Okay - but Netherlands is not as sunny, hot, and swampy as Houston and Orlando in the Summer.
I've never biked anywhere that's super hot and humid and sunny like Orlando in the Summer. Theoretically, the wind from biking should help evaporate your sweat before you get "sweaty" - but it's got to be easier to get swamp ass in Houston than Amsterdam.
It's not a fitness issue. The netherlands is fairly flat and has a cooler climate than any major US city. It's just not possible to be pedaling up/down hills in any amount of heat/humidity and not get sweaty.
It is as possible as walking in the same place, unless we talk about some kind of super steep hill where would just push the bike.
Very likely issue here is that people who are used to cycle for sport only are not used to bike for transport. They don't do equivalent of walk, they do equivalent of run. So they get sweaty, because they race.
That is an excuse. There are many people in hilly cities that cycle. Not as many as in the Netherlands or in Denmark, but they exist. And even Norther Europe gets days of 30 °C (~90F), and we do not stop cycling, its rather the other way around. So just start cycling in winter, if you want to try.
As I said, just cycle in winter. Your chart says that it does not get muggy from November to April, i.e half of the year. And yes, I do not mind the cold, and do not need it flat, I live in Stockholm and not in Amsterdam.
I think you should come live for a year in DC and see what you think about the winters. Notice that the comparison also shows it snows quite a bit more, ~~and is on average colder during core winter months~~! Weather is just more of a "thing" for the average US city. And when you start by subtracting half the year for heat, at least a month for snow, more days for harsh freezing conditions (not uncommon to have some weeks in winter that dip to -10C) etc etc... (edit: forgot you lived in stockholm where it's quite cold, I admit)
The point is not that cycling is impossible but that it's attractiveness is highly variable depending on local/daily conditions, since you are exposed to the elements. Less consistency in conditions means the entire form of transportatin is percieved as unreliable.
I commute by bike in my US city, and the weather concerns are alleviated 90% of the time just by having the right clothing. If you have gym clothes, that's what you wear during hot/warm weather. If you have cold weather hiking clothes, that's what you wear during cold/cool weather. Pack a small towel and a change of clothes for your destination, and you're all set. It's actually easier to do this during the warm months because you wear fewer layers and the clothes aren't as bulky. I use a rack-mounted bag more often in winter to carry those extra layers.
The remaining 10% of the time is for just straight up unpleasant weather that catches you by surprise. For example, if I bike to work in the morning and there's a huge rainstorm when I would bike home in the afternoon. When that happens, I just leave my bike at the office and catch a bus home. Or Lyft if I'm feeling especially impatient.
Yes, of course cycling is most popular in the Netherlands because geography and climate are most ideal there. But the same is true about infrastructure. If it exists, any form of transportation becomes widely more popular. Just think of Oulu :)
I’m in favor of cycling infrastructure in the US, but it’s important to remember that the latitude of the Netherlands (like most of the European cycling cities) is north of the entire continental US.
I’m in decent shape, but will sweat at a resting heart rate in a Southern US summer.
