I’ve been a cyclist for 40-odd years. By and large, it is good, but if you want to move along at a reasonable speed, by crikey you’ve got to be careful.

Even in a flat town with wide roads and lots of off-road cycleways like Townsville, it is still dangerous. Much more so than driving. And trying to ride around Brisbane or Perth, other cities that I’m familiar with, is just fraught with risk.

We’ve had two deaths of middle-aged experienced cyclists here this year, and a number of injuries….and who knows how many near-misses.

Cycling should most definitely be promoted in this age of rising fuel prices and concerns about climate change. But there absolutely MUST be a major educational campaign as part of it, to impress on riders and drivers just what the risks are and how to minimise them.

And, something that Chris Rissel didn’t mention; there needs to be a vastly improved policing regime, to see that cyclists and drivers obey the law….instead of the absurd blind-eye policing that we have in Townsville, in regard to lightless cyclists at night and cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road….which can a be a real hazard for legitimate cyclists, especially at night when they’ve got no headlight…which is an amazingly common occurrence in this town!!

The greater problem lies with corporate greed.

It is known widely that several oil companies hold patents and manufacturing rights to engines of remarkable economy/kilowatt outputs i.e. consumption figures that astound. The larger electrical entitities likewise with electric motor technology. But when the last litre of crude oil is wrung from the bowels of the Earth, and sold at whatever $ figure - perhaps only then will the greedy and myopic see that it is all over for fossil fuel technology as we know it.

Then, and only then, will we see some real "progress" in the arena of alternate technolgies being applied for consumption by the masses.

Darwin is comparatively flat topographically speaking. It has though, one of the better bicycle path networks which were installed in the 1990's primarily along the old WWII rail alignments (Darwin to Palmerston).

Unfortunately DCC and DIPE here are reticent to maintain these pathways to such a point they are in parts more dangerous to navigate than the roadways alongside - placing cyclists at some peril.

The lemming like rush to outer suburban regions (Livingstone - Humpty Doo etc) and the population spreading wider has not been addressed by planners. The much vaunted upgrade to Tiger Brennan Drive does not even have a bicycle corridor included, just the same 20 - 30 yr old 1 metre wide ribbons of concrete and intermittent tar macadam chunks to bounce over at a startling 12 klms per hour average speed. So much for high speed bicycle path networks... Tree roots breaking the pavements, broken glass causing innumerable flat tyres, ruined rims and workers coming in late to their workplaces.

Yes...cycling is indupitably good for your physical health, but in Darwin the amount of abuse hurled by petrol heads has to be experienced to be believed.

The Traffic Act has to be amended to something like the road rules in Belgium and Denmark where cyclists have a greater 'Right of Way'. If not just for the good they contribute to the environment, but more the good they contribute to a healthier society in general.

Oh and before I log off and forget.....the bl@#dy palm fronds that infest each and every footpath and road shoulder - ad infinitum!

And for the fatties (you know who you are) and the not so fit there is also the option of power assisted (electric) bicycles which help with the grunt work. Unfortunately most state laws limit the motor output to around 200 watts to still be called a bicycle and avoid registration and licensing issues. This power limitation should be revised upwards to encourage the less able onto bicycle and tricycles as well. The electricity required to power these motors is a fraction of a car and running costs are even smaller.

Good comments from Ludwig. Cycling is not very healthy for cyclists.

As a grumpy old motorist, though, I find cyclists a pain in the neck. If they want to go through red lights, that’s their problem. What really annoys me are cyclists over 12 years of age (SA) other than those permitted to accompany their under-12 children, riding on footpaths when it is ILLEGAL. I am also irritated (and unnerved) by two-abreast riders with the outside rider wobbling over the line of a bike lane into traffic. I’m even more annoyed by clubs all over the road, thinking that it’s OK to impede motorists trying to pass if they are en masse.

I am very aware of cyclists, and do my level best to keep them safe. I wish they would do the same things for themselves – and me.
I am not against cycling or cyclists. I often have a yen to ride a bike myself, but being smeared across the bitumen is not the way I want to go; as things stand, cycling (on roads) is dangerous for both cyclists themselves and for motorists.

The measures suggested by the author will never be paid for by governments

I was impressed with the health benefits of cycling until I googled "cycling and impotence" and discovered a disturbing amount of info that regular cycling in extremely bad for you in the downtairs department. Maybe people should consider this before they rush to jump on a bike.

I agree with most of what has been posted. It's all very well to talk idealistically about the virtues of physical activity etc, but the fact that, as a bike rider, you are sharing the road with a hunk of steel that has much more power and speed than you is a distinct danger to one's health. A friend of mine I rented with in the '80s used to ride up Punt Road hill in Melbourne. I look back now and wonder how he wasn't hit or killed. Like a lot of impressionable and "bulletproof" young people, he believed the biking-is-good-for-you spin. Time to debunk that myth: cycling is dangerous when you are mixing it with cars.

http://iainhall.wordpress.com/2007/05/21/ten-loonies-in-lycra/

This is a rather sarcastic take on just how annoying bicycle riders can be.
I shop once a week for the family and I have to drive 35 km there and back a dozen green shopping bags means that peddle power is out of the question, this is of course the problem Bikes just are not the answer for most people.

A real solution lies in making cars that weigh far less than the models currently available so that they can be far more fuel efficient.

Cycling can be wonderful, if there are cycleways. Far too many cyclists flout the road rules, and why is it, that whenever cycling is pushed as "environmentally responsible", that motorists and taxpayers generally are supposed to bear the cost of the infrastructure? Is there any reason why bicycles can't be registered like cars and motorcycles? The concept of "user pays" has never been applied to bicycles.

I also wonder why it is, in this age of invention, that bicycle seats are still 19th century torture devices.

Rather than build cycle paths local councils in Melbourne and the tram company are narrowing arterial roads making cars merge into a single lane, this makes drivers angry and makes cycling much more dangerous.

I am surprised that 50% of journeys are less than 5 km. Is that because after commuting for a hour or so you are just too exhausted to venture out of the house again so you run your chores on the homeward trip.

Commenting as someone who cycles to work, my chief antagonist is the weather. Riding in the winter rain is downright unpleasant, and being caught riding in 40 C heat in summer is enough to make you want to give it up for good. Skipping the weather by taking your bike on public transport would help if there was good public transport available - but it isn't for me.

Another issue is facilities - you arrive at work hot and sweaty (or if its raining - wet and miserable), and you need to shower and change. I have been lucky here - but most people I know aren't.

Cycling is perceived to be dangerous, but I think the issue is overblown. I have been hit twice in my decades of riding - both times I lost some skin. Loss of skin isn't that serious. Being hit at the lights by a car doing 80 km/h is deadly, but that doesn't happen in peak hour traffic - the cars are moving slowly and the drivers seem to be alert. Riding in those conditions is harrowing, but relatively safe.

The final issue is the effort it takes. It can get too much, particularly if you are older or live a long way (say 30 km) from work. But there is a solution, available now - electronic motors.

There are two types. The most common type turns the bike into an electronic vehicle. It does the work for you - press the throttle and it goes. But they have low range, and besides the effort is the point, isn't it? The alternative is electronic assist. Its multiplies the effort you put into peddling by some (usually adjustable) level. It makes you feel like a kid again - daddy is giving you a push. Hills become a non-issue.

Electronic assist means the effort is never too much - even on a day you just don't feel like riding. Just about every single occupant car driver could ride to work with electronic assist, if they wanted to. I suspect most just don't want to.

Thanks for a great article, Chris. I'd just like to make a few more points about electric bikes.

The problem with electric bikes here in Australia is that while the concept is fantastic and they are reasonably priced, the electric components could be greatly improved on a lot of them. The main problem is the battery (a lithium-ion battery on most) because it has a relatively short range (around 30-50kms) and tends to have a lifespan that can vary from 6 months to a few years depending on how its charged and how its used. There aren't many alternative electric systems available as they all seem to be imported from the same Chinese factory.

In the USA, its a different story with really nice machines like this http://schwinnbike.com/products/bikes_detail.php?id=887 being readily available. Unfortunately, nobody is importing these because they slightly exceed the 200 watt power limit imposed on Australian electric bicycles (I think these are about 250 watts).

What I'd love to see is 1) some govt assistance for R&D of better electric systems for the companies already selling/designing electric bikes here in Australia and to encourage others to become part of the industry and 2) raise the legal power restrictions on electric bikes so we could also import some bikes like the Schwinn from the USA and a few others I've seen used in the UK.

Coupled with Chris' suggestions about education and bicycle infrastructure, I think this mix would create a better quality range of electric bikes and a healthy, competitive market which would see more of us cycling.

Despite some problems, electric bikes are currently still a good mode of transport so don't let me put you off if you are thinking about one. The key is to do your research, take careful note of charging and maintenance instructions for the batteries and stay away from the real cheapies offered on eBay and the like.

Here is my 2c worth on the Australian electric bike laws. My understanding is they are a bit of a mess. They limit the power to 200W, but don't specify how it is measured. It could mean delivered to the motor or delivered to the road. It could also be peak or continuous. The law doesn't say.

More to the point, the law doesn't work. Put a 200W peak bike on a downhill slope and it will easily assist the rider over 40 km/h. Put a heavy person on it trying to use the motor going up a hill on the other hand and he may well find himself going backwards.

Other countries, like Canada for example, define a maximum speed. In the US it is 32 km/h. Beyond that the motor cuts out. I presume that speed came from what a fit unassisted road bike rider does, as they average around the 30 km/h mark on long (100km) journeys. The advertising often claims an engine will let you "keep up with the pack", but it can't do that unless it can at assist you up their average speed.

To go that speed on flat ground on a windless day requires about 700W continuous (1400W peak). By comparison a typical 50cc scooter engine is 2,000W continuous, so on one is going to be doing wheelies with a 700W motor.

Handily, it also turns out to be a practical maximum. 7kg of the most expensive batteries money can buy will last 30 km (1 hour) at that speed. All up the motor + batteries + bike will weigh over 20 kg - which is dammed heavy for a push bike. Anything above that and no one is going to use it without electric assist. If you are going to use it like that then be honest and get yourself a scooter.

So I think 700W continuous is a justifiable figure. But my point is really that 200W continuous isn't, and I don't know how they came up with it. Interpreting the law as 200W peak (ie 100W continuous) is just absurd.

It SURE is NOT healthy for those morons who block tunnels with bikes during peak hour.

Or..for those 'fools' who ride 2 abreast on roads where there is not enough room for a car to overtake safely without incringing over the centre line.

That is MOST unhealthy.

Agreed. Once again it boils down to cycleways & cycling facilities.
Everyone tells me Perth is a wonderful to ride a bike in.

Ah!! A subject close to an ex-Dutch girl's heart.

That cycling is still being discussed as an option and not the necessity that it should be is the ridiculous part.

When there are bike ways on the roads, you know the white line with a bike stencil, they are: too narrow, used my motorist as a parking lane, used by motorists as a left turning lane, used by motorists to increase the width of their driving lane, and most ridiculous of all-abruptly finish at the most dangerous spots.

It is beyond me why it is not possible to have a look at how other countries deal with cyclists. The Netherlands comes to mind. Much greater distances than 5km are ridden by bike. Mostly very safely, I saw some stats, can't remember where, that proportionally there are fewer cyclists killed or maimed in Holland (without bike helmets!)than here in Australia.

If public transport and cycling were properly integrated as they should be, so that it is possible to travel a distance too far to walk but easy to cycle, public transport wouldn't be such a pain either. Also, it wouldn't be necessary for a bus to take 40 minutes for a normally 20 minute journey, because it has to go through every street in the suburb. Proper bike racks should be available at a number of bus stops.

If school children could travel safely to school by bike, like millions of Dutch school kids, it would massively reduce traffic on roads AND it would resolve the obesity problem in one fell swoop. Nothing like 40 minutes/day on the bike five days a week to burn up those fast food calories.

Good points yvonne. Well, I reckon cycling is going to be upgraded big-time and integrated into the transport regime in a major way in the very near future.

Here’s hoping

I have been riding for more than thirtyfive years, but only in the last two years have I abandoned my car. I shop twice-weekly for three people by hitching a trailer to my bike and purchasing less bulky products. I am not in a hurry to get to the shops, even less so to get home as the extra weight in the trailer slows me down. It is only a four kilometre ride and I get to see footy and bowls in the park before spending my money. The biggest step is the first one. Work to eat, eat to live, live to bike, bike to work.

Dear Chris, I have been bicycle commuting for 3 years, a distance of 2 kms each way. Here it's legal to share the footpath with pedestrians provided you give way, except where a pedestrian crosses the footpath when they're supposed to give way, but don't. I ride on footpaths when I don't feel safe on roads - where there's heavy traffic and no cycle lane or an inadequate one. Pedestrians are not accustomed to sharing the footpath with cyclists. Most wander all over the place without checking who's coming from behind, listening to ipods; or walk in the middle, two or three abreast as if cyclists have no right. Few pedestrians keep left so a cyclist can pass or even seem aware of the possiblity. I have several times been abused by male pedestrians as if I had no right to be on the footpath. On the roads too, many motorists act like cyclists have no right to be there. Scariest are open highways where cars travelling at high speed are reluctant to give a wide berth, resulting in deaths of several cyclists here. I would prefer to commute via a cycle path that is separate from cars. I have a good quality mountain bike that I don't want to lose or have damaged. I asked at work for secure bike parking. The result is a bike rack in an insecure outdoor area which I don't use. Instead I bring my bike into the office, giving rise to complaints about OH&S issues or taking up needed office space. One anonymous party has even moved furniture to block the space where I was parking my bike; and moved it back repeatedly whenever I moved it out of the way. For the above reasons, including the relatively short distance to work, I have been finding lately that it's a lot less hassle to walk. I would rather cycle and look forward to the day when government authorities and the general public respect and make adequate provision for cyclists, given the all round positive benefits.