By Don Skinner

Ironic, isn’t it, that human beings succeeded for several million years to propel themselves around the planet on nothing but their hind legs? They even managed, in a relatively few thousand years, to expand their range from mid-Africa up the breadth of Europe and the Near East, across the expanses of Asia, over the land bridge to Alaska, and down the American continents all the way to Patagonia. And they did it without the aid of a single internal combustion engine.

Now, barely more than a century after it was invented, we act as if the world order will collapse if we’re denied private automobiles, continent-spanning ribbons of concrete on which to drive them, and an endless supply of cheap fuel. Fear that the last is evaporating drove the rhetoric about “energy independence” during the late, unlamented political campaign. Nearly absent from the discussion, however, was a novel concept: reduce energy consumption by using less of it. (Duh.)

That mentality was behind the National Republican Congressional Campaign’s sarcasm toward Democratic candidate Kathy Dahlkemper for suggesting that we walk more and ride bikes. Her attackers might want to consider what’s happening elsewhere in the world.

In September, the Earth Policy Institute reported that global bicycle production had increased for six consecutive years; and the number of people riding bikes has doubled in the past decade. Anthony Lo, the owner of Taiwan’s Giant bicycle company, who commutes 160 miles per week on one of his own bicycles (bet he’s in better shape at 60 than many Tribune readers), reports that sales have doubled since 2002 and were up an astounding 24 per cent the first half of 2008.

Unfortunately, as a country, America is still asleep. While millions recreate on bikes, only 0.4 percent of us commute to work on one. In contrast, the Washington Post Foreign Service’s Blaine Harden reports that in Tokyo alone, more Japanese commuters park bicycles at train and subway stations every workday (704,000) than in the entirety of the United States (545,000).

Or consider this: Germans are 10 times more likely to ride a bike than Americans, but three times less likely to get hurt. Why should this be so? Because many of the world’s major cities are light-years ahead of us in creating the conditions that encourage cyclists. Exhibit A for a quick infrastructure fix that got commuters out of cars, reports Harden, is London. Since 2000, the city increased 10-fold its investment in bike lanes, bike parking, and educational programs, followed in 2003 by a steep, $16 “congestion charge” on cars driven into the city center. The result, cycling has doubled.

Similar reports flow in from Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands. Of course, they got a head-start. Hit by the first global oil shock in the 1970s, they sensed (as we did not) how fast their quarter-century of American-style, car-centric urban planning would collapse if energy supplies were disrupted. They also discovered that following our model had coincided with a sharp decline in cycling. So they did an about-face.

The impact, according to John Pucher, professor of urban planning at Rutgers University, was dramatic. An integrated system of safe cycling routes now criss-cross all three countries. Cyclists move on paths completely separate from motor traffic, through “traffic-calmed” neighborhoods. The result is the highest rate of cycling and lowest rate of accidents in the industrialized world. Berlin estimates that its 3.4 million residents now use their bikes a million times per day. In the Netherlands, bikes now account for 27 percent of all trips.

If you think it can’t work in the U.S., check out Portland, Ore. Two decades ago, the Rose City began adding bike lanes to urban streets — not all of them, but enough to provide a cycling grid. A recent study by Portland State University found that while only 15 percent of streets yet have bike lanes, they attract half the city’s bike travel. More important, bike use has jumped 400 percent since 1991.

Bogotá, Columbia, experienced a similar, “build it and they will come” transition, the Post’s Harden reports. Dutch bicycle engineers were imported to build bike lanes and re-configure traffic flow. In consequence, bike usage increased 10-fold in just two years.

Unfortunately, there is a dismal downside to this story. While some countries (like ours) remain lethargic, two are downright contrarian — the two that the world can least afford. In China and India, among the fastest growing economies in the world, bicycles are seen as shameful reminders of poor-nation status. Two decades ago, bikes constituted 60 percent of New Delhi traffic; today, they comprise four percent.

In China, the symbol of growing middle-class status is not simply an automobile, but a large Buick. Both countries are now major players in global petroleum demand and greenhouse gas emission. The former promises to keep world fuel prices volatile for the duration. And the latter threatens to increase greenhouse gas production at least as fast as industrial countries can curtail it. It’s not a promising picture.

Skinner, a native of Meadville, is chaplain emeritus of Allegheny College and a longtime environmentalist.