22 Sept. No petrol day

[Flying Echidna]

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:30:39 +1000, "Resound"
<[email protected]> wrote in aus.bicycle:

>
>If you had to expend as much energy to extract it as you get from it, it
>wouldn't be worth a thing. You'd be running at a loss from the start.

Pumping water up the snowy and Shoalhaven hydro schemes at night only
recovers 80% of the enery it takes to pump but there are other
benefits.

Its the convenient way of storing energy that makes it worth while


Regards
Prickles

 

[John Blake]

In message id <[email protected]> on Fri,
16 Sep 2005 15:10:29 +1000, LotteBum wrote in aus.bicycle :

>Perfect example: My mum rode her bike to work on a daily basis until
>just days before she had my sister and I. I was born in December, my
>sister in February. Those are hardly warm months over there.

Twins with at least 33 days in between? What happened - was Mum too
posh to push a second time?

 

[Plodder]

"vaudegiant" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>
> Whilst it is obviously better if people only arm themselves with a
> vehicle that absolutely suits their needs (rather than wants), and I
> appreciate that drivers are basically the enemy, than are many aspects of
> peoples' lifestyle choices that need to be looked at, not just the
> soft-target of 4WD owners. In many instances, the order of magnitude b/w
> a "sensible" car and a 4WD in terms of envronmental impact is not as
> great as other comparisons, such as types and uses of home energy
> systems, aircraft travel, food consumption etc. Having a go at urban
> 4WDers just for the sake of it is intellectually lazy, and in some cases
> plainly incorrect.
>
> Pat
>

Agreed, although I'm not sure about the "...drivers are basically the enemy"
bit. I drive too. However, at the risk of overgeneralising, often someone
who drives an oversized vehicle for their needs is someone who is less
likely to consider environmental impacts in general. The use of a
Landcruiser to ferry the kids to school or to drive to the office can, I
think, provide a fair indication that the driver is making less of an
environmental effort than many others.

I'm very reluctant to talk in absolutes. I think the thread here is about
general tendencies and is not intended to be 100% correct. The discussion is
also centred around bikes vs cars, so other aspects becomes less relevent to
*this* discussion (not less relevent overall).

I wouldn't trot around assuming everyone driving a fuel-guzzler is
environmentally irresponsible any more thn I'd laud everyone who rides a
bike for their green footprint. I try to bear in mind that this is
essentially a chat forum, not an academic debate...

Cheers,

Frank

 

[aeek]

"
I wouldn't trot around assuming everyone driving a fuel-guzzler is
environmentally irresponsible any more thn I'd laud everyone who rides a
bike for their green footprint. I try to bear in mind that this is
essentially a chat forum, not an academic debate...

Braking on descents is a waste of energy, unGreen.
Crashing is an extreme form of braking, extremely unGreen.

 

[TimC]

On 2005-09-18, aeek (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> Plodder Wrote:
>> "
>> I wouldn't trot around assuming everyone driving a fuel-guzzler is
>> environmentally irresponsible any more thn I'd laud everyone who rides
>> a
>> bike for their green footprint. I try to bear in mind that this is
>> essentially a chat forum, not an academic debate...
>
> Braking on descents is a waste of energy, unGreen.
> Crashing is an extreme form of braking, extremely unGreen.

Very red in fact. But red is good, for it represents the communist
state.

;P

--
TimC
Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.

 

[Resound]

"TimC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2005-09-18, aeek (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>
>> Plodder Wrote:
>>> "
>>> I wouldn't trot around assuming everyone driving a fuel-guzzler is
>>> environmentally irresponsible any more thn I'd laud everyone who rides
>>> a
>>> bike for their green footprint. I try to bear in mind that this is
>>> essentially a chat forum, not an academic debate...
>>
>> Braking on descents is a waste of energy, unGreen.
>> Crashing is an extreme form of braking, extremely unGreen.
>
> Very red in fact. But red is good, for it represents the communist
> state.
>
All natural ingredients, biodegradable, fabulous as a mixer with tequila,
what's not to like?

 

[TimC]

On 2005-09-18, Resound (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
> "TimC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 2005-09-18, aeek (aka Bruce)
>> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>>> Braking on descents is a waste of energy, unGreen.
>>> Crashing is an extreme form of braking, extremely unGreen.
>>
>> Very red in fact. But red is good, for it represents the communist
>> state.
>>
> All natural ingredients, biodegradable, fabulous as a mixer with tequila,
> what's not to like?

I'm not having your tequila.

--
TimC
My other car is a cdr

 

[LotteBum]

John Blake wrote:

Twins with at least 33 days in between? What happened - was Mum too
posh to push a second time?

Haha, no we're not twins. I meant um... respectively.

But mum was actually a bit too posh to push when she had me - hence I ended up hearing impaired.

LotteDeafBum

 

[Tamyka Bell]

LotteBum wrote:
>
> John Blake wrote:
>
> Twins with at least 33 days in between? What happened - was Mum too
> posh to push a second time?
>
> Haha, no we're not twins. I meant um... respectively.
>
> But mum was actually a bit too posh to push when she had me - hence I
> ended up hearing impaired.
>
> LotteDeafBum
>
> --
> LotteBum

You are such a liar. The reason you're hearing impaired is from all
those "bleeps"
used to cover your swearing. Gutter mouth, goes with the rest of you.

Tam

 

[Theo Bekkers]

Resound wrote:

> Then, nasty as it sounds, she's not doing something effectively. The
> largest car my family had when I was a kid was a Datsun 180B station
> wagon and we certainly didn't suffer.

Were there compulsory baby capsules then? We took our children home from the
hospital in a VW beetle with my wife holding the baby in her arms. Show me
how you would put two legally required baby capsules in the back of a 180B
and still be able to drive it. I suspect the drivers seat will be hard up
against the steering wheel.

> Trying to say that someone NEEDS a two tonne (or near as dammit)
> monster like an Adventra simply because they have children is a crock.

I agree with that.

> In short, bollarks.

You're entitled to that opinion. I'm sure you will be pleased to hear that
her husband, my son, is considering trading his Mercedes C180 in on an
ML350.

Theo

 

[Resound]

Resound wrote:

> Then, nasty as it sounds, she's not doing something effectively. The
> largest car my family had when I was a kid was a Datsun 180B station
> wagon and we certainly didn't suffer.

Were there compulsory baby capsules then? We took our children home from the
hospital in a VW beetle with my wife holding the baby in her arms. Show me
how you would put two legally required baby capsules in the back of a 180B
and still be able to drive it. I suspect the drivers seat will be hard up
against the steering wheel.

> Trying to say that someone NEEDS a two tonne (or near as dammit)
> monster like an Adventra simply because they have children is a crock.

I agree with that.

> In short, bollarks.

You're entitled to that opinion. I'm sure you will be pleased to hear that
her husband, my son, is considering trading his Mercedes C180 in on an
ML350.

Theo

Oh absolutely. Does he need it to carry an infant or does he feel that the C180 simply lacks presence in the supermarket car park?

 

[dtmeister]

Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> You're entitled to that opinion. I'm sure you will be pleased to hear that
> her husband, my son, is considering trading his Mercedes C180 in on an
> ML350.

Send him this link.

http://afr.com/articles/2004/04/01/1080544625539.html

Ask him which bits he relates to.

Oh, and where does he park? I've got some "I'm Changing The Climate - Ask
Me How!" bumper stickers still kicking around.

--

..dt
1996 Diamond Back 'Expert Tg' Roadie (7spd DT shifters, favourite bike!)
2004 Trek 2300 Roadie (9spd Ultegra)
2003 DiamondBack 'Criterium' Roadie (8spd Sora, rain bike)

 

[Theo Bekkers]

dtmeister wrote:
> Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> You're entitled to that opinion. I'm sure you will be pleased to
>> hear that her husband, my son, is considering trading his Mercedes
>> C180 in on an ML350.
>
> Send him this link.
>
> http://afr.com/articles/2004/04/01/1080544625539.html

You're comparing Ford technology to Mercedes technology?

> Ask him which bits he relates to.
>
> Oh, and where does he park? I've got some "I'm Changing The Climate -
> Ask Me How!" bumper stickers still kicking around.

Surely he is entitled to buy the vehicle he wants and can afford. He also
has two quite nice bicycles, one with a dual kiddie trailer. How much did
you spend on your bicycle(s). and how do you cost-jusify that?

Theo

Theo

 

[TimC]

On 2005-09-19, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> dtmeister wrote:
>> Oh, and where does he park? I've got some "I'm Changing The Climate -
>> Ask Me How!" bumper stickers still kicking around.
>
> Surely he is entitled to buy the vehicle he wants and can afford.

Well actually, in a perfect world, he would be fully paying for the
use of the vehicle, instead of having it subsidised by current and
future generations.

I doubt it would then be so affordable to him then.

Of course, I believe my own footprint is still about 5 times greater
than what is available for me on this earth, so I can't really point a
finger here.

I still consider his driving "theft" from said future generations, to
the answer to your statement/question "Surely he is entitled to buy
the vehicle he wants and can afford" is surely "no"?



When will computers be sold with costs including disposal of the
computer? I somehow fear what will become of those 5 monitors parked
outside someone's house on council rubbish day last week.

--
TimC
Oooh, Look! Shiny New Thing! -- TimC

 

[PiledHigher]

Oh absolutely. Does he need it to carry an infant or does he feel that the C180 simply lacks presence in the supermarket car park?

With that much to compensate for I surprised that he is capable of making a baby!

 

[dtmeister]

Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
> dtmeister wrote:
>> Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> You're entitled to that opinion. I'm sure you will be pleased to
>>> hear that her husband, my son, is considering trading his Mercedes
>>> C180 in on an ML350.
>>
>> Send him this link.
>>
>> http://afr.com/articles/2004/04/01/1080544625539.html
>
> You're comparing Ford technology to Mercedes technology?

Actually, I was thinking more about the points on the psychology
behind the choice..



>> Oh, and where does he park? I've got some "I'm Changing The Climate -
>> Ask Me How!" bumper stickers still kicking around.
>
> Surely he is entitled to buy the vehicle he wants and can afford. He also
> has two quite nice bicycles, one with a dual kiddie trailer. How much did
> you spend on your bicycle(s). and how do you cost-jusify that?

I don't care how/why/if he can justify the cost. I was wondering if he had
any thoughts regarding the social and environmental impact of this particular
choice?

--
..dt
1996 Diamond Back 'Expert Tg' Roadie (7spd DT shifters, favourite bike!)
2004 Trek 2300 Roadie (9spd Ultegra)
2003 DiamondBack 'Criterium' Roadie (8spd Sora, rain bike)

 

[Peka]

> Surely he is entitled to buy the vehicle he wants and can afford. He also
> has two quite nice bicycles, one with a dual kiddie trailer. How much did
> you spend on your bicycle(s). and how do you cost-jusify that?

I don't care how/why/if he can justify the cost. I was wondering if he had
any thoughts regarding the social and environmental impact of this particular
choice?

I'd much rather him be in a ML320 than a Prado/Cruiser, since he obviously doesn't need/want the 4wd capabilities.

 

[Resound]

I'd much rather him be in a ML320 than a Prado/Cruiser, since he obviously doesn't need/want the 4wd capabilities.

By the same token, I'd MUCH rather be in an E320 than am ML320.

 

[sinus]

I still consider his driving "theft" from said future generations

But maybe he is taking responsiblity for supporting a future generation. Swapping a credit for a debit. Really just depends on his need - it's not as if we are talking about a V8.

Should I get annoyed every time I hear about single people who don't drive two door hatches? Those bloody V8 commodores, falcons and 4WD's that serve no point than to be loud and take off fast at lights p*ss me off more. Mostly because they are dangerous.

That article quoted was most interesting because of the safety/attitude slant. It's like the next step backward from the old Volvo driver syndrome is happening before our eyes.

 

[Peka]

By the same token, I'd MUCH rather be in an E320 than am ML320.

Granted, but you have to give credit to the likes of Merc & BMW (or whoever it was) for kickstarting a range of safer 'SUV' like vehicles designed primarily for passengers, rather than being a truck-based 4wd. These things actually steer and stop, maybe (almost?) as well as a traditional passenger vehicle, with all the active and passive safety features.