The recent CNN article about Americans being financially crushed by commuting paints a bleak picture of modern transportation. Workers are crying in hotel rooms over gas receipts, retiring earlier than planned because of fuel costs, and turning down jobs simply because they can’t afford to drive to them anymore.
And yet, reading the piece from the perspective of a magazine devoted to smart living by bicycle, one can’t help but notice the giant, bike-shaped elephant in the room.
The article treats driving as the default setting for transportation. The only real alternatives discussed are working from home, moving closer to work, or quitting altogether. It’s as if North America collectively forgot there might be another option between “drive 90 kilometres a day” and “collapse emotionally at the Shell station.”
We realize not everyone can bike to work, and, honestly, cycling represents less than 1 per cent of trips in most cities. The regional hotel manager driving across three states in a pickup truck full of supplies is probably not throwing Ortlieb panniers on a cargo bike and pedalling through Indiana. Fair enough.
But for millions of workers, especially those making the kinds of shorter urban and suburban commutes described in the article, the real surprise is not that driving has become unaffordable. The surprise is that we still organize so much of our lives around the assumption that everyone should absorb the staggering cost of car ownership in the first place.
According to AAA’s “Your Driving Costs” analysis, the average annual cost of owning and operating a new vehicle surpassed US$10,700 a year in recent studies, and has climbed even higher in more recent estimates. That includes fuel, insurance, depreciation, maintenance, financing, registration, and tires. CAA offers a similar estimate in Canada.
That works out to roughly US$900 to US$1,000 per month just to participate in basic car-dependent life.
And that was before gas prices started behaving like meme stocks.
AAA reported gas prices topping US$5 per gallon during previous spikes and now once again pushing toward record territory in parts of the United States.
For people already stretched thin by housing costs, groceries, insurance premiums, and inflation, commuting by automobile has quietly become one of the largest monthly expenses after rent or mortgage payments. The workers interviewed by CNN are not outliers. They are simply saying the quiet part out loud.
Meanwhile, bicycle commuting continues to sit there like an absurdly obvious life hack.
Commuting on the Eastbank Esplanade in Portland, Oregon
A decent commuter bike costs less than a a month or two of car payments. Many daily bike commuters spend less on annual maintenance than drivers spend on fuel in a single week. E-bikes have expanded realistic commuting distances dramatically, flattening hills and shrinking suburban geography in ways that were unimaginable even a decade ago.
And unlike the automobile commute, the bicycle commute tends to produce side benefits instead of side effects.
People who bike to work generally incorporate physical activity into their daily routines without needing a second trip to the gym. Cities with strong cycling infrastructure consistently report reduced congestion, lower transportation emissions, quieter streets, and improved public health outcomes. Even financially, the math becomes difficult to ignore. Replacing even a portion of weekly car trips with cycling can save hundreds or thousands of dollars annually.
There is also the strange psychological reality that bicycle commuting often feels less soul-crushing than sitting motionless in freeway traffic while listening to another report about oil markets in the Middle East.
The irony is that many North American cities already contain huge numbers of trips that are entirely bikeable. The average commute in the United States is well within e-bike range. Yet transportation policy, zoning, and infrastructure spending still overwhelmingly prioritize the assumption that everyone will drive everywhere forever, regardless of cost.
Then gas prices spike and everyone acts shocked.
The CNN article unintentionally highlights something cycling advocates have been saying for years: car dependency is financially fragile. When your transportation system requires people to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars a month just to get to work, the entire thing becomes vulnerable to global oil markets, geopolitical instability, and economic shocks.
Bicycles, on the other hand, rarely care what Iran is doing. And, the benefits of commuting beyond just the financial side are sizable including mental and physical health.
That does not mean every worker can suddenly commute by bike tomorrow. North America still has enormous infrastructure gaps. Many suburban roads remain unsafe for cycling. Secure bike parking is inconsistent. Protected bike lanes remain politically controversial in places where six-lane arterial roads somehow are not.
But the answer to unaffordable commuting shouldn’t simply be “hope gas gets cheaper.”
At some point, cities and workers alike have to acknowledge that there are smarter, healthier, cheaper, and frankly more enjoyable ways to move around.
The future of commuting probably includes more remote work, more transit, more walkable neighbourhoods, and yes, more bicycles. Not because cycling is some niche lifestyle choice for fitness enthusiasts in expensive rain jackets, but because the economics of car dependency are becoming impossible to ignore.
If paying US$1,000 a month just to reach your workplace is considered normal, maybe the problem is not the gas prices.
Maybe it’s the commute itself.