Advocacy & Safety - How much does gas have to cost before the average car driver switches to bicycles?

How much does gas have to cost before the average car driver switches to bicycles?

I didn't vote in this poll. Your question presupposes that the only alternative to high gas prices is riding a bicycle. To a lot of people, that thought will never enter their mind. Instead they'll vote for politicians who will promise lower gas prices, or support car manufacturers that make alternative fuel/hybrids, or look into public transportation, or *gasp* just plain ol' walking. I think it is naive to assume that just because gas prices go to some threshold, people are just going to naturally gravitate to a bike; for some there are a lot of other options that will come before that.

I'm not even sure the average car driver would switch at $10.00 per gallon.

Assume:
1. daily 10 mile commute, 50/week
2. 20 mpg
3. that's 5 gals of gas. At $10 that's only $50/week.
4. commuting 48 weeks/year, that's only 240 gals, so $2,400/year.
5. With $24k vehicle, that's only 10% for fuel. For $48k, that only 5%. Can't see Hummer or Suburban driver switched for just 7% cost change.

$30.00 a gallon. then we would see an meaninful increase, anything less is wishful thinking.

Biggest problems with bicycles:
1. limited carry on space
2. exposed to elements and commuters just want to jump out of bed and go, no dressing.
3. distances are too great for many
4. other family members need transportation. Kind of hard to take kid to school and then continue on to work.

I didn't vote in this poll. Your question presupposes that the only alternative to high gas prices is riding a bicycle. To a lot of people, that thought will never enter their mind. Instead they'll vote for politicians who will promise lower gas prices, or support car manufacturers that make alternative fuel/hybrids, or look into public transportation, or *gasp* just plain ol' walking. I think it is naive to assume that just because gas prices go to some threshold, people are just going to naturally gravitate to a bike; for some there are a lot of other options that will come before that.

Your point is well taken. That's why I suggest different prices. One auto driver might switch to buses at $4.00, another might switch to carpooling at $5.00, and still another might switch to bikes at $4.00. Got it?

Addendum: you'll see a lot more bus, car-pooling scooter, and motorcycle commuting before you would see bicycle commuting. In non-urban enviroments, distances are too great and people are too dependent on motorized transportation.

Bicycles replacing cars is a pipe dream.

What we should be shooting for in the short term is "driving" folks toward purchasing higher MPG vehicles, and in the long term coming up with alternative fuels.

Weather/Cargo/Passengers etc, will always make the "exclusively bicycle" life impractical for all but the most spartan and thrifty.

Bicycles replacing cars is a pipe dream.

Weather/Cargo/Passengers etc, will always make the "exclusively bicycle" life impractical for all but the most spartan and thrifty.

Mostly agree. But think it is a mistake to talk focus on exclusive bicycle life or to set up the cycyling model as only for Spartans and Thrifty.

Cycling would be better compared to sking or golf:

1. the equipment is not cheap
2. there's always new gear
3. thrifty does not sell in USA. Most people have a good bike and good accessories. http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=129650.
4. If we set the garage sale bike as the ideal model, then very very few of the people momentarily ticked off by gas prices would every consider cycling. Most people in US want style with their commute vehicle.
5. The combo sales pitch of
a. better health,
b. save on auto/truck [suv] expenses
c. not as hard with the newer bikes
d. there's an active support group to help you learn what you need to know.

That has a small chance of success. Even with all that, of my immediate family group. Only one other would consider a bike and gas would have to be about $50 a gallon or new home would have to be very bike friendly for any consideration of biking.

...commuters just want to jump out of bed and go, no dressing.

yeah, there's the real problem: naked drivers!

i think that when fuel gets to be over $10/gallon, assuming a minimum wage of less than six bucks or so, you're going to see some changes. what changes, i have no idea. but something.

consider: many of the most apathetic voters are our minimum wage earners. they are also near the bottom of the automotive food chain - they can't afford to replace their clunker with a Prius. once fuel costs to get back and forth to work starts to affect their ability to feed themselves, they'll get less apathetic quick. in a similar financial boat will be working college students and the like - plus, they'll be better educated.

how many revolutions have started with an alliance of the working classes and students? we won't have a revolution (at least not a violent one), but all these folks can vote...

Your point is well taken. That's why I suggest different prices. One auto driver might switch to buses at $4.00, another might switch to carpooling at $5.00, and still another might switch to bikes at $4.00. Got it?
Based on that response, I'm doubtful as to how well the point was taken. You do not have a "the cost of gas has nothing to do with people switching to bicycles" option in your poll.

Based on that response, I'm doubtful as to how well the point was taken. You do not have a "the cost of gas has nothing to do with people switching to bicycles" option in your poll.

My bad.

Invalid poll in my opinion. My wife would love to ride to work, but before that would be possible (one unavoidable stretch of bumper to bumper 60 MPH traffic) there would have to be enough people already making the switch. It's only a 12 mile commute, but right now it's not in any way practical by bike. Unfortunately, neither is public transportation. In the D.C. suburbs, you can go into D.C., and in a direct line to a closer in location, but it's damned hard to get to another location that's a similar distance from the city without going in and coming back out. For that to be an option, we'd be looking at probably a 3 hour commute with wait times, and several dollars a day. At 30 MPG, even $6 a gallon gas would be cheaper.

We have a Corolla (30 MPG) and a mid-sized SUV (18 MPG). We take the Corolla when we can. I'd like to get out of the SUV, but we're sort of burried in it right now, so we try to only drive it when we're carrying 4 bikes, 2 kids, and sometimes a dog somewhere, or on longer trips where I can nurse 22 MPG out of it.

For many people it's beyond impractical to consider cycling as a primary means of transportation.

Only a tiny fraction of people will abandon their cars for bicycles.

I was a boy during the gas crisis of 1974, and I don't recall any adult, that I knew, giving up his/her car for a bicycle. I do remember people buying smaller cars and people riding motorcycles to work -- including one of my teachers.

I do recall the fist fights and robberies at gas stations. I also remember the people who would speed off without paying for their gas, and how my father had to purchase a locking gas cap for his Ford because someone had siphoned the gas out while it was parked. Then there were all the "miracle" gadgets that were sold to desperate, and gullible, people that were supposed to improve gas mileage -- including water injection units! This is what you have to look forward to if gas prices keep rising.

If gas continues to rise in price, I'm planning on selling a water injection unit that will increase the gas mileage of any car by 786.765%! Guaranteed! I found the plans for this device in my late grandfather's attic. My grandfather had obtained the plans during his WWII army service in Germany. The plans were found in the bombed-out ruins of the Volksreichs Politeknische Institute of Düsseldorf. This device was the brainchild of the famous German scientist Horst von Schwinnler -- who was also responsible for inventing instant beer powder. My grandfather kept this secret his entire life because he knew that the international oil companies had sent out agents to retrieve the plans and kill anyone who knew about them. I know it's risky, but I have to do this for the good of America.....and my bank account.

If gas continues to rise in price, I'm planning on selling a water injection unit that will increase the gas mileage of any car by 786.765%! Guaranteed! I found the plans for this device in my late grandfather's attic. My grandfather had obtained the plans during his WWII army service in Germany. The plans were found in the bombed-out ruins of the Volksreichs Politeknische Institute of Düsseldorf. This device was the brainchild of the famous German scientist Horst von Schwinnler -- who was also responsible for inventing instant beer powder. My grandfather kept this secret his entire life because he knew that the international oil companies had sent out agents to retrieve the plans and kill anyone who knew about them. I know it's risky, but I have to do this for the good of America.....and my bank account.


Hey, I remember reading about a similar device in Popular Mechanics...sells for $399.

Hey, I remember reading about a similar device in Popular Mechanics...sells for $399.

Really? Well, the guy selling that thing is a charlatan. My water injector is the real deal and only costs $378.47.

Let's see, how many would I have to sell to buy that new McMansion, Hummer, Mercedes, Lamborghini and a couple of 10,000 gallon underground gasoline storage tanks?

i heard on the radio today about some nut that modified his Prius to get over 200 mpg...

i heard on the radio today about some nut that modified his Prius to get over 200 mpg...
My bicycle gets at least 15km/liter of bicycle fuel on the weekends, and that fuel (i.e. the beverage of moderation) is renewable and all natural.

Hey, I remember reading about a similar device in Popular Mechanics...sells for $399.

I remember that too. That was a LONG ! time ago.

Mostly agree. But think it is a mistake to talk focus on exclusive bicycle life or to set up the cycyling model as only for Spartans and Thrifty.

Cycling would be better compared to sking or golf:

1. the equipment is not cheap
2. there's always new gear
3. thrifty does not sell in USA. Most people have a good bike and good accessories. http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=129650.
4. If we set the garage sale bike as the ideal model, then very very few of the people momentarily ticked off by gas prices would every consider cycling. Most people in US want style with their commute vehicle.
5. The combo sales pitch of
a. better health,
b. save on auto/truck [suv] expenses
c. not as hard with the newer bikes
d. there's an active support group to help you learn what you need to know.

That has a small chance of success. Even with all that, of my immediate family group. Only one other would consider a bike and gas would have to be about $50 a gallon or new home would have to be very bike friendly for any consideration of biking.


Let me congratulate you on your economic analysis of the impact of gas prices on the overall cost of driving.

I think if it came to that, public outcry would be for public transport like buses. People whom I know seem to regard me as a freak of nature when I talk about doing a 50 mile ride. The average individual has no idea how easy it is for a reasonably fit person to travel by bicycle.

I accidently voted $4 because I misread the title. I think more towards $8/gallon will begin to force the average driver to start riding 2 wheels instead of 4. However, I don't think that necessarily means bicycles. I don't think prices will ever be coming back down under $2/gallon. The oil companies have tested the water, consumption hasn't dropped. I believe in 2003 Exxon posted triple profits (not revenues, profits) even though they cited increased production costs being the main reason for the rise in prices.

As long as fast and/or large cars are considered status symbols, they will still be bought. You won't see P. Diddy riding up to the MTV awards on a pimped out Madone 5.9 anytime soon, if he did, I'd be willing to bet that Trek would see an increase in sales larger than any of the last 7 years (Lance's impact).

Many people took their job when gas prices were cheap, $1.00 - $1.50/gal, they never expected prices to get this high and are in a position where moving work or moving home isn't an option. For many, neither is purchasing a new(er) car, even if it gets better milage.

Until the cost of hybrid technology reaches a point where the choice between gas only and a hybrid is $100-$500 (i.e. Civic vs Civic Hybrid), most people won't adapt.

I would love to commute on my bicycle ( I already ride my motorcycle to work at least two days a week to save on gas) but to get to work and not take restricted access highways would be at least 40 miles each way, so at this point it just isn't practical for me.

What we should be shooting for in the short term is "driving" folks toward purchasing higher MPG vehicles, and in the long term coming up with alternative fuels.


Traded in the SUV for a sedan this past winter (17mpg -> 26 mpg), and I'm scouting bike-friendly routes to work this week. Had there been a 'now' option in the poll, I think that's what I woulda chosen. And I'm an "average car driver."

One other thing I wanted to add...

The majority of the new "bike to work instead of driving" will generally be 16-25 year old males. This also happens to be the age where insurance costs are the highest. Also, this demographic are also the majority of the minimum wage, part-time workforce.

In Michigan, minimum wage is $5.15/hr. The average car gets 25mpg, and the average commute is 12 miles to work. That means 1 round trip is roughly 1 gallon of gas. Gas prices have topped $2.60 for regular here, which means a half hour of work is required in order to commute to work. Assuming 4 days/wk and 5 hours shifts...

20hrs @ 5.15 = $103/wk * .75 (for 15% taxes) = $77.25/wk take home
$77.25 - ($2.60 * 4 [gas]) = $66.85/wk ($267.40/month, $3,208.80/yr)

The lowest I've heard someone paying rent/boarding at school is $250/mo.. which leaves $17.40 for food and other expenses.

I'm just on a rant now. I'll stop.

I remember that too. That was a LONG ! time ago.

Last month?

Instead they'll vote for politicians who will promise lower gas prices, or look into public transportation

If a politician promises low gas prices, make sure you vote for the other guy/girl because he's not telling the truth. The Republicans are stuck in supply side economics in believing that tax breaks for large multinational oil companies will bring more fuel into the market. It won't. Democrates believe that energy conservation and forcing auto makers to bring more economical cars into the market will do the trick. It won't.

Its disheartening that so many people even in the biking forum can't imagine a world without cars.

Hey, somehow the human race got along without them entirely for a few million years!

The 3 main objections to bikes: Cargo, weather, and distance can be addressed with imagination.

* Distance: We created "urban sprawl" in our hasty rush to separate the haves from the have-nots in only about 30 years. We can ondo this damage in another 30. People WILL move -- they do it all the time!

* Cargo: Plenty of options for extending bike cargo capacity. Also think in terms of multiple people-powered vehicles or "bike-pools". Some motorized "van" bikes could be used for large-scale deliveries.

* Weather: Cars would be totally impractical without the billions of dollars that we have spent on smooth, asphalted roads. A covered bike route could be made for a fraction of the price of even a basic road.

I'm not thinking of a bike-only world, but of a bike-centric world. One in which there may be a mix of powered vehicles (bulldozers, construction machines-- possibly with Stirling technology), animal powered vehicles (genetically enhanced, extra muscles and/or limbs) and/or lightweight transportation devices (dunebuggy-like vechicles for the rich).

Here's the thing: WE WILL RUN OUT OF OIL! Maybe in 200 years. Maybe in 50. Personally I think in 20, since older models assumed 3rd world countries coming online slowly rather than explosively as we see happening. We can attempt to address this problem with war, poverty, and dissolution, or we can address it with imagination.

Alas, human nature being what it is, I fear that it will be the former and not the latter.

Last month?

I read that in the 1960's really! :eek:

People will change their habits only when they receive pleasure from the change. A guy I work with just started riding to work. He's in his 50s. He started not because of gas prices, but because he wanted to get in shape, get more exercise. He keeps doing it because he enjoys it.

I'm not even sure the average car driver would switch at $10.00 per gallon.

Assume:
1. daily 10 mile commute, 50/week
2. 20 mpg
3. that's 5 gals of gas. At $10 that's only $50/week.
4. commuting 48 weeks/year, that's only 240 gals, so $2,400/year.
5. With $24k vehicle, that's only 10% for fuel. For $48k, that only 5%. Can't see Hummer or Suburban driver switched for just 7% cost change.

But... you're basing this on people only using their car for going to and from work. Most households with cars that I know of have more than one car.. Around where I work, most people drive used cars that maybe cost them $6-$8. We were just talking about gas prices the other day and several of my coworkers, between them and their spouse are paying 80-150 a WEEK in gas right now. They go to church, bring kids to activities, go to the movies, the grocery, etc... That figure floored me. I dont see how people are doing it.

If a politician promises low gas prices, make sure you vote for the other guy/girl because he's not telling the truth. The Republicans are stuck in supply side economics in believing that tax breaks for large multinational oil companies will bring more fuel into the market. It won't. Democrates believe that energy conservation and forcing auto makers to bring more economical cars into the market will do the trick. It won't.

W has talked about invading Iran, an OPEC nation. We've already attacked one OPEC nation, Iraq. It would not be beyond any stretch of the imagination to suggest invading the rest of OPEC, such as Saudi Arabia, under the guise of fighting terrorists. Remember, all the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi nationals.

Where would all the warm bodies come from to feed the meat grinder? The Army hasn't quite figured out to outsource combat operations. Everyday, thousands of people risk their lives crossing the border to fulfill their glorious American dream. They don't know that the American already here have lost faith in The Dream of a two car garage, cheap gas, and 36 month car payment at 6 percent.

Instead of turning away these brave, naive potential Americans, the Army might set up tables, put out lemonade, and sign-up sheets along the Rio Grande. Sign up right here on the dotted line for two tours in Saudi, and if you survive, you get American citizenship. Woooohooo!

Then, the rest of us REAL American can go back to trying to figure out who Brad Pitt will sleep with next. We won't need to worry anymore about killing our own kids. Instead of Casey doing the dying, it will be Carlos dying for the cheap gas. THAT's the real American dream!

Its disheartening that so many people even in the biking forum can't imagine a world without cars.

Hey, somehow the human race got along without them entirely for a few million years!

The 3 main objections to bikes: Cargo, weather, and distance can be addressed with imagination.

* Distance: We created "urban sprawl" in our hasty rush to separate the haves from the have-nots in only about 30 years. We can ondo this damage in another 30. People WILL move -- they do it all the time!

* Cargo: Plenty of options for extending bike cargo capacity. Also think in terms of multiple people-powered vehicles or "bike-pools". Some motorized "van" bikes could be used for large-scale deliveries.

* Weather: Cars would be totally impractical without the billions of dollars that we have spent on smooth, asphalted roads. A covered bike route could be made for a fraction of the price of even a basic road.

I'm not thinking of a bike-only world, but of a bike-centric world. One in which there may be a mix of powered vehicles (bulldozers, construction machines-- possibly with Stirling technology), animal powered vehicles (genetically enhanced, extra muscles and/or limbs) and/or lightweight transportation devices (dunebuggy-like vechicles for the rich).

Here's the thing: WE WILL RUN OUT OF OIL! Maybe in 200 years. Maybe in 50. Personally I think in 20, since older models assumed 3rd world countries coming online slowly rather than explosively as we see happening. We can attempt to address this problem with war, poverty, and dissolution, or we can address it with imagination.

Alas, human nature being what it is, I fear that it will be the former and not the latter.

Perhaps you've misread some of the replies. It's not so much that we "can't imagine a world without cars"; more we can't imagine a world where people trade cars for bikes exclusively (or even partially). At least, I can't. I also note that the human race got along without bikes for a considerable length of time as well.

The fact that we'll run out of oil does not mean we will run out of ways to make cars or other transportation. I have no doubt that people will embrace nuclear power once the oil reserves start dipping low and rationing begins. But they'll embrace it for the purpose of powering their electric cars, busses, whatever. They still won't be inclined to hop on a bike; most people see bikes-as-transportation as a step backwards, not forward.

Don't get me wrong, a bike-only or even just bike-centric world be really cool, but I am having trouble envisioning the social and political climate that would permit discussing it even half-jokingly outside of a bicycle-centric Internet forum (within this century anyway).

Well, I know of at least TWO people at my workplace who made at least made the switch to more fuel-efficient vehicles.

One guy has a huge Ford Excursion (14 mpg tops) who is now driving a small Saturn to work and another who traded in his '91 T-Bird for a fuel-sipping Nissan Sentra.

I read that in the 1960's really! :eek:

Ha! It's an ongoing scam.

Then, the rest of us REAL American can go back to trying to figure out who Brad Pitt will sleep with next. We won't need to worry anymore about killing our own kids. Instead of Casey doing the dying, it will be Carlos dying for the cheap gas. THAT's the real American dream!That's so scary, its probably true.

Yes. As long as people feel free to buy Hummers, GAS IS TOO CHEAP!

People will switch from cars to bikes only when they've exhausted all the cost reduction alternatives.

One way to cut fuel expenses approximately in half is better trip planning and combining trips.

Another way is by using a 40-50 mpg small vehicle.

Another way is by intensive carpooling or vanpooling.

I can't think of much else a person could do to stretch the fuel budget. So the maximum cost reduction that can be done is a factor of 8. If the threshold of pain in the present non-conserving environment is $3 a gallon, as evidenced by the increased discussion about gas prices here, some people will start to feel they have run out of alternatives when the price reaches $3 x 8 = $24 a gallon. Of course, other motorists would have enough income to be able to afford even $24 a gallon.

If even a few percent of motorists try to switch to public transit, the present systems in most U.S. cities would be unable to accommodate the demand. So in an apocalyptic scenario, mass China-style cycling would really be the only alternative.

I doubt gas will come close to $24 a gallon for many years. Long before it reaches that point it will be economically feasible to extract oil from unconventional sources like Canadian tar sands.

So I think we will never see the average motorist on a bike. A more interesting question would be, at what price will we see the number of bike commuters double or triple? We may not be far from that now.

Its disheartening that so many people even in the biking forum can't imagine a world without cars.

Hey, somehow the human race got along without them entirely for a few million years!

The 3 main objections to bikes: Cargo, weather, and distance can be addressed with imagination.

* Distance: We created "urban sprawl" in our hasty rush to separate the haves from the have-nots in only about 30 years. We can ondo this damage in another 30. People WILL move -- they do it all the time!

* Cargo: Plenty of options for extending bike cargo capacity. Also think in terms of multiple people-powered vehicles or "bike-pools". Some motorized "van" bikes could be used for large-scale deliveries.

* Weather: Cars would be totally impractical without the billions of dollars that we have spent on smooth, asphalted roads. A covered bike route could be made for a fraction of the price of even a basic road.

I'm not thinking of a bike-only world, but of a bike-centric world. One in which there may be a mix of powered vehicles (bulldozers, construction machines-- possibly with Stirling technology), animal powered vehicles (genetically enhanced, extra muscles and/or limbs) and/or lightweight transportation devices (dunebuggy-like vechicles for the rich).

Here's the thing: WE WILL RUN OUT OF OIL! Maybe in 200 years. Maybe in 50. Personally I think in 20, since older models assumed 3rd world countries coming online slowly rather than explosively as we see happening. We can attempt to address this problem with war, poverty, and dissolution, or we can address it with imagination.

Alas, human nature being what it is, I fear that it will be the former and not the latter.

I'm wondering what the price of renting a one room apartment in a city will be as we all move back in only 30 years? Got that $2,500 a month rent check handy?
Taxes will ahve to go up also, since the ones moving back in will DEMAND that crime be lowered.

I'm wondering what the price of renting a one room apartment in a city will be as we all move back in only 30 years? Got that $2,500 a month rent check handy?
Taxes will ahve to go up also, since the ones moving back in will DEMAND that crime be lowered.

That's what a one bedroom currently rents for in Manhattan.

The problem is that our current road system doesn't really support a massive shift to people-powered transportation. Everything in this country is designed around getting people from Suburbia to commerce in as little time as possible.

We would have to see a massive shift with people starting to live in the communities that they work in, instead of getting a house 1/2 an hour drive from work. I wish it would happen, that's a world I would love to live in, where neighbors work together, take care of one another and even get healthy together. Sounds like Utopia!

The gas prices have officially shifted me into commuter mode now. I've started building up the beater bike. I already have to get up at 5 am to drive to work. I guess it will be 4:30 now so I can ride. I've been wanting to make the switch anyway.

4. other family members need transportation. Kind of hard to take kid to school and then continue on to work.

They could invent a whole new range of multiple people bicycles, such as carcycles, with four people on a four-wheel bicycle platform. It would be called a Carcycle. There could also be a buscycle, where there is 50 seats, and you grab a seat and help out with the pedalling.
A taxi would be a small couch getting dragged along by a bike (the passenger would sit on the couch).

It would almost have to cost more to drive to work than what they earned for working in order to get folks to change. I think a large percentage of the population would passively suffer being de facto slaves to the oil companies for at least a while.

Me? It'd have to run at least $10/gal for me to start shelling out anywhere near $200/mo. for fuel. As it stands, my commute costs me only around $1.20 in fuel for a round trip.

But if I didn't work 3rd, I'd ride it anyway.

I think if there were to be a large shift in gas prices causing a large shift in bicycles that there would be a redesign of current systems.

Such as a 8-lane highway (4 each direction)...
Redesigning the on/off ramps could give way for a cycling lane for the highway. Granted, it would need to have a physical barrier between the car lanes and cycling lane, it could be done.

[BIKE][CAR][CAR][CAR] || [CAR][CAR][CAR][BIKE]

Granted, this would require at least a 25% reduction in cars on the highways to be feasible, but if it's feasible, it's a possibility.

I don't think the average car driver could ride a bicycle as transportation- look who's out there, people! - gas prices alone won't do it.

The average driver is so obese and out of shape that riding a bike is a fate worse than a jerry springer marathon. There's a lot of people who can't ride for health or practical reasons as well. What about families that live in suburbia? forget it, for most, bikes are only recreational. And the average driver is usually tied to their automobile like a liferaft in the north atlantic after the freighter flips.

The average car driver isn't going to switch to a bike no matter what gas costs.

People adjust to rising gas prices in anumber of ways - driving less(means watching more television!) , replacing gas guzzlers with a more economical car, using public transportation for some trips, moving closer to their workplace.

A small number will start cycling, but it will never be a mass movement.

The average car driver isn't going to switch to a bike no matter what gas costs.

People adjust to rising gas prices in anumber of ways - driving less(means watching more television!) , replacing gas guzzlers with a more economical car, using public transportation for some trips, moving closer to their workplace.

A small number will start cycling, but it will never be a mass movement.

I agree with this. People will just reorient their expenses until gas is only a commodity for the rich.

I switched at $2. Does this mean I'm cheap?

I switched at $2. Does this mean I'm cheap?

I think it means you are wise.

I think if there were to be a large shift in gas prices causing a large shift in bicycles that there would be a redesign of current systems.

Such as a 8-lane highway (4 each direction)...
Redesigning the on/off ramps could give way for a cycling lane for the highway. Granted, it would need to have a physical barrier between the car lanes and cycling lane, it could be done.

[BIKE][CAR][CAR][CAR] || [CAR][CAR][CAR][BIKE]

Granted, this would require at least a 25% reduction in cars on the highways to be feasible, but if it's feasible, it's a possibility.

We already have bike lanes on the highways, aka shoulders.

We already have bike lanes on the highways, aka shoulders.

That's how they do it in Northern California

That's how they do it in Northern California
And this may be a news flash to some, road conditions found in California are not necessarily found elsewhere.

We already have bike lanes on the highways, aka shoulders.
That's not how it is in MI.

All of our Interstate Highways you must have a 50cc or higher motor in order to be on the pavement. Shoulder or not. TECHNICALLY, it's illegal to walk it too, (leaving your car on the shoulder to walk to the gas station if you run out while driving) but that's not enforced.

The road conditions on the shoulder are also sub-par due to massive amounts of debris.

And this may be a news flash to some, road conditions found in California are not necessarily found elsewhere.

Newsflash!!

I've lived in Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, Arizona, Colorado and California. I've also traveled to 48 of the 50 states in the past 10 years, all by car. I'm aware that there are different road conditions in different places.

I was just saying it was an example of how people have utilized those shoulders as bike lanes. Since bikes are legal on the roads, they keep the debris cleaned up.