Originally Posted by adlai

I bike commute, and I have to say that it is not cheaper than taking a car. Here's why.

1. There's a fair bit of maintenance to do on the bicycle. Over the past two years I've had to replace an entire rear derailleur after it ate a spoke on my rear wheel, change out the chain, replace the tires, change at least a dozen flats, spend about 3 hrs adjusting the front derailleur (and no, the LBS people didn't do it right). I'd say that the costs of maintinence and various upgrades over the past year or two has amounted to about 500

2. True, car expenses include things like yearly registration, paying for parking, gasoline, replacing broken parts, etc. However, by and far car maintinence is, mile-for-mile, cheaper. Tires are a great example. The last flat tire I got in a car was entirely my fault and a result of a flagrant misjudgement. I regularly get flats in bicycles, both road and mountain, while doing on regular pavement. Otherwise, a low-end tire will take you 40k miles, and a set will cost maybe $500. With bicycles, you're buying a new pair of gatorskins at $80 every 4k miles. Cheaper tires last shorter.

3. there are other costs not accounted for. An obvious ones of course are the greater mobility of the car allowing you more freedom in getting to jobs, carrying capacity of people and cargo, and the fact that cars are safer than bicycles due to safety regs which will ensure that you're okay should you ever be hit. With a bicycle, mile-for-mile, you're at a greatly increased risk of death compared to a car, in general it takes you longer to get to places, you're breathing in toxic fumes from the vehicles on the road.

Now of course, I love bicycles and commuting in them so that's what I choose, but economically, at best it's a wash in terms of cost savings.