fuck cars, rural edition
fuck cars, rural edition
So suppose we don't like cars and want to not need them. What are the transportation alternatives for rural areas? Are there viable options?
Edit:
Thank you all for interesting comments. I should certainly have been more specific-- obviously the term "rural" means different things to different people. Most of you assumed commuting; I should have specified that I meant more for hauling bulk groceries, animal feed, hay bales, etc. For that application I really see no alternative to cars, unfortunately. Maybe horse and buggy in a town or village scenrio.
For posterity and any country dwellers who try to ditch cars in the future, here are the suggestions:
Train infrastructure, and busses where trains aren't possible
Park and rides, hopefully with associated bike infrastructure
No real alternative and/or not really a problem at this scale
Bikes, ebikes, dirtbikes
Horse and buggy
Ride share and carpooling
Don't live in the country
Walkable towns and villages
Our greatgrandparents and the amish did it
A lot of you gave similar suggestions, so I won't copy/paste answers, but just respond to a few comments individually.
I had a friend who was killed by a motorist while walking on a country road, so I've given this some thought. The key principle for safety is to keep cars away from more vulnerable road users.
So, there are the same basic options: better public transport infrastructure, and well-signposted, properly maintained footpaths and bike lanes are the most obvious.
As for driving from the countryside into urban areas, you can have 'Park and ride' schemes, which are common in parts of the UK. You drive your car to a bus station at the edge of the town, and the bus takes you the rest of the way in. That minimises miles driven and keeps cars out of urban areas, where they're especially inefficient.
Public transportation in a rural area lol have you ever been to a rural area?
The rest of your ideas are great. I've done the park and ride thing, it was great.
I live in a place where what you are describing is already implemented, and it does make a lot of sens, but there is still some issues:
- Since most people work in the same time period of the day, public transports are a nightmare in the morning and at the end of the day.
- Country side bus exists, but in my town there is 3 per day. So you need to spend the day at the city if you use it.
So there is still a lot of people that prefer to use their car to go to work or simply to go to the city, which causes insane congestions on the main road around the urban area at some points in the day.
I agree, those are obviously issues in many areas. But infrequent, unreliable, overcrowded public transport is a result of political decisions, whereas the car congestion is a result of geometry!
I also think it would be good if more places of work had staggered or flexible hours. So that, e.g., some staff work 8-4, others 9-5 and others 10-6. That would spread out the single hypothetical 'rush hour' into three busy hours. I'm not sure how exactly you could implement that at scale, granted. Possibly if governments started to do it, it would catch on in the rest of the world of work.
As for driving from the countryside into urban areas, you can have ‘Park and ride’ schemes
Which only works as long as the P&R placed don't just alter between "full" and "closed". Another common fallacy is to put them so far out of town that the only line to the city center and more central traffic hubs is a tram that has 20+ stops between P&R and Main Station.
I don't think cars are a problem in rural areas, where you have very low population density.
Aside from the emissions.
@kier @kingludd there's a cultural harm that you're not a real man/'Murican/Christian/conservative/etc if you aren't living a life of the non-cosmopolitan by riding a bike or interested in anything else other than car-dependency and all the ancillary things that come with that, since that starts to bleed into the suburbs and even urban areas. There's white-collar workers doing their morning commute in full-size pickups telling themselves that mass transit is for dirty poor people not therm
I mean, rural I'm talking about in the countryside, where your nearest neighbor is at 1km
In a lot of places trains connect even small towns to larger cities. Not just a couple trains each week or each day, but coming often enough that you don't really need to check a schedule.
A big part of the anti-car movement is being pro-infrastructure.
Agreed. And where it's not really worth it to link with trains they just do it with buses instead, between the smallest villages and the mid sized towns where trains do arrive.
Then if you have to link something that's even smaller than villages, people can just walk to the nearest village (in Europe this usually means walking 20-30 minutes at most) and take the bus there.
But more importantly, villages and rural places are an area where I can tolerate cars, because they aren't as unnecessary or replaceable as they are in cities.
Rural as in small but compact towns or as in homesteads?
In case 1, we will still need motorized agricultural equipment (good discussion how to decarbonize it). Tractors can be used for short haul transport as well. Walking for everyday getting around.
For traveling between towns a robust bus system does wonders. For example hourly bus to the nearest city also visiting a couple of other towns. And maybe another line not centered on a city. If you're lucky to be on a major route, a train.
Case 2 is harder. Horse and bicycle are some options. But basically you will need a motor vehicle of some kind. Best bet is combining multiple uses in one vehicle, so a van basically. You can carry stuff, people, animals ...
This is a good point. I should have been more specific; I wasn't thinking of towns and villages as being rural, but most people do. Really the alternatives need to be organized by use-case rather than geographic location.
I use a little truck as the all-purpose vehicle that can haul whatever and it works, but it sure ould be nice not to need it.
On isolated, super rural areas where you're the only person on a dirt road for miles, I think it might be unavoidable during parts of the year or if the road is really intensive to bike (steep, sharp curves for example) BUT that's where you should be able to drive to your village or town center and pick up the 15-30 minute regional train.
Likewise that would mean the people closer to town who might already be walking to the barber or liquor store would also be able to walk to the station if they needed to go farther.
Aren't dirt bikes a viable alternative unless it rains? They are made for difficult dirt roads if I am not wrong.
@feck_it
Electric MTBs are even better. I used to to live down a 7km rural dirt road with no neighbors. 7km was to our village of 50homes. It's how I got about.If the village has regular bus services running through to the city, it's all I would have needed.
I really wasn't thinking personal transport. People in my area don't really need that except maybe once or twice a season. What we here really need is to pick up livestock feed, and we get groceries maybe 4 times a year.
We need to be able to haul large quantities (like, by the half ton at least).
Older rural areas are actually typically much more walkable than American cities. Keep in mind, rural towns were very common before cars existed. They're typically structured to have a small center, sometimes basically just a "main street", with all the places you need to regularly visit, and houses surrounding them, and the farmland surrounding that. This way the people are all relatively close, and the farmland is not between you and others. These towns are all about self sufficiency within the community, but ofc if you keep a car for when you need to travel somewhere else that's fine, and no one is begrudging you for using gas powered farm equipment on your farm. The main point is you don't have a daily commute that requires a car, because it's either your farm or one of the lose shops that are close to everyone.
And for what it's worth, a lot of train networks used to go to these rural towns as well, and it'd be awesome to see those return for Intercity travel.
I like seeing this discussion. I live in rural Ireland and so has my family for generations.
Expecting people in our situation to completely ditch cars overnight is unrealistic. The priority should be on making towns and cities car free because pedestrianization, cycling infrastructure and public transport makes so more more sense there.
I would love to find a way out of needing them, but I think maybe you're right. It's just a necessity for us. Anyway if the city people can ditch their cars it will solve most of the ecological problem.
Towns and villages would be a lot nicer if we parked on the outskirts and walked, biked, or golf carted around. Not sure how to implement that though, at this point.
In the US? You'll probably need access to a car for a lot of things, but let's assume the political leanings of your town are open to things like collective ownership and bike infrastructure. Let's also assume we're talking about a rural town that has a dense, but small downtown surrounded by farmland (fairly common).
Your community could set up a ride share service for the town that is locally and communally owned. They could also run a car loan service. With bike infrastructure, cargo bikes and electric bikes can replace a lot of car trips. Living in a small house or apartment near the center of town will cut out the need for cars for lots of trips, too.
If there is a bus network in your county or state, you could also lobby to get a bus to come to your town to more easily connect you to other areas without a car, but I don't know how feasible something like that would be.
Amish style - bicycle, buggy, horse, walk
Ask yourself: If I didn't have a car, would I still live here?
Cars encourage sprawl, and living far away from the things we need everyday. This is a bad thing. This, not emissions, and not safety, are my main gripe with personal automotives. You're asking, "how do we keep the worse, most selfish parts of car ownership if we get rid of cars?" We fucking don't. That's the point.
I honestly really have a problem with this mentality. I would like to try to find common ground with you around the things we both think are problems, but I don't know if that's possible.
See, to me, it's just the opposite. It's all the cities where peopke are mashed in together like a factory chicken farm-- that's where the problem comes from. If we could just have fewer people living further apart I think a lot of the problems with society would more or less solve themselves.
I'm not here to pick a fight, and I am listening to you. But how can you think that more bigger cities is an improvement? I really don't understand.
I don't want everyone to live in cities. What my gripe is, is sprawl, the city bleeding out into the countryside. The countryside should be full of people who actually live there; who work there, and get their food there, and spend their time there. Why should someone who spends four-fifths of her waking time in a city center be driving all the way out of the city to sleep?
We've made this option artificially cheap by subsidizing the automobile and passing the many, many externalities onto the public purse.
Just mentioning 'carpooling' because no one did yet.
That could work. I've been thinking for awhile that if everyone around here were on some kind of uberlike carpooling app, we could combine trips into town.
Already got that here, it's the village WhatsApp group. Doesn't line up perfectly, but there's a lot of car sharing going on :-)
It's worth considering the possibility of "rural" meaning villages. And in a village, most urbanist concepts work. Keep the main road outside the village, either horizontally (ring road) or vertically (tunnel). Put the places people need to go to in places where you can walk, mode separation & disentangling, all that jazz. And of course, with a village it absolutely makes sense to have a bus line go through it. Or maybe something heavier & faster if it happens to be there. Doesn't have to be a bus line to the village, said village may exist between two larger towns, so a bus line from town to town, that happens to go via village. Maybe an extra peak hour bus for high schoolers if the village is small enough to warrant bussing kids to high school out of town.
As for the areas further out, for those who live a bit further into the boonies, I'd say the Park&Ride idea makes sense. Especially if most parking facilities are for bicycles. That can bump the catchment radius of a P&R bus stop from a few hundred metres to a few thousand metres.
Ring roads are what kills villages, though. A lot of them, like the one I live in, don't have enough population for businesses to survive on their own. We need that road that goes through it to bring customers to the businesses. If a ring road was built, all the businesses would just move there. You see this all over America; town centers dying while these big ugly "power centers" with more parking than actual stores proliferate near the highways.
As it is, with a rather touristy road going through it, my village fares pretty well. There are all the necessary businesses (grocery store, pharmacy, bank, etc.), plus a couple seasonal restaurants, and it's still walkable with a nice sidewalk for the whole length of the village. Said sidewalk actually sees a lot of use, and it's kept clear of snow during the winter. Would it be nicer if there were fewer cars? Sure. But I wouldn't want it becoming a ghost town.
Let's slap a very Dutch solution onto that:
Ban any construction on the side of a through road, except for anything that strictly must serve cars, e.g. gas stations, EV fast chargers, stuff like that. If you want to build any other business near town, it has to be off the main road, closer to town.
Besides, make the village small enough, especially compared to the through road, and a through road through the village becomes more of an obstacle than a lifeline.
The park and ride is a cool idea, and that might be an option. About 5 miles from my place there's a sort of gravel lot that people sometimes park in when carpooling into town. Not sure about hauling loads of feed sacks, though. It's too much for a bike.
Rural UK. Nearest food shop is a 15 minute drive away, through narrow lanes and big hills. There is no alternative to a car for shopping, commuting or just life.
I live near to a small village. It's up a 25% hill in a very narrow hollow winding lane (say, eight feet wide? Cars and vans ok, but need to reverse for up to 1/4 mile if they meet,) If a lorry is foolish enough to come this way, they'll get stuck. We had one stuck for four days last year when it ripped an airtank off on a rock and completely blocked the road.
Bicycles are not great because of the hills. I have an ebike and that does make it doable, but carrying capacity limited. I have horses, but steep hills on tarmac would make that dangerous, if at all possible, to take a cart. We do ride them, and you might carry a fair bit in saddlebags but our village has no shops, and it's too far to get food by horse. Walking to a food shop would be something ike a four hour round trip.
There's no trains nearby, but the village does have a small bus. One bus. A day. So if you want to go to the town and back, it's going to be a two day trip. No problem getting a seat though, because it's always empty as nobody uses it. Must be the loneliest bus driver around.
So, it's cars. There is no viable alternative.
And the UK is super small, compared to many countries. I was just talking to an Indian friend the other day about how tiny the UK is and how rural US and especially rural India is so much more remote than it is here
How rural are we talking about? Miles and miles of farmland between every home? Some sort of personal vehicle would be fine in my opinion when the density of the population is this low. But you could still conceivably have a single train going through the middle with lots of stops. Then you only have to bike or walk a short distance and take a train of some kind the rest of the way.
Heyyy rural 19th century small "historic" town here.
Historically, my town was in lumber and you'd literally have building materials moved down the river and sold at their equivalent of home depot but on the water.
Streetcars connected the very center of town.
A rail line splits the center of town, so goods never needed a highway to reach here!
In current day, there is a highway built next to a road, and that road is ripe for a bike lane. Downtown is safe for cyclists and pedestrians during the day, but at night its dark and there's parking on both sides of the streets FULL for people to visit restaurants and bars.
A lot of small policy changes could fix all this mess, but alas it will probably not happen so I am going to move next year.
It sucks that my area is so clearly set up for the highway to be this main line connecting towns. And if it were a 30 mile long LRT, everyone in a massive rural/suburban/small city area could ditch cars entirely. But with new money coming in from federal and state government, everyplace is actually building the worst car-dependent and pedestrian unfriendly infrastructure for the first time! Shit that has been proven by studies over decades to not work.
There are a number of things that amaze me in this group. Like you all take it for granted that everyone is capable to ride a bike from here to sunset, and that the same bike is sufficient to haul whatever it is to be hauled. This is the narrowminded worldview of young, single city-dwellers that can reach all necessary places easily by public transport or bike or even foot within a few minutes.
I've lived in the country where there was (and probably still is) "the morning bus" and "the evening bus", and the next city was 30+km away. And you are really telling those people not to use cars?
Of course there are always scenarios where a person needs a car. If you have to live 30 km away from the next city and public transportation isn't an option (maybe a dial-a-bus kinda system) you probably have to take a car.
If you live 'rural' like me, 4 km away from the next city, there is barely anything you have to take the car for. And if you need to haul something you could rent a car in the city (if you don't have a own car). Still nearly all my neighbours own one car per person, at least two per household.
People like you amaze me. You take it for granted that everyone is able to afford and maintain a safe car and is able to park it wherever they want to. This is the narrowminded worldview of old, saggy village-dwellers.
Don't take it too personal, but your and many other peoples inability to understand that there can be a systematic problem with too much car dependency without attacking your individual way of living is quite annoying.
Just going to add that it's absolutely your Canadian showing.
Y'all got some massively sprawling suburbs that most of the world, US included, only has in a few sparing locations.
If I start driving West, East, or South from the city I live in, the last store or gas station for the next ~1 hour of driving is found 10 minutes away at the edge of the city.
About 30% of the city's workforce commutes from outside to get here. Without cars, or significant reforms in zoning, taxes, housing availability, and infrastructure, this city would economically crumble overnight.
I hate cars. I hate driving. I've lived in places where I didn't enter a car for months on end, and I've lived over an hour from the nearest city. Sometimes they are 100% necessary. Sometimes they're not. Realistically, even if public sentiment changed to the anti-car view right now, it would take decades to get the infrastructure completely in place.
I definitely should have been more specific. I wouldn't think of 4km from groceries as being rural at all-- like you said, I think that car problem can be solved with normal urban solutions.
Renting a car to haul is just... not even close to viable. That would approximately double my annual expenses. Besides, I can't rent a car with no credit history and no way to get to the city to rent a car.
Hauling really does seem to be the sticking point. If you have to haul you're kind of stuck with a car.
We (or at least I) are not telling those people to not drive in conditions like you described, we say that there should be more busses so not driving as often would even be possible, and that if they drive that they don't demand that they have a right to park right in front of everywhere they go in the city and get there by freeways that are built for rush hour traffic and sit mostly empty during the rest of the day (and scarring the city the whole time, while they can escape to their quaint countryside).
While I agree cars/trucks make sense in rural areas, your great grandparents likely lived in rural extremely rural conditions without a car. It has been done for the majority of human existence, and the Amish still do it today.
I've lived in the country where [the] next city was 30+km away
Maybe it's my Canadian showing, but 30 km away from a city is a suburb.
you all take it for granted that everyone is capable to ride a bike from here to sunset, and that the same bike is sufficient to haul whatever it is to be hauled
Not a single person here has said or even implied this. Everyone here has suggested several different kinds of transport, including but not limited to bicycles. Not only that, but nearly every comment has acknowledged that some car use in the countryside is probably necessary. I recommend actually reading the comments here rather than assuming you know what they say and getting angry about it.
Yeah, I was surprised how many responses didn't consider hauling at all. I really don't need to commute anywhere at all. I'm happy just staying home. But I do have to haul hay bales, feed sacks, and 50lb sacks of groceries.
Bro. It's a community for people that wish they could drive.
More like a community of people who wish they didn't have to drive
What makes you think that the majority of people noticing the enormous car dependency can't drive? I bet the opposite is true, people driving a lot will notice the lunacy earlier. If they aren't completely stupid and blind.