4 ms·

Apparently bikes are really bad for the environment being slow, low occupancy road vehicles? I think if are taking upon yourself to advise people you should adv

Apparently bikes are really bad for the environment being slow, low occupancy road vehicles? I think if are taking upon yourself to advise people you should advocate greener forms of transport such as existing public transit links, walking.

jerry40 9y ago
It must be my poor English. I've never said that bikes are bad for environment.
- nthcolumn 9y ago
  No sorry - I didn't mean to imply you had. I read a study on hackernews the other day. Unfortunately I cannot remember teh link as always. Single occupancy vehicles see, much better to have everyone in one clean bus instead - bikes are bad apparently.
  - ingenuous2 9y ago
    I don't know what the numbers are like, but bicycling regularly increasing calorie requirements, which would have an environmental impact. No idea how this compares to the scale of taking a bus or a solo car, but there is an increased cost. Growing food (often with fertilizers, harvest machinery, etc) in order to bring it to the market for you to consume and convert into motion doesn't seem like it's particularly energy efficient. I bike a lot, it's better for me physically and mentally, but I do wonder how the carbon impact is affected. (Of course, this ignores the fact that petroleum is a limited supply.)
    - wbl 9y ago
      The main input to agriculture energy consumption is Haber-Bosh process ammonia.
wbl 9y ago
A bike consumes much less pavement space then a car, increasing corridor capacity.
- nthcolumn 9y ago
  No it is the same. They cannot occupy the same space unless there are dedicated lanes. I guess even then it is single occupancy. A bicycle is a single space same as a car with only a driver. I wish I had the link now, sorry.
  - wbl 9y ago
    You don't have the link because it is wrong. More bicycles can pass a given plane in a certain width than cars can over a length of time. As for dedicated lanes we hand over lanes to parking.

jerry40 9y ago

It must be my poor English. I've never said that bikes are bad for environment.

nthcolumn 9y ago
No sorry - I didn't mean to imply you had. I read a study on hackernews the other day. Unfortunately I cannot remember teh link as always. Single occupancy vehicles see, much better to have everyone in one clean bus instead - bikes are bad apparently.
- ingenuous2 9y ago
  I don't know what the numbers are like, but bicycling regularly increasing calorie requirements, which would have an environmental impact. No idea how this compares to the scale of taking a bus or a solo car, but there is an increased cost. Growing food (often with fertilizers, harvest machinery, etc) in order to bring it to the market for you to consume and convert into motion doesn't seem like it's particularly energy efficient. I bike a lot, it's better for me physically and mentally, but I do wonder how the carbon impact is affected. (Of course, this ignores the fact that petroleum is a limited supply.)
  - wbl 9y ago
    The main input to agriculture energy consumption is Haber-Bosh process ammonia.

wbl 9y ago

A bike consumes much less pavement space then a car, increasing corridor capacity.

nthcolumn 9y ago
No it is the same. They cannot occupy the same space unless there are dedicated lanes. I guess even then it is single occupancy. A bicycle is a single space same as a car with only a driver. I wish I had the link now, sorry.
- wbl 9y ago
  You don't have the link because it is wrong. More bicycles can pass a given plane in a certain width than cars can over a length of time. As for dedicated lanes we hand over lanes to parking.