Cars for Commuting

Tenzor07

Well, I have to say I am hardly surprised at this...

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/car-still-king-for-daily-commute-and-most-drivers-are-women-3325320.html

Sadly though it would seem a lot of women are much more inclined to drive than cycle...

mossym

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Sadly though it would seem a lot of women are much more inclined to drive than cycle...

sadly? its sad more women don't cycle, but given the attitude of some drivers out there to cyclists on the road, especially at rush hour, i think women are right not to risk cycling at a time when they are on their own. if the roads were more cycle friendly I'd agree whole heartedly with the sadly bit though

smacl

The school figures would worry me more, dropping from over 50,000 in 1986 to just 6,592 now. I would imagine that those who've never cycled as a means of transport during their childhood are much less likely to do so in later life. I really believe a lot more focus should be put on getting kids cycling again, more so than adults.

Cabaal

smacl wrote: »

The school figures would worry me more, dropping from over 50,000 in 1986 to just 6,592 now. I would imagine that those who've never cycled as a means of transport during their childhood are much less likely to do so in later life. I really believe a lot more focus should be put on getting kids cycling again, more so than adults.

I have to agree with this as well,

Any adults I've spoken to that believe cycling is dangerous either cycled for little or didn't cycle at all during their childhood,

Tenzor07

Parents won't allow kids to cycle to school due to dangerous levels of cars/traffic...
Women won't cycle to work due to levels of carelessness and aggression by drivers on the roads...

Hardly surprising... But... "Driving is also the favourite mode of transport for third-level students" that is surprising..!

Jawgap

The databases are available here

I'm of only 326 males who cycle to work in Meath - Dublin has 19,234 males and 26,670 people in total who cycle to work.

RainyDay

Jawgap wrote: »

The databases are available here

I'm of only 326 males who cycle to work in Meath - Dublin has 19,234 males and 26,670 people in total who cycle to work.

Check out the number of girls cycling to school - down to single figures in some counties. And then we wonder why 30% of teenage girls are obese.

marketty

Jawgap wrote: »

The databases are available here

I'm of only 326 males who cycle to work in Meath - Dublin has 19,234 males and 26,670 people in total who cycle to work.

Me too! Although I cycle TO Dublin...

As regards cycling to school, forget about it, maybe kids 15+ could be converted but in my town the younger kids all seem to be driven to school even though most would be a max 10-15 min walk from either school. Ridiculous really no wonder they're all so fat...

Chips Lovell

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Hardly surprising... But... "Driving is also the favourite mode of transport for third-level students" that is surprising..!

Yeah. I was blown away by that. But maybe I'm conditioned by going to college in Dublin, where pretty much everyone either walked or got public transport.

Jawgap

marketty wrote: »

Me too! Although I cycle TO Dublin...

As regards cycling to school, forget about it, maybe kids 15+ could be converted but in my town the younger kids all seem to be driven to school even though most would be a max 10-15 min walk from either school. Ridiculous really no wonder they're all so fat...

I need to re-word or better punctuate my sentence....

"I'm of only 326 males in Meath who cycle to work - Dublin has 19,234 males and 26,670 people in total who cycle to work."

or

"I'm of only 326 males who cycle-to-work in Meath - Dublin has 19,234 males and 26,670 people in total who cycle to work."

Iwannahurl

smacl wrote: »

The school figures would worry me more, dropping from over 50,000 in 1986 to just 6,592 now. I would imagine that those who've never cycled as a means of transport during their childhood are much less likely to do so in later life. I really believe a lot more focus should be put on getting kids cycling again, more so than adults.

So has there been another notable drop between 2006 and 2011?

I have to admit I was not expecting that...

Tenzor07

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yeah. I was blown away by that. But maybe I'm conditioned by going to college in Dublin, where pretty much everyone either walked or got public transport.

Maybe I am getting old but about a decade(or so) ago the bike was used for college during the day and later was locked to the gates around the Green before heading out into the pub for a few pints!

CramCycle

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Parents won't allow kids to cycle to school due to dangerous levels of cars/traffic...
Women won't cycle to work due to levels of carelessness and aggression by drivers on the roads...

I would like our chilrd to cycle, she said she would be happy to but her mother says no, it's not even a 10 minute walk, you can't win some arguments even if 2/3 of the group are on the (IMO) right side.

Hardly surprising... But... "Driving is also the favourite mode of transport for third-level students" that is surprising..!

Not surprising but a bit disgusting, UCD has been chokerblock for years. Even with year on year expansion of car park spaces, you'd be lucky to find a space after 08:45 when I was there a few years ago. Quite alot of the drivers I knew were Dublin based. The only ones I could see it being justified for, were those for whom (during the boom times) affording or even finding a place to rent was almost impossible, so drove up and down from the country every day.

ITT has improved in terms of number of cyclists but alot of my students are from the local area but still drive in, even though I guess a majority are no more than 15minutes walk away.

Several students and old colleagues in DCU say they have the same issues as UCD. The only one that seems to not be over run with students driving is TCD but that would be for obvious reasons.

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yeah. I was blown away by that. But maybe I'm conditioned by going to college in Dublin, where pretty much everyone either walked or got public transport.

Unless you went to college in Trinity or a fee based one in the city centre, I imagine that the majority of students in Dublin drive.

Chips Lovell

CramCycle wrote: »

Unless you went to college in Trinity or a fee based one in the city centre, I imagine that the majority of students in Dublin drive.

Even Kevin St, Bolton St and UCD?

CramCycle

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Even Kevin St, Bolton St and UCD?

LOL forgot about DIT, I retract my statement.

UCD is heavily car driven students though (I will admit that they may not be the majority), I know quite a few go by bicycle and bus but when you look at the number of car park spaces on site (approximately 3,400 in 2009, which excludes the dirt overflow car parks and the new car park beside the sports centre and the extension of the car park beside the Quinn building), that are full every day in term with talk of more spaces being bought up, plus the students who park on surronding estates (over by the BOI and hotel etc.) and those who are dropped in daily by parents. I could easily imagine, that at least half the students are commuting by car, but thats just idle speculation.

catch.23

CramCycle wrote: »

Not surprising but a bit disgusting, UCD has been chokerblock for years. Even with year on year expansion of car park spaces, you'd be lucky to find a space after 08:45 when I was there a few years ago. Quite alot of the drivers I knew were Dublin based. The only ones I could see it being justified for, were those for whom (during the boom times) affording or even finding a place to rent was almost impossible, so drove up and down from the country every day.

This really isn't the case, there has been a year on year decrease in the parking spaces available in UCD, there are over 25000 students in UCD and only a few hundred parking spaces, its no wonder they fill up quickly! I'd say over 90% of students there walk, cycle or use public transport.

Lumen

RainyDay wrote: »

Check out the number of girls cycling to school - down to single figures in some counties. And then we wonder why 30% of teenage girls are obese.

Because they eat too much shíte?

Every fat cyclist knows that the stomach is fitter than the legs. Exercise is not a a panacea.

catch.23

CramCycle wrote: »

LOL forgot about DIT, I retract my statement.

UCD is heavily car driven students though (I will admit that they may not be the majority), I know quite a few go by bicycle and bus but when you look at the number of car park spaces on site (approximately 3,400 in 2009, which excludes the dirt overflow car parks and the new car park beside the sports centre and the extension of the car park beside the Quinn building), that are full every day in term with talk of more spaces being bought up, plus the students who park on surronding estates (over by the BOI and hotel etc.) and those who are dropped in daily by parents. I could easily imagine, that at least half the students are commuting by car, but thats just idle speculation.

There are a few hundred spaces reserved for gym members (strictly enforced), the new car park by the quinn building is there because the old one is gone. Even if there were 3000 spaces, which I doubt there are, there are 25000 students, plus a huge number of staff, say 30000 in all, so that would be 10% travelling by car!

seamus

Car use for the commute actually increased proportionally by 5% in that period, while walking, bussing, carpooling and motorcycling all decreased, some massively.

So despite the claims of "hard-pressed motorists", I think what this shows is that people are still well able to afford their cars despite the increased cost of motoring, recession, etc. Cycling and rail were the only other two to increase in the period.

monument

None of theses figures are the totals for any mode of transport. They are only commuters and only the main mode used. Any trip outside of commuting is not counted, but it does not end there...

For example, if John drives (or wallks) three days a week and takes the bus two days, only the mode used for the three days should be counted. Or if Mary takes the train for 7km and cycles 2km, only the train trip should be counted.

CramCycle

catch.23 wrote: »

This really isn't the case, there has been a year on year decrease in the parking spaces available in UCD, there are over 25000 students in UCD and only a few hundred parking spaces, its no wonder they fill up quickly! I'd say over 90% of students there walk, cycle or use public transport.

I don't think there has, I was there from 2004 until 2012, in that time, there have been at least 3 dirt car parks opened, a car park bought from Richview business park, the car park put in place beside the IHS, 2 car parks put in beside the Quinn building (even if one has disappeared). 2 small car parks put in between the cycle shop and the student residences. This also doesn't take into account the students who park along the slip road beside the Montrose, the car park of gym beside the mosque and other such places (although these would be small in number). I also imagine that there is more often than not more than one person per car but there is no way for me to test that.

catch.23 wrote: »

There are a few hundred spaces reserved for gym members (strictly enforced)

I did not know that, I thought it was pay and display, it was pay and display a few months ago but I don't pay much attention, that was probably just over the summer.

Even if there were 3000 spaces, which I doubt there are, there are 25000 students, plus a huge number of staff, say 30000 in all, so that would be 10% travelling by car!

That is assuming one person per car, and that isn't completely true. UCD had a strict policy of not enlarging the number of car park spaces up until 2009 from early on in the decade, presumably in line with council requirements (I think the SU petitioned them early in my term there and they were told no because of some such regulation from the council). Presumably in line with the new buildings, extensions and taking parking off the business park, they were able to enlarge over the past few years. They also did have a huge push for other modes of transport including cycling and bus use if you look at their commuting and travel policies.

That said, I was over estimating the percentage of students by a good mark but there is, in my view, still a huge number of students commuting by car, most of whom, I don't see the need for it, some have too due to distance, some car share which is great (I am also a big fan of the idea, if you have 4 passengers you can use the car lane to encourage such behaviour like they have in some other countries and cities) but alot don't, of all my years cycling in Dublin, the general level of skill IMO is lower around the Clonskeagh entrance due to the large mix of inexperienced drivers, heavy traffic, cyclists with no common sense, pedestrians whose heads cannot pivot left or right, traffic lights that seem to be only a guide during the peak periods and stressed out traffic jam people.

This is all just an opinion though, and I am sure some of my views are grossly unfair and skewed.

buffalo

CramCycle wrote: »

Not surprising but a bit disgusting, UCD has been chokerblock for years.

...

Several students and old colleagues in DCU say they have the same issues as UCD. The only one that seems to not be over run with students driving is TCD but that would be for obvious reasons.

Ex-DCU president Prondzynski, on his excellent blog, recently quoted Clark Kerr: "a university consists of ‘a series of individual faculty entrepreneurs held together by a common grievance over car parking.’"

Also: "a university President has three key tasks which his or her main stakeholders will expect to see achieved: ‘sex for the students, athletics for the alumni, and parking for the faculty.’ Only the last of these, he suggested, presented a problem."

http://universitydiary.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/the-key-problem-at-the-heart-of-every-university/

RainyDay

Lumen wrote: »

Because they eat too much shíte?

Or to be more specific, because they eat too much shíte, and get little or no exercise.

monument

To be clear, because I'm not sure I was...

Inactivity is a problem in it self, getting cycling commuting increased is the closest thing you can get to a panacea for inactivity.

Lumen

monument wrote: »

Lumen -- how many obese cyclists do you know?

My own definition of "fat cyclist" may differ from your definition of "obese cyclist". As a proportion, probably less than in the general population, but more than I'd expect if I believed that exercise was an easy way to lose weight.

CramCycle

monument wrote: »

Lumen -- how many obese cyclists do you know?

Technically alot of are at the least overweight but thats why the BMI scale is a load of sh1t

Which is better, a fat and active cyclist or a fat and inactive motorist / bus / train / ram user? It's not a panacea, it should not be in isolation, but exercise in isolation is far better than no exercise.

Just to be clear, being obese isn't always bad for your health, it depends on the type of fat cells, to generalise, you can have a MHO (metabolically healthy obese) person, whose fat cells have a different size and secretory profile, people with a large amount of MHO fat cells, tend to be in no worse and in alot of cases healthier than their skinny counterparts.

tomasrojo

I could be wrong, but I think exercise alone is not effective as a way of losing weight. As a way of preventing putting on weight in the first place, it's excellent, not just for burning calories, but also for keeping you out and about, away from grazing on cheap fatty and sugary foods.

Which is why it's important to get children active early on. The thing is, speaking from experience, they actually want to be active. We've just created a society that makes activity difficult, dangerous or frowned on.

(Also, you can be somewhat overweight and still healthy as long as you're active. So I've read anyway.)

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

Technically alot of are at the least overweight but thats why the BMI scale is a load of sh1t

It definitely doesn't work for athletes. Or even me. I have a BMI of 24+. 25 is overweight. I'm actually thin, though no athlete. I might have built up leg muscle from all the trailing heavy loads.

Lumen

CramCycle wrote: »

Technically alot of are at the least overweight but thats why the BMI scale is a load of sh1t

Yeah, all the fatties say that.

CramCycle wrote: »

Just to be clear, being obese isn't always bad for your health, it depends on the type of fat cells, to generalise, you can have a MHO (metabolically healthy obese) person, whose fat cells have a different size and secretory profile, people with a large amount of MHO fat cells, tend to be in no worse and in alot of cases healthier than their skinny counterparts.

It also depends on fat distribution, according to the "research" I've read. Fat thighs are correlated with low rates of heart disease.

Tenzor07

Meanwhile we can look at this and dream...Courteous drivers...proper infrastructure...Women and kids not scared away from cycling...

Iwannahurl

Lumen wrote: »

It also depends on fat distribution, according to the "research" I've read. Fat thighs are correlated with low rates of heart disease.

Maybe the risks are lower if the fat sinks all the way to the lower extremities, taking the pressure off the vital organs in the abdomen and thorax.

Biologically plausible?

piston

I cycle about 5,000 miles in an average year and am still about 3 stone heavier than my quack says I should be. But I'm happy to admit that diet isn't all that it could be, hence the weight thing.

Weight loss is basically eat more than you use - gain weight. Eat less than you use - lose weight. It's perfectly possible to lose weight sitting on the sofa reading the Daily Mirror if you are eating less calories than you use, but I still think you'd be healthier to take regular exercise.

harrier

Technically alot of are at the least overweight but thats why the BMI scale is a load of sh1t

Yes and no. Typical example cited is Brian O'Driscoll, reputed to have a BMI of 30 which is medically obese (but I wouldn't say that to his face). If you've lots of muscles and not so much fat, BMI is not a good measure.

Also subject to similar derision is the incredibly simple waist measurement and "Stop the Spread" campaign.

Widespread denial of being overweight abounds.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Maybe the risks are lower if the fat sinks all the way to the lower extremities, taking the pressure off the vital organs in the abdomen and thorax.

Biologically plausible?

Not really. Belly fat toxic in a way that lower fat isn't and it's associated with lots of avoidable diseases.

Exercise reduces risks, even if you're overweight and don't lose any of it. Better again if you do lose weight though.

Lots of commentators are claiming lack of physical activity will lead to a generation of parents that outlive their children. Sure, they're even talking about it in Leinster House so it must be important.

Iwannahurl

harrier wrote: »

a generation of parents that will outlive their children.

I might, if they don't kill me first...