I’ve never had much use for bike lanes. While I appreciate them in certain situations — like when they let you ride legally against the flow of traffic — they generally strike me as a half-measure that lull both drivers and cyclists into complacency. They give the illusion of safety when they are in some ways more dangerous than ordinary street riding. Bike lanes have their place in the city, but they’re less important than developing a universal cycling culture and a street environment that is safe for cyclists in any situation.
But what if you were to bring your own bike lane? “Instead of adapting cycling to established bike lanes, the bike lane should adapt to the cyclists,” write the guys behind the Light Lane, a laser-based safety light that projects the image of a bike lane onto the street behind a moving bicycle. “Our system projects a crisply defined virtual bike lane onto pavement, using a laser, providing the driver with a familiar boundary to avoid. With a wider margin of safety, bikers will regain their confidence to ride at night, making the bike a more viable commuting alternative.”
It’s a nice idea, one that enshrines the notion that a bike is an equal partner in traffic, not just a toy that can be relegated to a handful of recreational paths and bike lanes. For now, though, it remains just that—an idea—and even if the concept is workable, I’m not sure how effective it would be. Something tells me it isn’t so easy to make a lightweight, high-powered laser that can be visible even on rough and uneven pavement. But please, feel free to prove me wrong.
5 comments
Christopher, I’m in Amsterdam right now, and I beg to disagree with you about cycle lanes. Indeed the Dutch (like the Danish) have developed a universal cycling culture and respect for cyclists, but the development of cycle lanes and paths at least along all major streets in these countries has played a part in winning both space and respect for cyclists. See: http://www.amsterdamize.com and http://www.copenhagencyclechic.com
I like this :P. I don’t see it as a practical way to improve safety, but it looks nice.
As cited in “Traffic” by Tom Vanderbilt: a cyclist riding close to the curb, wearing a helmet receives the narrowest margin when passed by motorists compared to someone riding closer to the middle of the lane.
whether a line on the road or behind the bike, drivers will simply feel more comortable passing cyclists in extremely tight spots., at ever higher speeds.
drivers should be allowed to rely more on their own instict and react using their spatial sense when confronted by the immense range of stimuli on the road. lanes and other mitigations are taking the place of caution and courtesy, replacing it with hurry and carelessness on the part of all road users.
a few moments observing the de maisonneuve path in the summer is enough justification. i prefer to stick to my wits and ride on sherbrooke or ste catherine.
I think this is brilliant. It’s an in-your-face declaration of space. As both a cyclist and a driver, it is important that the “safe zone” be defined. While in the car I do my best to give bikes the widest berth possible, but I still sometimes go too close and find myself cringing, especially at night.
In nicer weather I ride my mountain bike around 15 miles a day, on asphalt and in the bush, where bears are more common than autos.
Anything that makes it safer to share the road is a great idea!
However, I can see the technology being adapted/perverted by auto drivers to send messages to the vehicles behind such as; ‘I got a Hemi, wanna race?’ ‘Busy tonight, if not, call HUnter 0-xxxx.’ etc.
But, still a good idea, if used responsibly, and obeyed.