How Dutch engineer Luud Schimmelpennink helped to devise urban bike-sharing schemes
A
The original idea for an urban bike-sharing scheme dates back to a summer’s day in Amsterdam in 1965. Provo, the organization that came up with the idea, was a group of Dutch activists who wanted to change society. They believed the scheme, which was known as the Witte Fietsenplan, was an answer to the perceived threats of air pollution and consumerism. In the centre of Amsterdam, they painted a small number of used bikes white. They also distributed leaflets describing the dangers of cars and inviting people to use the white bikes. The bikes were then left unlocked at various locations around the city, to be used by anyone in need of transport.
B
Luud Schimmelpennink, a Dutch industrial engineer who still lives and cycles in Amsterdam, was heavily involved in the original scheme. He recalls how the scheme succeeded in attracting a great deal of attention – particularly when it came to publicising Provo’s aims – but struggled to get off the ground. The police were opposed to Provo’s initiatives and almost as soon as the white bikes were distributed around the city, they removed them. However, for Schimmelpennink and for bike-sharing schemes in general, this was just the beginning. ‘The first Witte Fietsenplan was just a symbolic thing,’ he says. ‘We painted a few bikes white, that was all. Things got more serious when I became a member of the Amsterdam city council two years later.’
C
Schimmelpennink seized this opportunity to present a more elaborate Witte Fietsenplan to the city council. ‘My idea was that the municipality of Amsterdam would distribute 10,000 white bikes over the city, for everyone to use,’ he explains. ‘I made serious calculations. It turned out that a white bicycle – per person, per kilometer – would cost the municipality only 10% of what it contributed to public transport per person per kilometer.’ Nevertheless, the council unanimously rejected the plan. ‘They said that the bicycle belongs to the past. They saw a glorious future for the car,’ says Schimmelpennink. But he was not in the least discouraged.
D
Schimmelpennink never stopped believing in bike-sharing, and in the mid-90s, two Danes asked for his help to set up a system in Copenhagen. The result was the world’s first large-scale bike-share programme. It worked on a deposit: ‘You dropped a coin in the bike and when you returned it, you got your money back.’ After setting up the Danish system, Schimmelpennink decided to try his luck again in the Netherlands – and this time he succeeded in arousing the interest of the Dutch Ministry of Transport. ‘Times had changed,’ he recalls. ‘People had become more environmentally conscious, and the Danish experiment had proved that bike-sharing was a real possibility.’ A new Witte Fietsenplan was launched in 1999 in Amsterdam. However, riding a white bike was no longer free; it cost one guilder per trip and payment was made with a chip card developed by the Dutch bank Postbank. Schimmelpennink designed conspicuous, sturdy white bikes locked in special racks which could be opened with the chip card – the plan started with 250 bikes, distributed over five stations.
E
Theo Molenaar, who was a system designer for the project, worked alongside Schimmelpennink. ‘I remember when we were testing the bike racks, he announced that he had already designed better ones. But of course, we had to go through with the ones we had.’ The system, however, was prone to vandalism and theft. ‘After every weekend there would always be a couple of bikes missing,’ Molenaar says. ‘I really have no idea what people did with them, because they could instantly be recognised as white bikes.’ But the biggest blow came when Postbank decided to abolish the chip card, because it wasn’t profitable. ‘That chip card was pivotal to the system,’ Molenaar says. ‘To continue the project we would have needed to set up another system, but the business partner had lost interest.’
F
Schimmelpennink was disappointed, but – characteristically – not for long. In 2002 he got a call from the French advertising corporation JC Decaux, who wanted to set up his bike-sharing scheme in Vienna. ‘That went really well. After Vienna, they set up a system in Lyon. Then in 2007, Paris followed. That was a decisive moment in the history of bike-sharing.’ The huge and unexpected success of the Parisian bike-sharing programme, which now boasts more than 20,000 bicycles, inspired cities all over the world to set up their own schemes, all modelled on Schimmelpennink’s. ‘It’s wonderful that this happened,’ he says. ‘But financially I didn’t really benefit from it, because I never filed for a patent.’
G
In Amsterdam today, 38% of all trips are made by bike and, along with Copenhagen, it is regarded as one of the two most cycle-friendly capitals in the world – but the city never got another Witte Fietsenplan. Molenaar believes this may be because everybody in Amsterdam already has a bike. Schimmelpennink, however, cannot see that this changes Amsterdam’s need for a bike-sharing scheme. ‘People who travel on the underground don’t carry their bikes around. But often they need additional transport to reach their final destination.’ Although he thinks it is strange that a city like Amsterdam does not have a successful bike-sharing scheme, he is optimistic about the future. ‘In the ‘60s we didn’t stand a chance because people were prepared to give their lives to keep cars in the city. But that mentality has totally changed. Today everybody longs for cities that are not dominated by cars.’
Nguồn: Cambridge IELTS 14
GIẢI THÍCH
| Đáp án | Trích dẫn | Giải thích |
|---|---|---|
| 1. E | Đoạn E: “The system, however, was prone to vandalism and theft. ‘After every weekend there would always be a couple of bikes missing,’ Molenaar says.” | Câu hỏi tìm “a description of how people misused a bike-sharing scheme” (mô tả cách mọi người sử dụng sai mục đích). Đoạn E nói rõ hệ thống dễ bị “vandalism” (phá hoại) và “theft” (trộm cắp), với bằng chứng là xe thường xuyên bị mất. |
| 2. C | Đoạn C: “Nevertheless, the council unanimously rejected the plan. ‘They said that the bicycle belongs to the past. They saw a glorious future for the car,’ says Schimmelpennink.” | Câu hỏi tìm “an explanation of why a proposed bike-sharing scheme was turned down” (lý do một đề án bị từ chối). Đoạn C nêu rõ Hội đồng thành phố từ chối kế hoạch và trích dẫn lý do: họ cho rằng xe đạp thuộc về quá khứ và tương lai là của ô tô. |
| 3. F | Đoạn F: “‘It’s wonderful that this happened,’ he says. ‘But financially I didn’t really benefit from it, because I never filed for a patent.’” | Câu hỏi tìm “a reference to a person being unable to profit their work” (thông tin về việc một người không thể thu lợi từ công việc của họ). Đoạn F ghi lại lời của Schimmelpennink thừa nhận ông không được lợi ích tài chính vì không đăng ký bằng sáng chế. |
| 4. C | Đoạn C: “‘I made serious calculations. It turned out that a white bicycle – per person, per kilometer – would cost the municipality only 10% of what it contributed to public transport per person per kilometer.’” | Câu hỏi tìm “an explanation of the potential savings” (giải thích về khoản tiết kiệm tiềm năng). Đoạn C nói rõ kết quả tính toán của Schimmelpennink: chi phí cho xe đạp trắng chỉ bằng 10% so với chi phí cho giao thông công cộng, nghĩa là sẽ tiết kiệm được 90%. |
| 5. A | Đoạn A: “They believed the scheme… was an answer to the perceived threats of air pollution and consumerism.” | Câu hỏi tìm “a reference to the problems a bike-sharing scheme was intended to solve” (các vấn đề mà đề án bike-sharing muốn giải quyết). Đoạn A nêu rõ mục đích của Provo là để đối phó với các mối đe dọa về “air pollution” (ô nhiễm không khí) và “consumerism” (chủ nghĩa tiêu dùng). |
| 6. It failed when a partner in the scheme withdrew support. | Đoạn E: “But the biggest blow came when Postbank decided to abolish the chip card, because it wasn’t profitable.… ‘the business partner had lost interest.’” | Tùy chọn B: “It failed when a partner in the scheme withdrew support.” (Nó thất bại khi một đối tác rút lui hỗ trợ). Thông tin trong đoạn E hoàn toàn trùng khớp: đối tác Postbank (một ngân hàng) đã hủy bỏ thẻ chip vì nó không sinh lời và mất hứng thú với dự án. |
| 7. It was made possible by a change in people’s attitudes. | Đoạn D: “‘Times had changed,’ he recalls. ‘People had become more environmentally conscious, and the Danish experiment had proved that bike-sharing was a real possibility.’” | Tùy chọn D: “It was made possible by a change in people’s attitudes.” (Nó trở nên khả thi nhờ sự thay đổi trong thái độ của mọi người). Thông tin trong đoạn D xác nhận điều này: “Thời thế đã thay đổi”, “Mọi người đã có ý thức hơn về môi trường”, điều này đã giúp thu hút được sự quan tâm của Bộ Giao thông. |
| 8. A bike-sharing scheme would benefit residents who use public transport. | Đoạn G: “‘People who travel on the underground don’t carry their bikes around. But often they need additional transport to reach their final destination.’” | Tùy chọn D: “A bike-sharing scheme would benefit residents who use public transport.” (Một chương trình chia sẻ xe đạp sẽ có lợi cho cư dân sử dụng phương tiện công cộng). Schimmelpennink lập luận rằng những người đi tàu điện ngầm thường cần phương tiện bổ sung để đến điểm đến cuối cùng, và bike-sharing sẽ đáp ứng nhu cầu đó. |
| 9. The city has a reputation as a place that welcomes cyclists. | Đoạn G: “In Amsterdam today, 38% of all trips are made by bike and, along with Copenhagen, it is regarded as one of the two most cycle-friendly capitals in the world…” | Tùy chọn E: “The city has a reputation as a place that welcomes cyclists.” (Thành phố có danh tiếng là một nơi chào đón người đi xe đạp). Thông tin trong bài mô tả Amsterdam là một trong hai “thủ đô thân thiện với xe đạp nhất thế giới”, hoàn toàn phù hợp với danh tiếng này. |
| 10. activists | Đoạn A: “Provo, the organization that came up with the idea, was a group of Dutch activists who wanted to change society.” | Từ cần điền mô tả thành viên của nhóm Provo. Bài đọc gọi họ là “activists” (những nhà hoạt động). |
| 11. consumerism | Đoạn A: “They believed the scheme… was an answer to the perceived threats of air pollution and consumerism.” | Họ quan tâm đến hai mối đe dọa: “air pollution” (ô nhiễm không khí) và “consumerism” (chủ nghĩa tiêu dùng). |
| 12. leaflets | Đoạn A: “They also distributed leaflets describing the dangers of cars and inviting people to use the white bikes.” | Họ đã phân phát “leaflets” (tờ rơi) để lên án việc sử dụng ô tô. |
| 13. police | Đoạn B: “The police were opposed to Provo’s initiatives and almost as soon as the white bikes were distributed around the city, they removed them.” | Chủ thể đã lấy đi những chiếc xe đạp ngay sau khi chúng được phân phát là “the police” (cảnh sát). |
