01624602

Component

https://doi.org/10.3141/2662-17

Do routes with lower doses of air pollution exist in real-world bicycling networks, and do bicyclists actually use those routes? Low-pollution-dose alternative routes for a sample of urban cycling trips were modeled and compared with shortest paths. Bicyclists’ actual route choices on the same trips were observed with the use of GPS data and compared with the low-dose and shortest paths alternatives. With use of past studies of pollution exposure levels and simplified ventilation rates, link-inhaled doses of air pollution were estimated. Findings suggest that a majority of trips have lower-dose alternatives to the shortest path, with a 12% average dose reduction. Cyclists tend to choose routes with pollution concentrations between those of shortest paths and minimum-dose routes, but they also travel considerably farther, leading to total inhaled doses that are higher than on either alternative route. People’s seeming avoidance of nontraffic factors such as hills, excess turns, and difficult intersections leads to longer than optimal detours from a pollution avoidance perspective. Bike paths and bike boulevards (traffic-calmed streets with bicycle priority), as well as denser street grids, appear to provide effective low-pollution alternatives, although such routes tend to encourage excess detours that can add to total inhaled dose. Bike lanes can draw cyclists onto more polluted routes in some circumstances, with poor pollution inhalation outcomes. Overall, excess doses did seem to be a common problem for this sample of cyclists on a real-world network. The study’s findings support policies that provide dense networks of attractive facilities that encourage cyclists to choose direct, lower-pollution routes.

01656974

17-06227

English

pp 152–159

2017

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

9780309460415

Digital/other

Figures (2) ; Maps; References (33) ; Tables (2)

Air pollution; Bicycle facilities; Bicycle travel; Public health; Route choice

Environment; Operations and Traffic Management; Pedestrians and Bicyclists; Planning and Forecasting; Safety and Human Factors

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Dec 8 2016 12:32PM

• Bicycle Backlash: Qualitative Examination of Aggressive Driver–Bicyclist Interactions
• Classification Criteria and Application of Level of Service for Bicycle Lanes in China
• Comparing Crowdsourced Near-Miss and Collision Cycling Data and Official Bike Safety Reporting
• Current Efforts to Make Bikeshare More Equitable: Survey of System Owners and Operators
• Cycling in Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Route Choice Behavior and Implications for Infrastructure Planning
• Dwelling Type Matters: Untangling the Paradox of Intensification and Bicycle Mode Choice
• Enhancing Cycling Safety at Signalized Intersections: Analysis of Observed Behavior
• How Do People Cycle in Amsterdam, Netherlands? Estimating Cyclists’ Route Choice Determinants with GPS Data from an Urban Area
• Impact of Bike Facilities on Residential Property Prices
• Impacts of Level of Traffic Stress on Bikeshare Ridership in the Case of Capital Bikeshare in Montgomery County, Maryland
• Investigation of Alternative Bicycle Pavement Markings with the Use of a Bicycle Simulator
• Keep ’Em Separated: Desire Lines Analysis of Bidirectional Cycle Tracks in Montreal, Canada
• Low-Stress Bicycle Network Mapping: The District of Columbia’s Innovative Approach to Applying Level of Traffic Stress
• Mind the Gap: Assessing the Impacts of Bicycle Accessibility and Mobility on Mode Share in Washington, D.C.
• Observations of Public Bikesharing: Experiences from Ningbo, China
• The Reach of Bicycling in Rural, Small, and Low-Density Places
• Typologies of Urban Cyclists: Review of Market Segmentation Methods for Planning Practice
• Where Do Bikeshare Bikes Actually Go? Analysis of Capital Bikeshare Trips with GPS Data