Cool story bro.

by asuka on Jun 5, 2011 1:01 pm  

Some of those bikes have child seats! I'd join CaBi if they had that feature.

by TJ on Jun 5, 2011 3:13 pm  

Helmet, schelmet.

by Ward 1 Guy on Jun 5, 2011 7:45 pm  

+1000 on the child seat point; there's nothing worse than taking your two-year old on the bus. I'd also purchase some sort of seat that was designed to fit into the bixi bike front basket.

by Matt on Jun 5, 2011 8:12 pm  

@Matt -- what??? I can imagine a child seat that fits between the seat post and handlebars on a Bixi -- could make riding a bit awkward (bow your knees), but is safe -- but in front of the handlebars? So the kid swivels with the handlebars? No way! I wouldn't treat my kid like a messenger bag.

by Ward 1 Guy on Jun 5, 2011 11:58 pm  

Note also that kids ride in Hangzhou. Capital Bikeshare has a minimum age of something like 16 or 18. I think it should be 14 as long as a parent/guardian owns the account.

by Ward 1 Guy on Jun 6, 2011 12:00 am  

There are some genuine problems that must result from increasing Capitol Bikeshare's percentage of the total number of bikes on the street at any one time. Why? It increases both the absolute number as well as the percentage of bikes being ridden by helmet-less riders.
An important consequence has to be an increase in the number and percentage of accidents involving helmet-less bikers. ( One of the reasons for this is that riders of rental bikes are probably less road -savvy than bike owners, who are more likely to ride more often and more expertly than the rider of an occasionally-rented bike.)
It is obvious that not wearing a helmet makes an accident worse. Even an increase of one is an unnecessary danger; a personal friend of mine, riding helmet-less, was involved in a severe accident that left him with amnesia for 12 years, after which he died. Hard to get worse than that as a result of whatever ill-thought out reasons keep the great percentage of DC bike riders helmet-less.
I have not a thing against Capital Bikeshare, but they should be required to provide bike helmets, as part of the regulations governing doing business in the District. It would be even better if the City Council had the guts to pass a regulation requiring adults bike riders to wear helmets.

In the meantime, a well-drawn up study should be made of the number, percentage, nature and severity of reported bike accidents involving helmet-less riders , vs the number, percentage, nature and severity of accidents involving helmeted bike riders. Perhaps Capitol Bikeshares could contribute to this study.

by Susan Meehan on Jun 6, 2011 8:40 am  

@Susan Meehan; you're making several different assumptions:

1. "rental bikes" users are less road-saavy. Bike sharing is not bike rental, and you've got to differentiate that.

2. Obvious that not wearing helmets makes an accident worse. How is a helmet going to protect my arms> Leg? neck? It might make a head injury worse, but what if I remember the worst bike injuries are spinal. And honestly, a helmet is just foam If you're hit by a car, it isn't going to help.

3. The best thing about CABI is getting RID OF HELMETS.

by charlie on Jun 6, 2011 8:56 am  

And I, like many people, know other who have suffered injuries while driving that wearing a helmet would arguably mitigate. But we don't consider requiring drivers and passengers to wear helmets because we've decided that the risk of convenience is acceptable. If you want to wear a helmet driving or biking, please feel free, but don't substitute your risk tolerance for mine simply because the risk is greater than zero.

by TM on Jun 6, 2011 9:21 am  

This follows a VERY different payment model than CaBi or whatever NYC would use. It's apparently free for the first hour: no payment, no membership fee, just a swipe of your (metro card?) and off you go. Any system in the US would require a pay model, as detractors would say that's unnecessarily socialist - it is from a communist country after all - as it wouldn't have a user fee attached. That would bode ill for expanding such a system in a spending-concious country like ours.

by OctaviusIII on Jun 6, 2011 9:38 am  

i love this for 2 main reasons. First, some of the bikes are equipped with seats 4 children. Second, the multi-modal connection--ride bus & get 90 minutes of free biking.

fabulous!

by Marya McQuirter on Jun 6, 2011 11:14 am  

Charlie- although it is not obvious that wearing a helmet makes you safer on a bike, it's true. If a car hits you, the worst injury will probably be to wherever you land when it throws you off the bike (not necessarily the impact itself, which could just produce bruises.) And you could be flying pretty fast into that concrete! Be safe so you can continue to read and comment on greatergreaterwashington.org.

by acorn on Jun 6, 2011 11:30 am  

@OctaviusIII: Yes, you swipe your metro card (like a SmarTrip) to use the bikes. That makes the system open to a broad swath of the public.

However, under your logic, the *three* free hours of red bike time that SmartBikeDC granted would make Clear Channel super duper Communist. Redder than the Reds, even. Yikes.

by Payton on Jun 6, 2011 9:34 pm  

A few other points to note:
- Hangzhou is one of China's wealthier cities, and a prime tourist destination.
- The transit system integration is marvelous and technically quite easy. It literally is "the last mile," not a replacement for transit trips.
- Chinese cities, like European ones, rarely have a single "downtown." Workplaces and homes are highly mixed throughout a dense urban core. This arrangement lends itself well to bike sharing.
- NYC may be about the same size, but its highly concentrated CBD makes me doubt whether it's similar in any other ways.

by Payton on Jun 8, 2011 12:28 pm