The Bike Blog

Velorution has an article that claims the Paris free bike scheme has been the target of underhand tactics.

Free bike schemes leave bikes in cities for public use. You’re supposed to take one, ride where you need to go, and leave it for another person to use.

Although, that’s not the way that everyone uses the bikes of course.

I can’t read the original source, but if anyone has better French than me, feel free to elaborate in a comment.

Decaux was the low bidder, with ClearChannel offering a more extensive service and greater revenue to the municipality. But JC, the semi-retired patron unleashed his usual weapons: a legal challenge on a technicality forced a new bidding sequence, then Decaux overbid to force ClearChannel to rule themselves out. The winning bid is unlikely to be honoured: 20 600 bicycles at 1 451 parking spaces is way too ambitious.

These schemes are a fantastic idea, but have been beset with problems, as this Guardian article explains.

Bikes from the Amsterdam scheme have been found as far away as Moscow and the US.

The problem seems to be that there aren’t enough of the bikes released. If Halfords release 10 bikes, then they will dissapear. If there were 10,000 bikes then it would be more likely that some would remain in circulation. I think that a certain ammount of thievery has to be assumed, unfortunately.

I’m not sure you could even catch someone for stealing one, as there is no ‘maximum borrow length’. Even if there was, then the person could claim to have picked the bike up recently.

One approach is to lock the bikes with a code that only registered users have, and to only leave the bikes in affluent areas. OYBike is such scheme in London, that takes the additional precaution of not having pick-up locations in South or East London, where paupers like me live.

Under ye olde government, people had to send petitions to the Prime Minister by post, or deliver them to Number 10 in person. But under New Labour you can now create and sign petitions on a fancy new website, from the comfort of your own home.

There are hundreds on the site already, and quite a few are about cycling issues. If you have any opinions on the following then head over and cast your vote.

Should London create a world leading cycle-lane infrastructure?

Should cyclists without lights be prosecuted?

Should the Government stop persecuting cyclists?

Should people be made to take a cycling proficiency test?

Should cyclists have to pay insurance?

Fixie bikes have always intrigued me; no brakes, no gears and no coasting. But can you stop as quickly on a fixie as you can with a braked bike?

A bike messenger in Oregon is being taken to court because, by law, you must be able to “skid the braked wheel on dry level pavement”. A video response showing the rider doing just this has been put up on YouTube.

A no-brake fixie probably can’t stop as quickly as a braked bike in good condition, but messengers are more aware and skilled than other riders. A messenger without brakes can stop a lot quicker than a bored commuter with dull brakes, who isn’t paying attention to the road anyway.

In the UK the law says that both wheels must be braked, so it shouldn’t be an issue. Despite this, most of the messengers I see in London have fixies with one or no brakes.

Bicycle couriers in London are being forced to take dangerous routes as they are not allowed to use certain cycle paths. London parks have laws forbidding access to commercial vehicles and despite the fact that these are bikes, on bike lanes, the police have been enforcing this law.

It seems like police time may be better spent elsewhere, but I imagine it’s quite a lot easier to catch a courier in broad daylight than it is to catch a proper criminal.

Nik Shah is organising a bike-protest against the ban on protesting within 1km of Westminster.

The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) has outlawed protest within 1km of Westminster. My company is moving to Victoria in February so I will be cycling past the houses of Parliament and through the SOCPA protest exclusion zone more or less every day.

So far 5 people have signed up. If you’re interested in getting a government file opened up on yourself whilst you commute to work, then go and join them.

I will commute past Westminster on a bike wearing a vest that says “SOCPA sucks” but only if 10 other local people will too.

A new government proposal suggests that children’s parents could be paid for getting their children to bike to school, in order to promote excercise and reduce childhood obesity.

It’s been getting negative press, but if you look a little deeper you’ll see that only children who are eligible for free transport would recieve the money. As we would be paying for their travel anyway then it shouldn’t cost taxpayers any more than before.

Surely it’s a positive move - one more kid riding to school?

However, if they live near enough to school to cycle, then why should they get free transport? Perhaps the government should abolish it, and help poorer families to buy their children bikes instead?

There’s a story on the BBC about a boy who found a WW2 bomb and took it home on his bike rack. Luckily for him it didn’t go off, and a bomb disposal team safely detonated it later.

There’s also some stories about people who did the same thing, but actually wanted the bomb to go off.