You know, baby steps.  

Step, Baby, Step.

Friday, July 3, 2009

Who says bike helmets aren't cute? (Warning: Linkholes will be followed...)

OK, there have been many skirmishes in the helmet-or-no-helmet wars. It's not really a fair fight since the axis of helmet-wearers suffer fewer head injuries and as such live to fight another day, while the helmet-free need constant replacements at the front. You'd think this unfair advantage would be handicapped somehow but since there is no referee, no governing body adjudicating this debate, that attrition is simply the life-threatening head trauma the feel-the-wind-in-their-hair troops will have to bear.

So the debate rages on.

One of the complaints about helmets is their arguably off-the-charts dork factor. Even President Obama, who is generally seen as stylish, always appearing to inhabit a world of easy grace and elegance, can succumb to the fiercely equalizing dork-power that is the bike helmet.

Exhibit A:

This image was received so poorly the NY Times even pulled this out in comparison:

Obviously Obama was able to recover, but I have to wonder if that bike was hurting him image-wise too. Maybe he should have gone this route:


And going back to the original Obama/helmet/fail image, his bike has some attachment on the back - what is that?


I thought long and hard, and my best guess is it's something like this:

Maybe that's some Secret Service requirement? In an emergency they could swoop in and take control of the bike? Maybe it's a towbar with the nuclear football attached? (That could explain why it's cropped out in both photos I've seen - national security.)

Or is it some sad mountain bike fender? But that hardtail Trek would have to suffer an epic bottoming out to need that kind of clearance. And anyway, in that event the problem wouldn't be rear wheel clearance, it would be how to remove the saddle from the President's colon. Simple physics.

Anyway, that's all academic when the fail had already occured up top, though they really didn't have to drag Dukakis into it.

But here's the deal. Where is it written that helmets need to be crafted from 100%, corn-fed dork? Well OK, fair enough - it's written everywhere. But I'm prepared to make a prediction - from this point forward the momentum will change. "Helmet" and "Someone should say something" and "lame" and "King Dorko" and "No thanks, I don't think I'll even go to the prom this year" will no longer be found in the same sentence.

I present you with... Exhibit R (for "Rosemary"):

Game over. Admit it, that helmeted girl is pure win. Check, and Mate.

Next topic.

This brings me to the general issue of bike safety. Some take this issue head on, writing articles with titles like this:


Admirable. Direct. What could be more important? Well, this could be:

Safe and Healthy Bike Seats for Men and Women

They had me at “coccyx pain”:

"We make kids wear helmets and knee pads," Dr. Goldstein said. "But no one thinks about protecting the crotch."

It does seem obvious, but Dr. Goldstein is so right; that point cannot be stressed eoungh. They listed several bike saddles and their relative merits crotch-protecting-wise. But one stood out - "The Spongy Wonder":

“As I finished the research I decided to try the Spongy Wonder. I haven't been biking much lately, so it's hard to tell whether I'll get used to it quickly. I don't suffer from numbness anymore, but I find it hard to signal turns, since I don't feel safe enough to let my hands go of the handle bars. My friend who uses this seat, said that I need a bike with a higher frame, so that I could use my hip to lean on the frame, while I take my hand off the handle bar. He says it works well for him. Time will show.”

Indeed.

OK. The lack of numbness seems to be a net positive. I have experienced near total numbness in my Spongy Wonder area at about mile 18 - figured it probably was saddle-related. So now I have that ironed out. But this part concerned me a bit - "I find it hard to signal turns, since I don't feel safe enough to let my hands go of the handle bars." I think this confirms that a safe seat, even one (purportedly) as safe as the S.W. can't provide a letting-go-of-the-handle-bars-to-signal level of safety. But really, what can?

It makes me think the rider's saddle may not be the primary issue. But the writer got advice: "My friend who uses this seat, said that I need a bike with a higher frame, so that I could use my hip to lean on the frame, while I take my hand off the handle bar. He says it works well for him." I think their friend may have been as high as the frame they were recommending. About this high:


Seriously, I am having great difficulty imagining a riding position that includes hip-on-frame leaning. I mean, how do you do that? I strapped on my Google shoes and trust me, there's nothing...

But when you expose yourself to a post with the tags, "bike, seat, safety, saddle, erectile dysfunction, health, pain, numbness, chafing, prostate" you know you're on shaky ground. Best to saddle up and move on.

So move on I did. And this question caught my eye: "Is it safe to mountain-bike during pregnancy?"

Well? Is it?

One commenter had this sage advice: “I don't think it's the biking itself that is a problem it is the falling.” So true.

Well someone should have told this very masculine looking young lady, who, reliable sources have told me, was most definitely with child:

I won't go into the details, but this experiment did not end well, helmet or no. So this bike safety thing ran far deeper than even I, a regular rider, would have ever thought. I continued to dive down these bottomless linkholes, and here's what came next:

There is More to Bike Safety than a Helmet

Do tell...

"There are many aspects of bike fit that can affect your ability to ride safely. If the title of this article resonates to you, then chances are something has gone awry with your bike riding, or the safety of your current bike fit. Deciding that your health and sexual function are important enough to warrant an improved position on your bike is taking an active step to riding in comfort and peace of mind... When I sit on a standard saddle (a Selle Flite for ex), I can feel the pressure in all the wrong places and it is very uncomfortable for me because I know what is going on physiologically."

OK, my peace of mind was just shot to hell. But after considering the impact of mountain biking on pregnancy and now the impact of my saddle on my very ability to bring about the aforementioned pregnancy... well, I had to go right to the source. So I wrote the author:

"Hello Mr. Kraus,

"I was reading your article about bike seats and sexual issues tonight, with both concern and interest. If the problem is specifically erectile dysfunction, that is clearly not good. I love to ride, but not only the bike (ba-dum-bum - if you know what I mean).

"But I was wondering if ill-fitting bike seats can cause other issues, making actual reproduction less likely? I was reading some other articles about the safety of mountain biking while pregnant, and while they recommended against it, they did not say it would guarantee a child-free lifestyle. [What I neglected to mention in my letter is that I have found wearing a bike helmet to be an extremely reliable form of contraception, since it is then unlikely anyone will have sex with you in the first place.]

"So, my question is, would you consider an ill-fitting bike seat an effective method of birth control? If the answer is yes, you mentioned the Selle Italia Flite, but are there other saddles that would be as effective?

Thank you, Jim"

I got this response:

"Jim, anything that puts pressure on your nerves and arteries that run under your taint is considered a method of birth control. But its pre-birth control..more like booty control. If your stuff doesn't work, then you can't even play."

Damn. Helmets were seeming more and more like a distraction. The issue is taint-trauma, for crissakes. Still, the public is obsessed with helmets. I saw this desperate post:

"Dear Dr. Cory: Are bike helmets safe? Should I wear one?
Stephanie Knock, Massapequa Park, New York"

This whole thing was turning upside down. It started with the debate as to whether riding a bike without a helmet was safe, and now I was finding that the question was actually whether it was safe to ride with a helmet!

Dr. Cory let it all out:

"Dear Stephanie: Yes!"

He went on, but I'll spare you his propaganda and the obvious fact that Dr. Cory is in the pocket of Big Helmet. So I went to the only location I felt I could place my trust - the content related ads in the side bar.

There were three.

This:

"Zero Dork Factor Helmets
Coolest bicycle helmets on Earth from award-winning designer Yakkay
www.50cycles.com"

And this:

"Bell Helmets- Buy Direct
Free Shipping, All Styles & Colors Half Helmets, Moto 8's & More!
www.TheHelmetZone.com"

And this:

"Public Sex Offender List
Are Sex Offenders Living In Your Neighborhood? Find Out Now - Free!
www.FamilySafetyReport.com"

Damn. Clearly there was a relationship between bike safety and sex that simply could not be denied. And it was moving into the criminal arena.

So I have come to this conclusion. If a helmet is to be worn, it needs something of a "helmet-offset". The risks and downsides are just too great. It may be as simple as creating a diversion, a bike that has the firepower to take on the proven fashion-trampling mojo of the helmet. Maybe a ride like this:


Anything less would just be foolhardy.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Infrastructure & Incentives

My friend Mark sent me a couple photos he's taken while working in NYC. Though I'd been aware of a substantial cycling culture there, I hadn't thought much about New York as some kind of bikes-as-transportation Mecca. But as a recent NY Times feature confirms, NYC is looking at bikes with fresh eyes. For starters, these bike lanes:

Photo by Mark Imgrund

I would love to see this kind of thing in Santa Monica. Bike lanes separated from traffic (between parked cars and the curb, not between parked cars and the traffic...), and with the I-must-be-dreaming anti-dooring zone built in. Now that is some real Portland-on-the-Hudson enlightened infrastructure there. I mean seriously, if New York City can carve out a couple feet for safe bike riding in a dense urban area, can't we? [UPDATE: Commenter Alexander posted a link to this interview with the Commissioner of the NYC DOT. Amazing glimpses of the improvements in NYC and the leadership at the top that makes it happen. Can we get some leadership like that here in LA/Santa Monica?!]

Then in the next photo, a local business takes it upon themselves to make a difference:

Photo by Mark Imgrund

As you can (vaguely) see on the sign in the window, "Arrive by bicycle - 25% discount"! There is nothing in it for this business (I mean 25% off! That's real money), nothing except the love and devotion of local biking customers. It's just the right idea - that's the upside. I also notice the Revolution Rickshaw out front for deliveries...

Santa Monica should get with this - provide some actual incentives to people who ride their bikes to our business district. Of course they could start by creating actual bike lanes TO the business district.


This is one of my pet peeves - as you can see in the map, the pink bike lanes all end about 3 blocks before you get to the Promenade... I know 3 blocks isn't much, but they are 3 blocks where the streets and sidewalks are totally jammed. If Santa Monica wants people to ride there (which appears questionable), spend some cash at a local business and then ride home, you need to create a safe route (that a family could ride). Us hardy, everyday riders can wing it, but it's a real barrier to new riders. And don't let the green "Bike Routes" fool you - they are totally useless for anyone but the most daring (Lincoln Blvd.? A bike route? Really...?).

Whenever we get to the "Bike Route" sections of our daily ride towing the kids to school, marked with the "Share the Road" signs discreetly tucked behind trees and such, it translates consistently as "Get on the Sidewalk". They really are a (well-intentioned) joke...

What if there were actual incentives to ride to the Promenade? The benefits to overcrowded parking structures and general congestion are obvious. What if we had at just one route in - say Arizona Ave.? That would also serve the Farmer's Market. Maybe have a bike valet like the Sunday market down on Main Street. Maybe some actual discounts for people who ride there (maybe a coupon for a dollar off the next time you get stung $50 for leaving your car at home on street cleaning day...).

While we face depressing cutbacks in bike infrastructure, we need to find creative ways to encourage people to use the bike that don't cost much to local government. Though as we see stimulus money flow into the state, if we could carve out just a tiny fraction of those millions it could go a long way if the ideas are responsible, practical, and truly encourage riding. This map shows where transportation dollars are going, and as you move the mouse over the counties in California an obvious pattern develops - roads and highways are getting the cash. You move up to Oregon and you see another story - Trails and other alternatives are seeing some real love.

But California? Not so much...

But there are some positives. Obama announced new national fuel standards today, with both auto workers and executives at his side. Matt Yglesias offers some praise (and a bit of silver-lining darkening...). And I'll link here to his earlier post pointing out that George Will is, in fact, a tool, and takes particular issue will Will's (now regular) ignorance of the facts. In this case, ragarding the number of Americans that commute by bike... [UPDATE: Oregon Congressman Blumenauer (co-chief of the Congressional Bike Caucus) throws down, challenging Will to a transportation tie-off - defending Portland's approach. What's the matter GW? Ya chicken?]