AHC: What are the effects of a "no freeways" world?

Now let's talk bicycles. I can't see how they don't become a player in the US transport game much earlier in this scenario. If teens can't get regular access to cars, they'll bike longer. If families only have one car, more women will continue to bike. Young workers will be more likely to bike while saving up for a car. And if there are fewer cars on the road people will naturally feel more comfortable doing it. There are no real technological barriers to bike infrastructure; it's all just about having the demand before someone gets the brainwave. Denser cities with less competition from cars? Encouraging bikes makes sense on a municipal level. Better bike infrastructure means more people will feel comfortable doing it

AS OTL, you would still have people bolt ICE to the frame to motorize, making a moped, then to full motorcycles as pedals are removed for a simple kickstarter
 
AS OTL, you would still have people bolt ICE to the frame to motorize, making a moped, then to full motorcycles as pedals are removed for a simple kickstarter

Well, motorcycles were already a thing before the POD, as were scooters. If your point is that they might be more popular as well, perhaps you're right. Perhaps they'd be the primary vehicle to fill the gap left by the average household having only one car. More Rome or Hanoi than Amsterdam. But then Rome and Hanoi have a lot of bicycles as well, relative to most American cities. If it's AND not OR in those cities, I don't see why it would be any different for US cities ITTL.
 
One problem that will always restrict bicycle commuting a little bit: it works just fine if you're 22 and thin as a rail; if you're 55 and overweight, not so much.

Nonetheless, I'm very much a "both-and" person versus an "either-or," so I see no reason why people wouldn't use bikes, mopeds, and motorcycles, in addition to everything else available to get around - making up those rough percentages I stated at the initial post.
 
Top