Bike routes should aim to minimize time spent on these high-traffic roads, the Canadian researchers wrote. This would reduce exposures of riders who may be more susceptible to the immediate health risks of traffic-related air pollution, such as the elderly, children, and pregnant mothers.
A study of bike lanes in Portland, Ore., showed that lanes separated by planters, not just by white paint, actually decreased cyclists' air pollution exposure. A Belgian study of traffic pollution found that cycling as little as several feet off the road gave measurable differences in exposure.
Getting cyclists out from behind the cars helps, too. In Portland, when traffic stops at a red light, cyclists have a designated area at the front of the line of cars, called a bicycle box, which helps them navigate turns and flee the tailpipe fumes.
"Little things like that can help a lot to reduce exposure to cyclists," Bae said.
If a little is good, more is better. Brauer says the preliminary results of his lab's work suggest that bike lanes are best when built one block from a major traffic artery. Despite the emerging research, Bae said that she does not know of any cities that consider cyclists' pollution exposure when designing bike lanes.
Including Vancouver, where Brauer cycles, many of the cities that built bike lanes one block away from a major road thought about cost, not pollution.
"Most were done by accident, because they were cheaper," Brauer said. "But they actually give you an air pollution benefit."
This article originally ran at Environmental Health News, a news source published by Environmental Health Sciences, a nonprofit media company.
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentTwo paragraphs of this text have been duplicated.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI bike to work about 99% of the time and I try to run errands on my bike as much as I can. It always irks me when someone passes me driving a diesel pickup or a huge SUV on a suburban road, spewing out much more pollution that they have to.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI mean, I know that some people MIGHT need to tow something once a year or they have 5 kids or whatever, but when I see 1 person and zero cargo in a vehicle that looks like it has never been off road in its existence, I kind of wonder if that person even TRULY evaluated their REAL needs when buying that vehicle. Really, and this might sound smug, but why do I have to choke down all that extra pollution so THEY can have a false sense of security and an ego boost from their land yacht? What’s so hard about buying a sensible, fuel efficient passenger car for 99% of your driving and renting the pickup for the one or two times a year you actually use its capabilities?
The IC engine will soon be history. Never buy a new car.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou miscounted: 4 paragraphs (7, 8, 9, & 10) are duplicated (11, 12, 13, & 14).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I mean, I know that some people MIGHT need to tow something once a year or they have 5 kids or whatever, but when I see 1 person and zero cargo in a vehicle that looks like it has never been off road in its existence, I kind of wonder if that person even TRULY evaluated their REAL needs when buying that vehicle. Really, and this might sound smug, but why do I have to choke down all that extra pollution so THEY can have a false sense of security and an ego boost from their land yacht? Whats so hard about buying a sensible, fuel efficient passenger car for 99% of your driving and renting the pickup for the one or two times a year you actually use its capabilities?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDitto. It always amazes me, the level of irrationality associated with so much of our purchasing decisions, most of which seem aimed at social validation rather than at actual satisfaction of our needs. That's just putting too much power on other people's hands so that we can feel the approval of the herd.
Returning to the article, as a bicycle commuter, I reduce the problem by choosing my hours carefully: the early bird avoids rush hour.
"the early bird avoids rush hour."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe late bird does too.
Is it not true for anyone walking, or basically living, in our cities that pollution of all sorts will have an effect of their lungs? The concentration, due to high volumes of traffic, will be according to exposure. Any one working outside, from street vendors to police, etc. is exposed not just bicyclists. Improvements in car technologies is reducing pollution. But it is in our hands, or feet, how much we pollute. We all seem to be driving in a continuous high state of anxiety about "time" and seem to be speeding to all our destinations. It has been estimated that on average we all decrease efficiency, or miles per gallon, in the range of 30%. Speeding, idling, looking for that extra close parking slot, etc. basically throws about 1/3 of our gasoline purchase out the window! No wonder oil companies enjoy 8 to 10 billion in profits each quarter!! Yet,in view of these facts, we continue our wasteful driving habits much like addicts that continue behavior they know is bad for them. It has been said that you cannot manage what you do not measure. Have you measured your driving efficiency? Recent studies have confirmed that even with technology in the vehicle that can tell drivers how efficient, or not, they are driving, drivers will not change their habits. Average extra cost? About $400 each year. More for those who drive extra large vehicles.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this