I’ve looked at the Le Monde article, my French is super basic but what you can see in the chart (the number that’s doubled) is the average number of cyclists through 128 counting points, with a peak on Tuesday evening with more than 250 cyclists/hour. And before someone tries to just multiply by 128 to get the total number, no, you can’t. There’s not enough information.
I put my Duolingo to the test and attempted to read the Le Monde article. As far as I could tell it’s mostly just percentages too; the only absolute numbers I could find were these:
Sur l’avenue de Flandre, le boulevard Voltaire et le boulevard Magenta, la moyenne ne dépasse jamais 384 véhicules motorisés à l’heure sur la partie centrale de la chaussée, contre 537 vélos sur les pistes cyclables en septembre et en octobre.
Translation:
On Flanders Avenue, Voltaire Boulevard and Magenta Boulevard, the average never exceeds 384 motor vehicles per hour on the central part of the roadway, compared to 537 bicycles on the bike trail in September and October.
I think that’s discussing a particularly extreme example, but still, if bike traffic is actually exceeding car traffic anywhere that’s pretty damn good!
Good, but not really surprising. The Netherlands is the best case example of what good bike infrastructure means in its “consequences” (no negative connotations). That’s why I get terribly annoyed when I see people constantly argue against it, or wanting to do a couple hundred more feasibility studies and whatnot for every single street, or even just parts of it. It’s exhausting how humankind keeps working against its own self-interest.
I also would like to see the numbers… This article links to another one that supposedly goes into more detail (I see graphs at least) but it’s in French so hard to say. I’d love some absolute numbers rather than percentages as percentages can give the wrong impression depending on what numbers we’re dealing with.
That graph shows the average cyclists per hour through 128 counting points. You can see it doubles for almost every hour every day of the week, the max peak going from ~130 to ~260 cyclists/hour.
I expected to at least see what number doubled in one year.
I’ve looked at the Le Monde article, my French is super basic but what you can see in the chart (the number that’s doubled) is the average number of cyclists through 128 counting points, with a peak on Tuesday evening with more than 250 cyclists/hour. And before someone tries to just multiply by 128 to get the total number, no, you can’t. There’s not enough information.
You can click through to the article in Le Monde, though it’s in French. I assume that article also links to a report somewhere.
I put my Duolingo to the test and attempted to read the Le Monde article. As far as I could tell it’s mostly just percentages too; the only absolute numbers I could find were these:
Translation:
I think that’s discussing a particularly extreme example, but still, if bike traffic is actually exceeding car traffic anywhere that’s pretty damn good!
Good, but not really surprising. The Netherlands is the best case example of what good bike infrastructure means in its “consequences” (no negative connotations). That’s why I get terribly annoyed when I see people constantly argue against it, or wanting to do a couple hundred more feasibility studies and whatnot for every single street, or even just parts of it. It’s exhausting how humankind keeps working against its own self-interest.
I also would like to see the numbers… This article links to another one that supposedly goes into more detail (I see graphs at least) but it’s in French so hard to say. I’d love some absolute numbers rather than percentages as percentages can give the wrong impression depending on what numbers we’re dealing with.
That graph shows the average cyclists per hour through 128 counting points. You can see it doubles for almost every hour every day of the week, the max peak going from ~130 to ~260 cyclists/hour.
Thanks for digging up/translating the info!
Thank you for providing legitimate discourse. Pretty rare in this kind of thread, but it’s important.