The climate change mitigation effects of active travel

Abstract

Active travel (walking or cycling for transport) is considered the most sustainable form of getting from A to B. Yet the net effects of active travel on mobility-related CO2 emissions are complex and under-researched. Here we collected travel activity data in seven European cities and derived lifecycle CO2 emissions from daily travel activity. Daily mobility-related lifecycle CO2 emissions were 3.2 kgCO2 per person, with car travel contributing 70% and cycling 1%. Cyclists had 84% lower lifecycle CO2 emissions from all daily travel than non-cyclists. Lifecycle CO2 emissions decreased by -14% (95%CI -12% to -16%) per additional cycling trip and decreased by -62% (95%CI -61% to -63%) for each avoided car trip. An average person who ‘shifted travel modes’ from car to bike decreased lifecycle CO2 emissions by 3.2 (95%CI 2.0 to 5.2) kgCO2/day, and using a bike as the ‘main method of travel’ gave 7.1 (95%CI 4.8 to 10.4) kgCO2/day lower lifecycle CO2 emissions than mainly using a car or van. Investing in and promoting active travel should be a cornerstone of strategies to meet net zero carbon targets, particularly in urban areas, while also improving public health and quality of urban life.

Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being

“…Teleworking or telecommuters partially or entirely replace their out-of-home work activities by working at home or at locations close to home 90. ; Brand et al91 ;Creutzig et al32,55 ; Ivanova et al 92 ; Riggs 32 ; Mrkajic et al 11 ; Senbel et al 93 Shift: shared mobility and convenient and safe public transit. Pooled shared mobility with high occupancy and micro-mobility with high lifetime of vehicle stock; convenient rail-based public transit; supported by urban design and transit-oriented development, resulting in reduced travel distances; logistic optimization in last-mile freight.…”

How Digital Platforms Materialize Sustainable Collaborative Consumption: A Brazilian and Canadian Bike-Sharing Case Study

“…Cycling, especially as a means of transportation in the city, reappeared in the '90s (Brand et al, 2020). However, this bike behavior had been used for decades in Asian countries with high population density for all usage types (Cheah et al 2020;Lee, Lee, and Yoo 2020;Sun and Ertz 2021a).…”

“…In many cases, bikes are the fastest, most economical, cleanest, and healthiest way to circulate within the cities' downtown (Cerutti et al 2019;Sun and Ertz 2021a). Furthermore, the interest in participating in activities in the sharing in general and CC, in particular, is linked to the need to reduce environmental impact, to seek the well-being of society, or to promote a more sustainable lifestyle, like use bike-sharing system (Alzamora-Ruiz et al 2020;Brand et al 2020). Bike-Sharing using in the city, available and rent in several stations and neighborhoods, already has loyal clients-users, who search beyond an economic gain and clean and promising traffic (Cohen and Kietzmann 2014;Lee, Lee, and Yoo 2020).…”

“…Common examples of such challenges are adapting old cities' infrastructure to this new behavior, such as parking installations, lines marking the space on streets and lights for speed control in traffic (Wang and Moriaty 2018), and safety considerations (Börjesson and Eliasson 2012;Parkin 2016). In this way, bike-sharing suggest these multiple benefits, whether in the health of the people by physical exercises or as an alternative for reducing pollution and traffic in the cities (Brand et al 2020;Cerutti et al 2019;Cheah et al 2020;Lee, Lee, and Yoo 2020).…”

A Road Segment Prioritization Approach for Cycling Infrastructure

“…Like other sectors, transport is under substantial pressure to decarbonise, resulting in a number of technical innovations including electric vehicles. But new vehicle technologies can only go so far and do not tackle parallel problems such as congestion, road traffic casualties and physical inactivity (Brand et al, 2020).…”