Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Ideas for managing dockless scooters car-free

Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Ideas for managing dockless scooters car-free

Old 01-28-19, 06:33 PM
  #26  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by badger1 View Post
You see? This is the problem. You, like me, are (apparently) just another member of the Brigade of "the anti-LCF that like to throw their weight (and spit) around wherever ideas for car-free innovations dare to rear their heads."

Sad -- not. Why these latter-day variations on Ponzi schemes (for that is what they are) like Bird, Lime, and their ilk (not to mention Uber, Lyft etc.) are not recognized for what they are is beyond me.
Funny, I've never heard of a Ponzi scheme that gives people access to share vehicles.

As for these negative comments being anti-LCF, it's just a no-win scenario with the nay-sayers. They are expecting these simple forms of transportation to generate as much revenue as cars and automotive infrastructure and there is simply no rational reason why they would do that. As a result, they dismiss them as being financially doomed, but that's a bit like what I read today about Apple not being able to make devices outside China because the tiny specialized screws they need are too cheap for anyone to bother making in the US.

If share bikes/scooters are too cheap to bother with, then that translates into a driving mandate; just like Apple's cheap Chinese screws translate into a mandate to import them from a high-skill/low-wage economic region.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-28-19, 07:11 PM
  #27  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
I don't think that's the problem at all.

The overall idea of using alternative sources for transportation is sound but in this case it would appear the companies are ignoring reality and pinning ongoing success on fuzzy strategies.

You can't ignore the fact that left unattended, people will vandalize scooters.
You can't pin recovery and recharging hopes on teenagers using third party power supplies.
You can't lay out more to run an idea than it generates in income.

Widespread dockless scooters may seem cool but it sounds like society and the infrastructure isn't ready for them. Perhaps smaller, targeted locales with docks so the user needs to be accountable for return (or get billed on the CC) and where they can be recharged using the parent companies power would be a more sustainable and responsible business model. It would also reduce recovery fees (as the scooters are docked).

Last edited by Happy Feet; 01-28-19 at 07:22 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 01-28-19, 07:13 PM
  #28  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by happy feet View Post
i don't think that's the problem at all.

The overall idea of using alternative sources for transportation is sound but in this case it would appear the companies are ignoring reality and pinning ongoing success on fuzzy strategies.

You can't ignore the fact that left unattended, people will vandalize scooters.
You can pin recovery and recharging hopes on teenagers using third party power supplies.
You can't lay out more to run an idea than it generates in income.

Widespread dockless scooters may seem cool but it sounds like society and the infrastructure isn't ready for them. Perhaps smaller, targeted locales with docks so the user needs to be accountable for return (or get billed on the cc) and where they can be recharged using the parent companies power would be a more sustainable and responsible business model.
+1
Machka is offline  
Old 01-28-19, 09:41 PM
  #29  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 4,998

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1420 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 29 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by badger1 View Post
You see? This is the problem. You, like me, are (apparently) just another member of the Brigade of "the anti-LCF that like to throw their weight (and spit) around wherever ideas for car-free innovations dare to rear their heads."

Sad -- not. Why these latter-day variations on Ponzi schemes (for that is what they are) like Bird, Lime, and their ilk (not to mention Uber, Lyft etc.) are not recognized for what they are is beyond me.
One of the things I learned a long time ago is a con works best on those who want to get something for nothing. Or at the very least for close to nothing. So the promise has to be big even if a hard look tells someone it is too good to be true. A Ponzi can even be legal. Look at Amway, they promise you will make money simply by buying superior products. Quite often the first several layers of the Pyramid do make money. Sooner or later the people on the bottom are doing all the work and not making any money.

A promise of a system where you can pick up a scooter or bike “anywhere” you see it parked and drop it off “anywhere” you want for just a few bucks, less than 5 bucks a day sounds too good to be true. When you add 5 bucks to recover and charge one, bird hunting? LOL. Then when teen age kids are driving around town in a van, not car free and not easy on gas, your profits have to be taking a hit. Give the kids a bonus of 20-30 bucks each for scooters that have not been used for a day or two and how is the vendor making money?

The venture capitslist aren’t taking the hit try are using investors money. In city after city the systems are breaking down and the tax payers are cleaning up the mess but the believers are blaiming others for not supporting them. And when the Pyramid starts to crumble because the vans running around town are costing more than the scooters make some LCF true believers will wonder why no one said anything.

Just a prediction but the shared link might support such a prediction?
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 01-28-19, 10:07 PM
  #30  
Homebrew01
Super Moderator
 
Homebrew01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Posts: 21,027

Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 787 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Scooters are like weeds in some places. We were in Santa Barbara visiting family and scooters are all over the place, leaning against fences, left in piles, in the middle of the sidewalk....

I think charging trucks make rounds charging them up.
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.

FYI: http://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Homebrew01 is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 03:00 AM
  #31  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by Homebrew01 View Post
Scooters are like weeds in some places. We were in Santa Barbara visiting family and scooters are all over the place, leaning against fences, left in piles, in the middle of the sidewalk....

I think charging trucks make rounds charging them up.

Doesn't sound very "car free" or environmentally friendly.



Simpler ... I think ... to just walk or ride our own bicycles.
Machka is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 06:40 AM
  #32  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
The overall idea of using alternative sources for transportation is sound but in this case it would appear the companies are ignoring reality and pinning ongoing success on fuzzy strategies.

You can't ignore the fact that left unattended, people will vandalize scooters.
You can't pin recovery and recharging hopes on teenagers using third party power supplies.
You can't lay out more to run an idea than it generates in income.

Widespread dockless scooters may seem cool but it sounds like society and the infrastructure isn't ready for them. Perhaps smaller, targeted locales with docks so the user needs to be accountable for return (or get billed on the CC) and where they can be recharged using the parent companies power would be a more sustainable and responsible business model. It would also reduce recovery fees (as the scooters are docked).
This is so similar to the article I read about why Apple can't make products outside of China. The article described a single person making tiny specialized screws because the cost of the screws didn't warrant multiple workers in Texas, whereas in China there would be a whole team of people working on the screws. Basically that means that Apple has to make products in China and ship them across the ocean, i.e. because local people aren't willing to do the kind of work needed at the cost/wages that workers in China will. Maybe because they don't LCF and so they have to pay for cars and driving.

What seems to be clear is that ubiquitous driving generates a certain level of GDP that requires everyone to drive. So unless a class of LCF people can emerge that are willing to work for less, things like dockless share scooters/bikes are going to be too expensive to be a viable business model.

The other option is for people to pay enough for the dockless share scooters/bikes to generate a lucrative business at automotive-economy levels, but then of course people are going to be under pressure to do as much business as in a full-blown automotive economy, which will probably mean they have to travel as much and as far as those who drive do.

Then, if the dockless share companies fail, it's just proof that the overall automotive economy has become a barrier to affordable transportation choice, which we've sort of known all along anyway, except those of us who are living in the dream reality that it's just as easy to LCF as it is to get around by driving.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 07:03 AM
  #33  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 3,689
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 960 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post

Then, if the dockless share companies fail, it's just proof that the overall automotive economy has become a barrier to affordable transportation choice, ..
If that were true, one might thing such scooter rentals would be economically viable in developing nations that don't have our "automotive economy."

The "problem" with these ideas is they're selling a product relatively few wish to buy at a price that is insufficient to meet operating costs. And there's little prospect of that changing. These schemes are only launched in more prosperous countries because those are the only places with investors who can sink money into the idea.
jon c. is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 07:12 AM
  #34  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by jon c. View Post
If that were true, one might thing such scooter rentals would be economically viable in developing nations that don't have our "automotive economy."

The "problem" with these ideas is they're selling a product relatively few wish to buy at a price that is insufficient to meet operating costs. And there's little prospect of that changing. These schemes are only launched in more prosperous countries because those are the only places with investors who can sink money into the idea.
+1

Scooters are simply not the solution for a number of reasons that include but are not limited to weather, snow, terrain, road conditions, etc.

Plus people like comfort and convenience.
Machka is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 10:04 AM
  #35  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
This is so similar to the article I read about why Apple can't make products outside of China. The article described a single person making tiny specialized screws because the cost of the screws didn't warrant multiple workers in Texas, whereas in China there would be a whole team of people working on the screws. Basically that means that Apple has to make products in China and ship them across the ocean, i.e. because local people aren't willing to do the kind of work needed at the cost/wages that workers in China will. Maybe because they don't LCF and so they have to pay for cars and driving.

What seems to be clear is that ubiquitous driving generates a certain level of GDP that requires everyone to drive. So unless a class of LCF people can emerge that are willing to work for less, things like dockless share scooters/bikes are going to be too expensive to be a viable business model.

The other option is for people to pay enough for the dockless share scooters/bikes to generate a lucrative business at automotive-economy levels, but then of course people are going to be under pressure to do as much business as in a full-blown automotive economy, which will probably mean they have to travel as much and as far as those who drive do.

Then, if the dockless share companies fail, it's just proof that the overall automotive economy has become a barrier to affordable transportation choice, which we've sort of known all along anyway, except those of us who are living in the dream reality that it's just as easy to LCF as it is to get around by driving.
Perhaps you should rethink your PR if you imagine yourself an advocate for LCF because suggesting people need to begin accepting dystopian wage and working conditions in communist China as prerequisite is going to be a hard sell (and completely untrue). Sounds more like an anti - advocate message.

And since when are unregulated dockless scooters a needed component in LCF? To me they seem to be high tech toys for people to play around on for whimsy. The current business model actually caters to that in the sense of use and lose, no responsibility access by both the company and users (user for disposable scooter, company by creating no real infrastructure). Responsibly, companies could identify corridors where such devices would be useful, create a series of maintained docks, and encourage responsible use therein. If they (the scooters) are truly beneficial that would be a long term viable business model.

I lived car free until I was 30 in 4 different cities. The basics are still the same: density, good mass transport infrastructure, bicycle friendly corridors/roads, security and a decent bike. If you have those it's pretty easy to be at least, car lite.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 04:30 PM
  #36  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Perhaps you should rethink your PR if you imagine yourself an advocate for LCF because suggesting people need to begin accepting dystopian wage and working conditions in communist China as prerequisite is going to be a hard sell (and completely untrue). Sounds more like an anti - advocate message.
It's not a question of dystopianism or communism or anything like that. It's just that scooters are small, simple vehicles and you can't justify charging lots for them the way you can a car where everything from the windshield-wiper motors to the automatic door locks are complex parts. Simplicity is a good thing for the consumer and investors, who then don't have to deal with so many suppliers, etc. that drive up costs. But when people start vandalizing them because they see the potential for lost automotive business in them, things do start getting a little dystopian.

And since when are unregulated dockless scooters a needed component in LCF? To me they seem to be high tech toys for people to play around on for whimsy. The current business model actually caters to that in the sense of use and lose, no responsibility access by both the company and users (user for disposable scooter, company by creating no real infrastructure). Responsibly, companies could identify corridors where such devices would be useful, create a series of maintained docks, and encourage responsible use therein. If they (the scooters) are truly beneficial that would be a long term viable business model.
An electric scooter is simply the smallest-possible iteration of a personal motor vehicles. The regulations and laws are very biased in favor of passenger vehicles with a lot of weight, crash-protection, etc. so it is difficult to whittle down the size and complexity of personal motor-vehicles to something that requires less lane-width, less materials, is more cost/energy-efficient, etc.

I lived car free until I was 30 in 4 different cities. The basics are still the same: density, good mass transport infrastructure, bicycle friendly corridors/roads, security and a decent bike. If you have those it's pretty easy to be at least, car lite.
It's good to have options for LCF where all those various conditions aren't met. Otherwise, the people who live in places that don't meet those conditions end up driving-dependent.
tandempower is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 08:29 PM
  #37  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
It's not a question of dystopianism or communism or anything like that. It's just that scooters are small, simple vehicles and you can't justify charging lots for them the way you can a car where everything from the windshield-wiper motors to the automatic door locks are complex parts. Simplicity is a good thing for the consumer and investors, who then don't have to deal with so many suppliers, etc. that drive up costs. But when people start vandalizing them because they see the potential for lost automotive business in them, things do start getting a little dystopian...
Whooza whatsit? You specifically said:

...because local people aren't willing to do the kind of work needed at the cost/wages that workers in China will.
and now you're not saying that? and mixing in a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory that people vandalize scooters because they see the potential for lost automotive business in them? Really?
Rather than a grand conspiracy by the auto pact I think people vandalize things because people vandalize things. Leave scooters lying around unattended and that's just what happens. Leave your bike out unlocked on a street corner for a couple of days as an experiment.

An electric scooter is simply the smallest-possible iteration of a personal motor vehicles. The regulations and laws are very biased in favor of passenger vehicles with a lot of weight, crash-protection, etc. so it is difficult to whittle down the size and complexity of personal motor-vehicles to something that requires less lane-width, less materials, is more cost/energy-efficient, etc.
Huh? what does that have to do with leaving them unattended?

You are mixing two issues: 1. Viable means of transportation 2. Administering said means. I won't argue that public use scooters may have a role somewhere, somehow but will argue that if administered wrong they will probably fail. Try to keep the two concepts separate. Otherwise, you wind up arguing that they ought to work just because they are a good idea. It's also a good idea to love one another but that doesn't always work out so well either.

It's good to have options for LCF where all those various conditions aren't met. Otherwise, the people who live in places that don't meet those conditions end up driving-dependent.
Except, if you live in places where those conditions don't exist, you won't be turning to e scooters as a solution will you.
To review. For LCF using e scooters you need: density, good mass transport infrastructure (unless you plan to drive to the scooters), bicycle scooter friendly corridors/roads, security and a decent bike scooter.

I don't mind engaging in a conversation but you really seem to have a hard time doing that without slipping into evil world order rhetorical baffegab. To me that's boring. The problem with dockless scooters is not the vehicle itself but that no one is taking responsibility for them. You seem to think it is the anticipated end user and/or casual bystander who should be doing that. I disagree. I believe it is the company who wants to implement them that needs to provide intelligent foresight to set the program up and administer it in such a way that it doesn't fail due to easily anticipated and predictable behaviors such as vandalism.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 01-29-19 at 08:41 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 01-29-19, 10:36 PM
  #38  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post

I lived car free until I was 30 in 4 different cities. The basics are still the same: density, good mass transport infrastructure, bicycle friendly corridors/roads, security and a decent bike. If you have those it's pretty easy to be at least, car lite.
I've been car free or car light most of my life and have never made use of scooters.

I've used public transportation, bicycles, and walking.

And I agree ... if you've got a good mass transport infrastructure, you've nailed the comfort and convenience aspect. It means that people can travel where they are going in reasonable comfort (out of the elements, for example), and reasonably conveniently (transportation comes by fairly frequently, and picks up and drops off in convenient locations).

That, to me, should be the main focus for living car free because the majority of people simply do not want to exert themselves in order to get around.

Then for those who do want to exert themselves, the bicycle is still the most or one of the most efficient means of human powered transportation. Or for shorter distances, walking can be pretty convenient.


Those are the three areas to focus on for LCF cities.
Machka is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 06:34 AM
  #39  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory that people vandalize scooters because they see the potential for lost automotive business in them? Really?
I don't think you look at 'conspiracy,' in the same way I do. All culture boils down to subconscious conspiracy. Take something simple like gender-segregated changing areas. Those are completely normal in some places but in others men and women change in the same area for, say, swimming. Then there is the idea of gender-segregated swimming, which would seem abnormal and excessive in places where public pools are 'co-ed' but normal in places where they are traditional and expected. It is a conspiracy to suspect and persecute men who walk into women's changing rooms in places where that's abnormal, then? Not a conscious one, but from the perspective of someone who views co-ed changing areas as normal, yes it would be a conspiracy.


Share/bike scooter vandalism is due to these things being new. Who knows what is going through the mind of each vandal as they trash a share scooter or bike. There are probably plenty of people angry about their economic situation, who see the scooters/bikes as representing a new economic paradigm where money doesn't flow as easily as it did when everyone was driving cars everywhere. So they see the scooters/bikes as a scapegoat. It's not a conscious conspiracy but it amounts to the same at a cultural level.


Rather than a grand conspiracy by the auto pact I think people vandalize things because people vandalize things. Leave scooters lying around unattended and that's just what happens. Leave your bike out unlocked on a street corner for a couple of days as an experiment.
Then why aren't cars and trucks being vandalized just as much?


Huh? what does that have to do with leaving them unattended?
It's just the reason they make sense as a vehicle option. It's like if a computer company made and sold computers as powerful as a large desktop that fit in the size of a smartwatch and they had trouble getting people to use them because of cultural norms, etc. This actually happens with laundry detergent, soda, etc.. You can get concentrated detergent or soda and mix it with water at home, but pre-mixed stuff sells better because people think they are getting more when there is more volume in the package when they buy it.


You are mixing two issues: 1. Viable means of transportation 2. Administering said means. I won't argue that public use scooters may have a role somewhere, somehow but will argue that if administered wrong they will probably fail. Try to keep the two concepts separate. Otherwise, you wind up arguing that they ought to work just because they are a good idea. It's also a good idea to love one another but that doesn't always work out so well either.
I'm just not willing to accept that it's natural that every challenge to ubiquitous car ownership and driving fail. I think it's because there are business/economic motives to keep as many people as possible buying and paying all these automotive expenses. It's ridiculous otherwise that rationality doesn't prevail in achieving progress beyond the inefficiencies of vehicle size and infrastructure that are currently causing environmental/economic/social problems to stagnate.


To review. For LCF using e scooters you need: density, good mass transport infrastructure (unless you plan to drive to the scooters), bicycle scooter friendly corridors/roads, security and a decent bike scooter.
Why are you now putting 'scooter' with 'bicycle' crossed-out next to it? Are you implying that there's not enough room on the roads for bikes and scooters both? If so, why not? It is the cars and trucks that are the road/space hogs. Bikes and scooters are relatively small in comparison.


I don't mind engaging in a conversation but you really seem to have a hard time doing that without slipping into evil world order rhetorical baffegab. To me that's boring. The problem with dockless scooters is not the vehicle itself but that no one is taking responsibility for them. You seem to think it is the anticipated end user and/or casual bystander who should be doing that. I disagree. I believe it is the company who wants to implement them that needs to provide intelligent foresight to set the program up and administer it in such a way that it doesn't fail due to easily anticipated and predictable behaviors such as vandalism.
The bottom line is that progress beyond ubiquitous driving must be possible. All the failure and blaming is just for the sake of buying time for the economic investment/financial complex sustained by the driving paradigm. Achieving progress is better than stagnating for morale, and morale is eroding under all the environmental/climate awareness. Traditionally the solution has been to pull the wool over our eyes and go on as if the problems weren't worsening, but that only drags out the misery and makes things worse in the long run. It is better to be working toward sustainability than dragging feet and denying there's a need for reform.


Functional share bikes/scooters would be a good option to establish everywhere, so people should stop vandalizing, mismanaging, or otherwise thwarting progress in achieving the affordable dockless car-free vehicle option.
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 06:40 AM
  #40  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Machka View Post
I've been car free or car light most of my life and have never made use of scooters.

I've used public transportation, bicycles, and walking.

And I agree ... if you've got a good mass transport infrastructure, you've nailed the comfort and convenience aspect. It means that people can travel where they are going in reasonable comfort (out of the elements, for example), and reasonably conveniently (transportation comes by fairly frequently, and picks up and drops off in convenient locations).

That, to me, should be the main focus for living car free because the majority of people simply do not want to exert themselves in order to get around.

Then for those who do want to exert themselves, the bicycle is still the most or one of the most efficient means of human powered transportation. Or for shorter distances, walking can be pretty convenient.


Those are the three areas to focus on for LCF cities.
Have you happened to notice through the years that public transit and cycling don't quite satisfy enough people to continue growing in popularity to a level that would cure congestion and sprawl? And yes I know that you don't see a problem with sprawl, but hopefully you can see that it is a deterrent to biking or taking transit in many places.

What is the problem with appreciating (share) scooters as a transportation option? All they are is a small platform with handbars. The electric ones use a lot less battery-materials and other materials than electric cars, so it is more efficient to produce them in large numbers. They are smaller than bikes and thus easier to stack or otherwise store in large numbers. They have less components so they must be easier to manufacture. Can't you just acknowledge that there are reasons scooters provide an option that bikes can't on a number of levels?

I may not personally love them or want to ride one, but I can see their value as something different than bikes and cars/trucks. And I agree with you that public transit is important for many reasons, but I think share bikes/scooters could be a temporary solution for people who live far from transit stops to get to them so that increased ridership stimulates the route planners to add more routes closer to where they live.
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 07:03 AM
  #41  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
Have you happened to notice through the years that public transit and cycling don't quite satisfy enough people to continue growing in popularity to a level that would cure congestion and sprawl? And yes I know that you don't see a problem with sprawl, but hopefully you can see that it is a deterrent to biking or taking transit in many places.

What is the problem with appreciating (share) scooters as a transportation option? All they are is a small platform with handbars. The electric ones use a lot less battery-materials and other materials than electric cars, so it is more efficient to produce them in large numbers. They are smaller than bikes and thus easier to stack or otherwise store in large numbers. They have less components so they must be easier to manufacture. Can't you just acknowledge that there are reasons scooters provide an option that bikes can't on a number of levels?
Maybe in the places where you've lived, but not in the places I've lived. Certainly not where I live now.

Yeah sure, the kids up the way have a bit of fun flying down our road on their own scooters and skateboards ... but those are their own scooters and skateboards.


They'd be OK for only very short distances ... and you've got to get back up the hills somehow. Plus just how convenient are they for bringing home the shopping?

Last edited by Machka; 02-01-19 at 07:19 AM.
Machka is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 09:58 AM
  #42  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
Share/bike scooter vandalism is due to these things being new. Who knows what is going through the mind of each vandal as they trash a share scooter or bike. There are probably plenty of people angry about their economic situation, who see the scooters/bikes as representing a new economic paradigm where money doesn't flow as easily as it did when everyone was driving cars everywhere. So they see the scooters/bikes as a scapegoat. It's not a conscious conspiracy but it amounts to the same at a cultural level.

I'll leave the conspiracy stuff alone as it is just speculating on your own biased theories.

Then why aren't cars and trucks being vandalized just as much?

Really? Vandalism and theft happens with cars all the time. Keying is common, as is breaking windows and popping tires. Theft is so rife a whole industry of prevention has grown from it. First simple doors locks, then the club, then alarms and immobilizers and now even smart phone alert and lowjack systems. How do you explain that if people are so pro car culture? I explain it because people are just people and a segment will always vandalize and steal stuff - more so if it is perceived to be left unattended or uncared for.

It's just the reason they make sense as a vehicle option. It's like if a computer company made and sold computers as powerful as a large desktop that fit in the size of a smartwatch and they had trouble getting people to use them because of cultural norms, etc. This actually happens with laundry detergent, soda, etc.. You can get concentrated detergent or soda and mix it with water at home, but pre-mixed stuff sells better because people think they are getting more when there is more volume in the package when they buy it.

Just like people think they are getting more value from non GMO, organic I guess. Welcome to reality. But, leave that small computer out in a public space unattended and see how long it takes to get stolen or vandalized. Do you remember some of the problems with the old public phone booth? Graffiti, used for coordinating crime, dirty, no phone book, broken parts... Why didn't people value a public phone on every street corner they could use for a dime? We used to be able to send our kids out places with a quarter to call home but now need to supply them with a $500 smart phone.

I'm just not willing to accept that it's natural that every challenge to ubiquitous car ownership and driving fail. I think it's because there are business/economic motives to keep as many people as possible buying and paying all these automotive expenses. It's ridiculous otherwise that rationality doesn't prevail in achieving progress beyond the inefficiencies of vehicle size and infrastructure that are currently causing environmental/economic/social problems to stagnate.

I don't think it needs to be a fail at all. Edison made like100 attempts for the first light bulb. The companies only need to analyze what happened, how it can be fixed and try again. I just took a training course on how to implement change in the workplace and they called it the PDSA cycle: Plan, Do, Study, Act (accept, adapt, abandon). In this case you are anticipating Plan, Do, Abandon, without the study part. There is always the adapt part to consider. Like I said earlier: Identify key use areas, create a series of docks for security and recharging. Two problems solved.

Why are you now putting 'scooter' with 'bicycle' crossed-out next to it? Are you implying that there's not enough room on the roads for bikes and scooters both? If so, why not? It is the cars and trucks that are the road/space hogs. Bikes and scooters are relatively small in comparison.

No. I changed the text to show how scooter could be interchangeable with bicycle and my main premise would still hold. It's not a conspiracy.

The bottom line is that progress beyond ubiquitous driving must be possible. All the failure and blaming is just for the sake of buying time for the economic investment/financial complex sustained by the driving paradigm. Achieving progress is better than stagnating for morale, and morale is eroding under all the environmental/climate awareness. Traditionally the solution has been to pull the wool over our eyes and go on as if the problems weren't worsening, but that only drags out the misery and makes things worse in the long run. It is better to be working toward sustainability than dragging feet and denying there's a need for reform.

It is possible and people are actually doing it all the time (look to Europe) but no one likes a moralizing zealot. Tell me I'm doing this or that negative thing all the time and I'll probably stop listening. Then one has failed to create change based on their own lack of effort to find a receptive means of messaging.

Functional share bikes/scooters would be a good option to establish everywhere, so people should stop vandalizing, mismanaging, or otherwise thwarting progress in achieving the affordable dockless car-free vehicle option.

Sure. But I think most real LCF riders will agree that one of the basic needs is more bicycle security so one feels better about taking and leaving their bikes places. Dockless scooter companies try to solve this for the consumer by providing the vehicle (no consumer security worries) but fail to address their own need for vehicle security. It's as if they think the general norm does not apply to them. Pretty simple problem to identify and fix I think so they can be more successful - if they choose. Or they can just blame big "something" or society and make themselves feel morally superior and not at fault.
Bolding is mine

Last edited by Happy Feet; 02-01-19 at 10:48 AM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 03:39 PM
  #43  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Posts: 4,998

Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike, 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1420 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 29 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Bolding is mine

Some very good and valid points. But they are being made in a forum where reality is often superseded by dreaming and wishing.


Picking up anywhere and dropping off anywhere sounds like a good idea until one realizes sooner or later such a plan leads to chaos. I am not sure it would matter what kind of vehicle it is if you can simply leave it somewhere and sign off on a phone you could leave it at an airport and someone sooner or later would have to come an collect it. If you signed off of the system and the thing was locked it isn't your problem. And yes people vandalize cars and motorcycles and trucks everyday.


The business model "is" the problem. They seem to assume that the same people that abuse public restrooms, bus stops and peoples bike when they are just sitting in front of a store will change their habits just because someone wants to ride a scooter in town? I don't see it. I don't believe the average LCF poster in this forum does either. I base this on the number of time people have suggested using a "beater" for trips to the store and saving you "good" bike for times when you don't have to leave it unattended.


But let us take another look at the basic contention by at least one LCF advocate? If the scooters are made for people that want a minimal cost of transportation how does a system the requires someone to have a credit card fit with that ideal? How about a system that requires a smart phone and a account on an app? A smart phone often costs more than three bikes many LCF people seem to prefer. And like you posted earlier why haven't under developed countries without an automotive infrastructure jumped on the scoot4er band wagon? Or better yet why haven't the companies themselves flooded those markets with free range scooters?


I contend like you did they need the same infrastructure and dense urban area does. Good smooth pavement like what cars need to avoid serious problems that small wheeled vehicles like scooters can use. Chip seal, hard packed gravel, brick type pavers and yes dirt roads will make a scooter a nightmare to navigate.


I know this seems like nit picking and I also know the dreamers that believe because something looks like a good idea it has to work. Think Segway, not long ago someone in these very forums was sure they were the future of transportation. I guess if you live in a mall they might have their place.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 03:50 PM
  #44  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Machka View Post
They'd be OK for only very short distances ... and you've got to get back up the hills somehow. Plus just how convenient are they for bringing home the shopping?
I think the more they are established, the more variations they will morph into. You might end up with larger models in a couple years that have a large trunk like a car, but which you can stand on and ride 10-20mph. The key is keeping the speed low and having a strip of pavement for them to ride on where 10-20mph isn't a problem.
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 03:53 PM
  #45  
tandempower
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,369
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8069 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
no one likes a moralizing zealot
I do. Thank you for yours, even though I don't agree with all of it.
tandempower is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 05:17 PM
  #46  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
Some very good and valid points. But they are being made in a forum where reality is often superseded by dreaming and wishing.



Picking up anywhere and dropping off anywhere sounds like a good idea until one realizes sooner or later such a plan leads to chaos. I am not sure it would matter what kind of vehicle it is if you can simply leave it somewhere and sign off on a phone you could leave it at an airport and someone sooner or later would have to come an collect it. If you signed off of the system and the thing was locked it isn't your problem. And yes people vandalize cars and motorcycles and trucks everyday.



The business model "is" the problem. They seem to assume that the same people that abuse public restrooms, bus stops and peoples bike when they are just sitting in front of a store will change their habits just because someone wants to ride a scooter in town? I don't see it. I don't believe the average LCF poster in this forum does either. I base this on the number of time people have suggested using a "beater" for trips to the store and saving you "good" bike for times when you don't have to leave it unattended.



But let us take another look at the basic contention by at least one LCF advocate? If the scooters are made for people that want a minimal cost of transportation how does a system the requires someone to have a credit card fit with that ideal? How about a system that requires a smart phone and a account on an app? A smart phone often costs more than three bikes many LCF people seem to prefer. And like you posted earlier why haven't under developed countries without an automotive infrastructure jumped on the scoot4er band wagon? Or better yet why haven't the companies themselves flooded those markets with free range scooters?



I contend like you did they need the same infrastructure and dense urban area does. Good smooth pavement like what cars need to avoid serious problems that small wheeled vehicles like scooters can use. Chip seal, hard packed gravel, brick type pavers and yes dirt roads will make a scooter a nightmare to navigate.



I know this seems like nit picking and I also know the dreamers that believe because something looks like a good idea it has to work. Think Segway, not long ago someone in these very forums was sure they were the future of transportation. I guess if you live in a mall they might have their place.

I don't think it's nitpicking and quite sensible.


There are a lot of issues that come about if one is trying to be carfree or carlite which I think are worth discussing. Having been carfree for many years, moderately carlite now and looking forward to more carlite in the future I find most have to do with real practical matters so that's how I look at it. I have also decided that if I am going to change anyone else's behavior it will probably be via example and not promotion. That resonates with me as a model for change far more than wishing others would behave better.


Tandem,

I think you want good things as we all do but often find it hard to cut through the ideological verbiage to see what the nuts and bolts issues are. We can discuss and help each other solve practical issues or even form different perspectives but we aren't going to create sweeping socio economic change on this forum. In fact, I would say most here have/would already buy into a lower car use philosophy if the practical concerns could be addressed.


In the end, I can only really change me and apparently, that's a full time job
I try to share that experience so that, if someone else also wants to change, they might find something useful.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 02-01-19 at 05:21 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 07:13 PM
  #47  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
In the end, I can only really change me and apparently, that's a full time job
I try to share that experience so that, if someone else also wants to change, they might find something useful.

Yes!!


Machka is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 08:29 PM
  #48  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,141
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by Machka View Post
Yes!!
I don't know if you know but I often find your posts an example of how to share without getting rude or personal about things. I try but still fall short occasionally.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 08:43 PM
  #49  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
I think the more they are established, the more variations they will morph into. You might end up with larger models in a couple years that have a large trunk like a car, but which you can stand on and ride 10-20mph. The key is keeping the speed low and having a strip of pavement for them to ride on where 10-20mph isn't a problem.
We can't even get cycling lanes, or decent footpaths in many places ... how are we supposed to get a strip of pavement for scooters?
Machka is offline  
Old 02-01-19, 08:45 PM
  #50  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,393

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 45 Times in 32 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
I don't know if you know but I often find your posts an example of how to share without getting rude or personal about things. I try but still fall short occasionally.
Thanks.

I think you do very well yourself!!
Machka is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.