I don’t see much talk about that self-evident fact. Asphalt sucks in so many ways. What would be a better alternative that needs not worry about cars but mostly bicycles?
Biking on pavement takes less effort, and pavement is also more suitable for things like wheelchairs and strollers.
Paved streets have existed for thousands of years before cars; there’s nothing wrong with them in and of themselves. It’s building them too wide in order to try to accommodate ever-increasing car traffic that’s the problem.
What the hell are you talking about… Asphalt is such an ideal surface for cycling that it was a national cycling club which started and led the public campaign to make it the default road surface.
Asphalt roads are literally cyclist-gotten gains. Let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water!
NCC recommends installing devil’s horns as a handlebar and bitumen is demons’ cum. There’s no way around this, infinitesunrise, you maker of arguments™. I’m sorry.
Noooo I’ve been used by the devil yet again! Say it ain’t so!!
OP hates cars so much that they even see asphalt as an evil.
I sure do but my loathing of asphalt is as sovereign and self-sustainable 👉👈
Sea shells in parks and bricks in denser areas also work pretty well
So what are the ways asphalt sucks in your opinion?
(providing the road is well maintained…)I have a hard time coming up with road surface types that don’t suck more in most aspects.
I’m more of a titsphault man myself
Pigeonsphault is more nutritious.
Asphalt is actually pretty cool right? It’s resilient and highly reusable as far as I know.
While more resuable than concrete, the process is very energy intensive and requires bitumen every time. It also doesn’t last very long.
Bitumen is recyclable, though it isn’t nearly as easy as reclaiming the aggregate. And there are techniques where you don’t need to expend lots of energy, collectively called “cold in-place recycling.”
For example, California’s cold recycling program.
Have a look at Dutch streets. Many of them are paved with bricks. It allows rainwater to be absorbed rather than running off causing flooding.
It allows rainwater to be absorbed rather than running off causing flooding.
There’s an old theater I performed at twice in Southern Ohio. Built before the Civil War, and surrounded by brick buildings, a brick street out front, brick alley, and brick parking lot area.
The second time I was there, the street had been paved, as had the back parking area, and large portion of surrounding alleys. Only the single side alley was still brick.
The first time it rained the week I was there, the basement, while not flooded completely, had so much water running through it to the sunken boiler room, the owners had to toss down some quick 2x4 walkways so nobody was ruining costumes and footwear or slipping and suing. The walls of the basement looked like mini waterfalls.
I popped outside during a lull and the back parking area and alley were basically acting as a funnel, pushing all the water right up to the sides of the building.
I just checked a satellite map view and it looks like they’ve at least re-paved the back alley (don’t know if it drains any better but it’s clearly much darker and there’s lines painted) and the building beside it is gone and instead there’s a ton of grass. So maybe it’s better, but I’m sure they shortened the remaining life of the building by a ton.
I don’t know. It depends.
Asphalt spread out on very large surfaces sure sucks. Like parking lots and street parking. It contributes to flooding and heat island effect. It’s also bad for runoff polluted water, filled with microplastics from tire shedding. Too much asphalt everywhere is bad.
But! Some major bike green ways and rail trails here have started to put asphalt on their bike paths, and they have good reasons for doing so. Those rail trails were covered with fine crushed rocks before, and the runoff was also pretty bad for the environment. The maintenance was higher because the gravel needs to be replaced. And the path couldn’t be used for some weeks in the spring and fall because of thaw cycles. This article in French has a mayor saying they had this studied and it was better for the environment to have their part in asphalt. Plus, bikes are not heavy enough to damage the asphalt so it also needs much less maintenance for cycle routes.
I’m all for having asphalt on major bike roads and rail trails. But not on rural roads mainly for cars, and not to cover parking lots.
EDIT: Asphalt for bicycles, not cars. Like this.
It’s still bad for the environment, you’re essentially bisecting it. Animals can cross the road, but mycelial networks (which underpin pretty much everything in the forest) often can’t. A ribbon of asphalt divides entire networks, isolating and perhaps even killing them, which leads to collapses in other areas. It also impacts drainage and encourages runoff.
This can be mitigated by using wood chips as a road surface instead of pavement. There are experimental mycelium-based road surfaces in development as well.
The holy Grail obviously is a flat, hard surface more similar to asphalt but without those issues, as I know wood chips and other rough surfaces can be both annoying to ride on and preclude certain vehicles/tires (i.e. road bikes) from riding on them at all.
Yeah, there’s no perfect solution. Bicycles also produce microplastics and particles from tire shedding and brake pads. It’s much much less than a car, but it still happens.
There is also a particular swampy area in a park with a paved bike path, where every year, there’s a few dozen frogs flattened on the path. It’s not common to other places where I ride, mostly just there. I was wondering if the heat of the asphalt might lure the frogs to bask on the path, and to their doom. However I’ve also ridden in the night and frogs sometimes just jump in your wheels. Maybe there’s also just a bigger concentration there.
I’ve also seen terrapins lay their eggs in gravel paths. And I’ve never seen one dead, yet. In their case, asphalt might help a bit because they can’t lay in the middle of the path, only the sides.
Plus, my point of view is also guided by the climate in my region, because asphalt can be plowed easily, and it also allows a cycling network to be open year round instead of just 6 months a year here. We can’t cycle in mud or a metre of snow. Other regions might not have such extremes and can get away with well maintained dirt or gravel paths.
And I’ve never really ridden on wood chips for a long distance, only on decorative chips with soft beds. I’d be curious to try in some experimental spots. I would hope it’s easier to roll on than grass. This also reminds me about some trails where they have multiple short wooden bridges to let nature cross in other ways.
I prefer cycling on asphalt.
Self-evident in your mind, maybe. Ever tried to walk or cycle on a dirt road that’s more holes than actual path?
