Why are environmental clubs and individuals on campus against a campus bike-sharing program? Sustainable development is a goal at Bishop’s, and Bixi bikes might seem to meet these criteria. However, the nature of this project is inherently unsustainable in economic, environmental and social terms.
This is a substantial investment. Bishop’s students will be paying $15 per semester in student fees to pay off the initial investment. While the initial cost will be paid off in three years, the new student fees will exist indefinitely. One cannot opt out, regardless of whether you have your own bike, whether or not you choose to bike, and whether or not you are able to access one of the forty available bikes. After four years at Bishop’s, that money could have bought you a decent bike. You could use it all the time, and not be limited to thirty minutes. Chances are, if you are interested in biking, you would make the investment yourself. If you don’t want to buy a good bike for a four-year stint, then you can get a $30 bike from the barber on Queen Street.
The reason the bikes are being advertised as free is because you don’t pay for the first half-hour. The bikes must be returned to one of four docking stations around Lennoxville , or the user will be charged. The size and location of Lennoxville makes this system impractical. The advantage of bikes is to get long distances in a short amount of time. The town of Lennoxville is accessible by foot, practically anywhere you would like to go.
If you need to get somewhere that is not walkable, you need more than half an hour. Sherbrooke takes fifteen minutes one-way, North Hatley an hour. There are no docking stations there, so in the case of Sherbrooke, you would literally arrive, then immediately turn back. The Bixi bike system is used in Montreal, a highly concentrated urban area where most destinations are accessible in half an hour. Montreal’s bike system is also designed with many more docking stations in place in convenient locations. Bishop’s will have four docking stations, all within a few kilometers of each other. This follows a rationale of giving wheels to walkers, cutting a few minutes off their commute, and allowing drivers to park off-campus and save themselves parking fees. The estimated time of use is 2.5 minutes. No one is cutting down on fossil fuel emission; the only thing being cut is a small amount of time. Let me highlight this point: this program targets walkers.
Do we really need $1100 bikes to get to Tim Horton’s and back? Bike share programs have been proposed in the past, and been turned down due to issues of liability. The annual cost of insurance for such a project would cost significantly less than a single new bike. A proposal just recently approved for green levy funding, developed by a student would use recycled bikes, invest in local business, provide work for local bike mechanics, and be much more affordable for Bishop’s. Adopting Bixi would not be investing in sustainability, simply a flashy new technology that is capable of charging your credit card. If this techie bike should break down, it would have to be sent to Bixi mechanics for repair, resulting in transportation emissions produced in the name of an emissions-free mode of transportation.
This project is simple greenwashing. The manufacturing alone goes against the goals of sustainability. Don’t let this referendum pass. We can do better.
– Kristen Cleghorn
