Page 6 - Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads

06-12.-2005, 03:31 PM	#76
Bob Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message news:43951954.12511500@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > > Then it is an empirical question of what pollution is saved by them > cylcing (which is small if they were catching public transport) and > what is saved or increased by the effects on other traffic. > Whichever way you argue it, a cyclist could only ever make an incremental difference to the pollution of fellow road users. Therefore cyclists reduce total pollution against the other option: driving.

06-12.-2005, 06:09 PM	#77
Graeme Dods Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On 5 Dec 2005 20:40:20 -0800, Donga wrote: > Mark Jacobson, an engineer at Stanford University in California and his > colleagues used a survey conducted in 1999 by the Environmental > Protection Agency(EPA) that made hundreds of thousands of measurements > across the US. The researchers then modelled how air pollution would > change if all petrol-burning cars were swapped for diesel cars equipped > with the latest filter technology. > > As a starting point for the models, the team measured different levels > ... The paper is here - http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/...sNOxTextnew.pdf

06-12.-2005, 07:35 PM	#78
aeek Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: canberra Posts: 758	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads Hmm, I drove today so the car could get serviced. Tommorrow, its back onto my bike for the safety of all of us on the roads.

06-12.-2005, 09:21 PM

#79

PiledHigher

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 619

Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads

Quote:

Originally Posted by dewatf

On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 16:19:47 +1100, PiledHigher
<PiledHigher.1zjwz5@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote:

>Don't forget that in most cases the companies taht are building toll
>roads are getting significant tax breaks and subsidies to build
>infrastructure (and they accept the requirements to build the mixed use
>path next to them as part of this deal). In effect the toll road is
>significantly subsidised before it is built by tax dollars.

No they aren't getting tax breaks. The NSW government ensured that
they paid hundreds of millions of dollars to the government for this
and other toll roads built in Liberal voting areas. Then they closed
down all the public roads to force drivers to use them.

The NSW ALP government profits from toll roads in Liberal seats, for
toll roads ALP seats they are prepared to invest tax payer money and
even to refund the tolls to the users (who mostly live in ALP seats).

Still the amount and usage should be made public. It may well be that
the cycleway is a good investment and more efficent to build such
infrastructure at construction rather than building it later. But you
won't be able to find that out because both the Government and the
toll company are concealing that, and the amount that drivers are
paying for it.

dewatf.

It was in the paper this week that the toll operators got given $434 million in the building of the M7 in sydney, and there are likely to b etax concessions.

06-12.-2005, 10:20 PM	#80
Resound Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "Stuart Lamble" <7d5-c-06@carousel.its.monash.edu.au> wrote in message news:slrndp9qna.hen.7d5-c-06@carousel.its.monash.edu.au... > On 2005-12-06, Resound <sacredchao@> wrote: >> (hybrids shut down the internal combustion while standing >> still or on a trailing throttle and also make use of regenerative >> braking, >> which pushes up efficiency big time) > > I seem to remember reading somewhere -- probably the Monastery -- that a > bus company set its fleet up with regenerative brakes. They saved a heap > of money as a result. Not from the fuel costs, mind you -- the savings > were in maintenance, as there was much less wear and tear on the brake > pads. The fuel savings were just gravy on top. > I'd believe that. Brake maintenance costs seems to go up as a square of vehicle mass. Possibly a cube. I've got no figures at all to support that but heavy vehicle brake costs are crazy.

06-12.-2005, 10:25 PM	#81
Resound Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4393c2e5.31056500@news.syd.ihug.com.au... > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:37:19 GMT, Euan <euan_b_uk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>Then how come I keep coming across the same cars who've overtaken me on >>arterial roads at stop lights? This is coming up behind them mind you >>as I don't filter in roads so narrow that motorists have to merge right >>to get past me. Obviously I'm not the limiting factor. > > That depends on whether the traffic is travelling at 20km or not. > > Most of the time when driving on arterial roads in Sydney in peak hour > I find that I may only average 20km/h but am not travelling at 20km/h. > > Spend a lot of time doing less at bottle necks then driving at 70 or > 80km in clear stretchs which averages out to 20kms. And a cyclist > slowing the traffic down to 20km (or less on hills) results in you > getting stuck behind them on the fast bits, and you can't merge out > because there is a stream of traffic on your right travelling at high > speed. The same things happens with buses and trucks, but cyclists > cause it too. > > And just because the cylist can catch up at the next set of lights > doesn't mean they didn't slow cars down till they got round them, > ensuring that they did get stuck for 3 or more minutes at the lights. > > dewatf. And you know how valuable quality sitting-at-the-red-light time is...

07-12.-2005, 06:51 PM	#82
dewatf Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:19:50 +1000, Tamyka Bell <t.bell@uq.edu.au> wrote: >Actually, it's difficult to merge because (1) drivers don't look far >enough ahead to spot that there is a slower moving vehicle to overtake >and therefore don't overtake until after they've had to slow down, and >(2) drivers don't allow sufficient following distance making it >difficult to find a "gap". It is difficult to merge 1) Because if you are travelling slower you need more room and time to do so 2) Peak-hour Sydney drivers don't leave adequate stopping distance (and if you try to someone just cuts into it). 3) Peak-hour Sydney drivers speed up if you try to merge infront of them. You can look ahead all you want, doesn't help you if there is a car in the right hand land. When there is less traffic, it is much easier to merge and go around a slow moving cylist. dewatf.

07-12.-2005, 06:54 PM	#83
dewatf Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:21:55 +1000, Tamyka Bell <t.bell@uq.edu.au> wrote: >Buses and trains are public transport. A bike is personal transport, >like a car. So what, we are talking about modes of travelling. >So what was your point? Oh, one type of personal transport >should be eradicated and those road users should be forced onto buses. >Okay, I'll go with that, let's choose car users. No that the amount of pollution save by a cyclist is dependant on what alternative they would use. The assumption by the cycling lobby is that they are always going to use car, not always the case. dewatf.

07-12.-2005, 06:55 PM	#84
dewatf Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 16:31:50 +1100, "Bob" <bob.mccorkle@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >"dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:43951954.12511500@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > >> >> Then it is an empirical question of what pollution is saved by them >> cylcing (which is small if they were catching public transport) and >> what is saved or increased by the effects on other traffic. >> > >Whichever way you argue it, a cyclist could only ever make an incremental >difference to the pollution of fellow road users. Therefore cyclists reduce >total pollution against the other option: driving. A cyclist yes. Thousands of cylists are quite capable of causing large differences to pollution of fellow road users, other wise what the is point of a critical mass demo? dewatf.

07-12.-2005, 07:36 PM	#85
Bob Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4396a2b0.19004218@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:21:55 +1000, Tamyka Bell <t.bell@uq.edu.au> > wrote: > >>Buses and trains are public transport. A bike is personal transport, >>like a car. > > So what, we are talking about modes of travelling. > >>So what was your point? Oh, one type of personal transport >>should be eradicated and those road users should be forced onto buses. >>Okay, I'll go with that, let's choose car users. > > No that the amount of pollution save by a cyclist is dependant on what > alternative they would use. > > The assumption by the cycling lobby is that they are always going to > use car, not always the case. > > dewatf. > but completely relevant for a comparison of car and bicycle transport

07-12.-2005, 07:36 PM	#86
Bob Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4396a2b0.19004218@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:21:55 +1000, Tamyka Bell <t.bell@uq.edu.au> > wrote: > >>Buses and trains are public transport. A bike is personal transport, >>like a car. > > So what, we are talking about modes of travelling. > >>So what was your point? Oh, one type of personal transport >>should be eradicated and those road users should be forced onto buses. >>Okay, I'll go with that, let's choose car users. > > No that the amount of pollution save by a cyclist is dependant on what > alternative they would use. > > The assumption by the cycling lobby is that they are always going to > use car, not always the case. > > dewatf. > but completely relevant for a comparison of car and bicycle transport

07-12.-2005, 07:36 PM	#87
Bob Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads "dewatf" <dewatf@anti-hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4396a2b0.19004218@news-server.bigpond.net.au... > On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 15:21:55 +1000, Tamyka Bell <t.bell@uq.edu.au> > wrote: > >>Buses and trains are public transport. A bike is personal transport, >>like a car. > > So what, we are talking about modes of travelling. > >>So what was your point? Oh, one type of personal transport >>should be eradicated and those road users should be forced onto buses. >>Okay, I'll go with that, let's choose car users. > > No that the amount of pollution save by a cyclist is dependant on what > alternative they would use. > > The assumption by the cycling lobby is that they are always going to > use car, not always the case. > > dewatf. > but completely relevant for a comparison of car and bicycle transport

07-12.-2005, 10:52 PM	#88
Terry Collins Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads dewatf wrote: > > A cyclist yes. > > Thousands of cylists are quite capable of causing large differences to > pollution of fellow road users, other wise what the is point of a > critical mass demo? That is the whole point that Critical Mass is really making. Driving a car in peak hour is so slow, that you might as well be riding a bicycle. If you think it inconveniences you, you really are not looking at all the other inconveniences that you are having on your journey home.

08-12.-2005, 07:08 AM	#89
dewatf Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:52:22 +1100, Terry Collins <newsonespam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote: >That is the whole point that Critical Mass is really making. Driving a >car in peak hour is so slow, that you might as well be riding a bicycle. Rubbish. The point critical mass is actually making is that cyclists can make driving even slower. It only serves to piss of motorists, fuels anger against cyclists and undermines what bicycle user groups are acheiving by working with government and the community. >If you think it inconveniences you, you really are not looking at all >the other inconveniences that you are having on your journey home. Yes transport is pretty stuffed in Sydney. By having a few cyclists obstruct you further isn't an improvement in them is it. dewatf.

08-12.-2005, 07:10 AM	#90
dewatf Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Off yer bike - for the sake of all of us on the roads On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 20:36:54 +1100, "Bob" <bob.mccorkle@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >but completely relevant for a comparison of car and bicycle transport The issue is traffic and commuting. Of which public transport is involved too. And the idea that cyclists should ride on busy arterial roads with 60-80km speed limits isn't going to change that. dewatf.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode