Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The formula I found was quartic, from [1]

  Nref = Nx (Wx / Wref)^4
  Nref = number of trips of reference vehicle
  Nx = number of trips of other vehicle
  Wref = weight of reference vehicle
  Wx = weight of other vehicle
The quartic formula really works in our favor for bicycle commuting: if a bicycle (with rider) is 1/20th the weight of a car, the bicycle will produce 0.000625% the wear of the car. So if commuting were the only purpose of the road, you would essentially never need to replace a road again.

This does make adding (larger) delivery vehicles quite bad. If the average delivery vehicle is twice as heavy as the average passenger car which was formerly used, each trip will produce 16 times as much wear. Looking up the curb weights for a Chevy cargo van (5000 lb) and a Toyota Corolla (2800 lb), the actual wear factor is 10x.

[1] http://www.nvfnorden.org/lisalib/getfile.aspx?itemid=601



> So if [bike] commuting were the only purpose of the road, you would essentially never need to replace a road again.

You're assuming that use is the only thing that harms roads, and that's clearly wrong.

I mentioned tearing up the roads for utility changes.

Another factor is weather, which amplifies the problems caused by utility "tear ups".

It's fairly easy to see these effects; pedestrian-only and bike-and-pedestrian-only "roads" deteriorate.

However, we know also know that (as you mentioned), these roads won't be bike only.

In short, there will be some maintenance savings, but not a lot.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: