Many countries spend a lot of money to make bicycles easier. Why? Is it the best solution for transport problems?

Nowadays, the amount of money has been spent on easy bicycle access by some nations to tackle traffic congestion. However, the most viable way for this problem is to limit the fossil fuel. Today, most countries allocate its revenue to develop accessibility of bicycle to cope with the traffic density originated by the high rate of transport privatization. This is because, when facilities of bicycle are established, these attract citizens to use this transportation because of effectivity in peak times, reducing the proportion of private-transport owners, resulting a minor density of traffic. For example, Jakarta authorities’ funds in 2018 had been spent on the bike ways, being effective for workers suffering from dense traffic when they went to the office, and this trend in 2019 decreased car ownership from 25% to 15%, impacting a decline of traffic congestion about 20%. Nevertheless, the best solution to tackle dense road in some nations is to budget the limitation of fossil usage as the fuel of various transportations. This is caused by if this non-renewable resource is still well-known, the percentage of private transports will be increasingly higher, inclining the level of density of road. For instance, China regulated the revenue to reduce the usage of gasoline in some gas stations in 2020, being less popular that country, shrinking considerably the level of motorcycle riders and car drivers from a half to a quarter, then this regulation consequently decreased the intensity of bustle in road to a fifth. In conclusion, limiting the fossil fuel is the feasible way for several nations to waste money to solve traffic congestion instead of improving easy access of bikes. As a reason, the rate resulted from the former is more influence than that from the latter.