????在荷蘭，自行車被做成校車，這種自行車可乘坐12個(gè)人，由一名成年人掌握車龍頭，孩子們則負(fù)責(zé)蹬車。在日本，自行車主可以將車存放到路邊的設(shè)施，然后自動(dòng)存入地下停車場(chǎng)。在中國，政府將發(fā)展電動(dòng)自行車（內(nèi)置機(jī)械輔助的自行車）作為國家的重點(diǎn)。然而，美國人到私家車道另一頭取郵件都得開車。

????自行車是世界上最普遍的交通方式。行業(yè)分析師杰伊?湯雷稱，去年全球共生產(chǎn)、批發(fā)銷售自行車約1.33億輛，是2011年全球汽車產(chǎn)量的兩倍以上，比50年前增長了500%。如今，最新涌現(xiàn)出的一批自行車倡導(dǎo)者，以及越來越多更加務(wù)實(shí)的城市政府，希望進(jìn)一步掀起自行車普及的浪潮。

????過去五年，全球大城市掀起了對(duì)這種兩輪交通方式的新一輪熱潮。自行車咨詢機(jī)構(gòu)MetroBike創(chuàng)始人保羅?德馬約稱，全球公共自行車項(xiàng)目出現(xiàn)了爆發(fā)式增長，從2007年的60個(gè)增加到今天的約450個(gè)。原因顯而易見。面臨日益嚴(yán)重的城市問題，比如烏煙瘴氣的城市擁堵、高肥胖率和負(fù)擔(dān)過重的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施等，自行車無疑是最好的解決方案。巴黎公共自行車系統(tǒng)的自行車數(shù)量超過20,000輛，倫敦約有8,000輛。而在中國，據(jù)稱杭州有60600輛公共自行車，而武漢的公共自行車數(shù)量則達(dá)到驚人的70000輛，創(chuàng)下了世界紀(jì)錄。

????美國人口僅占世界總?cè)丝诘?%，卻駕駛著全世界30%的汽車。在歷史上，美國人對(duì)自行車一直缺乏熱情。然而，如今就連美國的城市也開始緊跟世界潮流。紐約市計(jì)劃在今年夏天推出一個(gè)大型公共自行車系統(tǒng)，但由于軟件故障，可能要推遲到明年才能啟動(dòng)。屆時(shí)，這個(gè)系統(tǒng)將成為美國最大的公共自行車系統(tǒng)，規(guī)模擴(kuò)大了六倍之多。

????當(dāng)然，公共自行車模式將大獲成功還是遭遇慘敗，這個(gè)問題仁者見仁智者見智。在華盛頓特區(qū)，首都自行車共享（Capital Bikeshare）項(xiàng)目的支持者們指出，該項(xiàng)目廣受歡迎，大幅提高了該市的自行車出行率。該項(xiàng)目的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)，去年，項(xiàng)目會(huì)員得到了更多的鍛煉，乘車出行距離減少了500萬英里，交通開支減少了約1,500萬美元。

????但在批評(píng)者看來，該項(xiàng)目騎行者構(gòu)成的比例失衡，其中以白人和受教育人群為主，證明該系統(tǒng)對(duì)公共資金的利用并不合理，是一種倒退。他們認(rèn)為，納稅人的錢應(yīng)該用在最需要的地方，而不是用在有錢人和健康人身上。在紐約，開車的人和騎自行車的人每天都在上演“公路爭奪戰(zhàn)”，公共自行車系統(tǒng)的反對(duì)者抱怨稱，新建的、總量達(dá)10,000輛的自行車騎行系統(tǒng)其實(shí)就是為了滿足一小部分人趕時(shí)髦的興趣愛好，白白浪費(fèi)紐約市寶貴的道路空間。

????實(shí)際上，世界上大部分公共自行車系統(tǒng)都在賠錢。規(guī)模不同，損失程度也各不相同，但通常每年的虧損數(shù)額都在數(shù)百萬美元。公共自行車系統(tǒng)的運(yùn)行資金大部分來自政府。支持者們認(rèn)為，公共自行車系統(tǒng)可以增加新的交通服務(wù)，減少交通擁堵，提高市民健康水平，這些足以補(bǔ)償其開支。但問題是：公共自行車系統(tǒng)是否真的能讓足夠多的公眾受益，對(duì)得起納稅人源源不斷投入的資金？如果不能讓足夠多的公眾受益，誰又該為這一系統(tǒng)埋單？

????除了數(shù)額巨大的啟動(dòng)資金外，公共自行車系統(tǒng)每輛自行車每年的維護(hù)與運(yùn)營成本平均約為1,600美元。不過，紐約市表示，可以將這筆開支降低到1,200美元。目前，已經(jīng)有許多彌補(bǔ)維護(hù)與運(yùn)營成本的成熟做法：公共資金便是其一。例如，華盛頓特區(qū)的首都自行車分享項(xiàng)目便采用了會(huì)費(fèi)和政府資助的綜合方式。（該項(xiàng)目由政府所有，但由私人運(yùn)營。）另外一種模式是廣告商投資。巴黎Velib項(xiàng)目便由廣告商德高集團(tuán)（JCDecaux）負(fù)責(zé)運(yùn)營。作為回報(bào)，德高集團(tuán)可以獲得在巴黎的廣告特許權(quán)和該項(xiàng)目的收入分成。也有一些城市，比如柏林，引入了營利性機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)運(yùn)營。部分項(xiàng)目，如波士頓的新平衡樞紐項(xiàng)目（New Balance Hubway），則完全由政府所有和運(yùn)營。個(gè)別項(xiàng)目則完全屬于非盈利性質(zhì)。最近的一份報(bào)告發(fā)現(xiàn)，美國大型現(xiàn)代化系統(tǒng)中（包括丹佛、明尼阿波利斯和麥迪遜），58%采用非盈利模式。

????紐約市的公共自行車系統(tǒng)將綜合現(xiàn)有的模式。曾在諸多大城市運(yùn)營公共自行車系統(tǒng)的阿爾塔自行車分享公司（Alta Bicycle Share）將與紐約市共同負(fù)責(zé)該項(xiàng)目的運(yùn)營，所得利潤由該公司與紐約市政府共同分配。項(xiàng)目期間不會(huì)調(diào)用政府稅收，項(xiàng)目啟動(dòng)與運(yùn)營成本將由廣告商花旗集團(tuán)（Citigroup）和萬事達(dá)卡公司（MasterCard）承擔(dān)，這樣一來，可以避免項(xiàng)目遭到更為激烈的批評(píng)。花旗集團(tuán)承諾在系統(tǒng)中注資4,100萬美元，條件是將系統(tǒng)命名為“花旗自行車”（Citi Bike）。而萬事達(dá)卡公司將投資650萬美元，幫助建立租賃點(diǎn)的支付系統(tǒng)，該公司的標(biāo)識(shí)將裝飾在租賃點(diǎn)的設(shè)備上。

????In the Netherlands, there is such as thing as the bicycle school bus, a 12-person rig that children can pedal while an adult steers them to school. In Japan, cyclists deposit their bikes into curbside machines that subsume them into robotically enabled underground parking structures. In China, the government has made the development of electronic bikes -- bicycles with built-in mechanical assist -- a national priority. In America, however, it's not unheard of for people to drive to the end of their driveway to get the mail.

????The bicycle is the world's most popular form of transit. There were an estimated 133 million bikes produced and sold to retailers last year, says industry analyst Jay Townley. That's more than double the number of cars manufactured worldwide in 2011, and a 500% increase from 50 years ago. Now, a new wave of bicycle evangelists -- and, increasingly, pragmatic municipal governments -- are trying to push those numbers even higher.

????Over the last five years, major cities around the world have discovered a new, and fervent love for two-wheeled transport. Paul DeMaio, founder of the bike consultancy MetroBike, says the number of bike share programs worldwide has exploded -- from 60 in 2007 to nearly 450 today. It's not hard to see why. In the face of increasing urban problems like smog-spewing congestion, high obesity rates, and overtaxed infrastructure, biking is an obvious solution. In Paris, the publicly supported bike share system has more than 20,000 cycles. In London, it's about 8,000. In China, Hangzhou reports 60,600 and Wuhan claims a whopping 70,000, a world record.

????The United States, home to 30% of the world's autos and just 5% of its people, has been historically unfriendly to cycling. But today even American cities may be coming along for the ride. New York City is planning to introduce a major bike sharing system this summer, though software glitches may delay the launch until next year. When it does rollout, it will be country's largest such program -- by a factor of six.

????Whether this model of bike sharing has been an incredible success or a miserable failure depends on whom you ask. In Washington D.C., advocates of the hugely popular program Capital Bikeshare point to increased ridership rates throughout the city. A Capital Bikeshare survey also found that members got more exercise, traveled five million fewer miles by car, and saved some $15 million on their transportation last year.

????On the other side, critics point to the disproportionately white and educated Capital Bikeshare ridership as evidence that the system is a regressive use of public funding. They argue taxpayer dollars should benefit the neediest, not the wealthy and fit. In New York, where motorists and bikers are wage daily war over who owns the road, bike share opponents complain that the new, 10,000-bike system amounts to a giveaway of precious New York City street space to a fashionable niche interest.

????Most of the world's bike sharing systems actually lose money, often to the tune of several million per year depending on the size of the program. Much of that cash is government funds. Advocates say that the cost is offset by the addition of a new transportation service, reduced traffic congestion, and improved health. But the question remains: does bike sharing benefit enough of the public to justify the taxpayer dollars that must be poured into it? And if not, who should pay?

????In addition to substantial startup expenses, average maintenance and operating costs for a bike share bike run about $1,600 per year, though New York City says its will be lower, at $1,200 per unit. There are a few established ways of covering that cost: One is public funding. D.C.'s Capital Bikeshare, for example, uses a mix of member fees and government aid. (It's government-owned and privately operated.) Another model is advertiser funding. Paris's Velib program is run by the advertising agency JCDecaux, which in turn receives a concession for advertising in the city and a share of revenue. Some cities—such as Berlin—bring in for-profit companies' to operate the system. Others, like Boston's New Balance Hubway, are wholly owned and operated by the government, and still others function like non-profits. A recent report [http://transweb.sjsu.edu/PDFs/research/1029-public-bikesharing-understanding-early-operators-users.pdf] found that 58% of large modern systems in the U.S. (including Denver, Minneapolis and Madison) use the non-profit model.

????New York City's bike share system will be a hybrid of existing models. Alta Bicycle Share, which runs a handful of systems in major cities, will work with New York officials to run the program, and will split any profits with the government. Zero tax dollars will be used during the project, which should placate the system's more vehement critics. Instead, advertisers Citigroup and MasterCard will cover setup and operating costs. Citigroup has committed $41 million to the system, in exchange for branding it "Citi Bike." MasterCard is chipping in $6.5 million to help set up the stations' payment systems, and its logo will adorn the stations' kiosks.