waitrose free hire of bike trailers

[David Martin]

On Feb 12, 4:45 pm, JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
> Clive George wrote:
> > "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> Clive George wrote:
> >>> "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>news:[email protected]...
> >>>> Clive George wrote:
>
> >>>>> "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>> POHB wrote:
> >>>>>>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> What would be the point of going to the tip (or recycling point)
> >>>>>>>> on a
> >>>>>>>> bicycle? Come to that, what be the point in going there as a
> >>>>>>>> pedestrian?
>
> >>>>>>> To avoid the huge queue of cars and vans that snakes out of the site
> >>>>>>> and down the road at weekends, same as there is at Waitrose.
>
> >>>>>> Well, yes... but limited to dumping what one can lift, carry,
> >>>>>> drag, etc.
> >>>>>> You might as well just drop it in a litter bin.
>
> >>>>> You don't have a clue how much people can carry, do you - whether
> >>>>> it be on foot or on a human-powered vehicle.
>
> >>>> I know how much *I* can carry - and how much I am prepared to
> >>>> countenance my family carrying. For the amounts involved, we would
> >>>> not go the recycling centre on foot (it's way too far for a start).
> >>>> We could, of course, carry even less on a bicycle than on foot.
>
> >>> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
> >>> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
> >>> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
> >>> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
> >>> effect...
> >> I see.
> >> So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
> > Blimey, you're being a bit bizarre today. Why choose to assume that the
> > rules of the road aren't being followed?
>
> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
> bikes? I can carry when walking more than I could balance - safely - on
> a bike.
>
> But so what? The facilities we are discussing were created in order that
> people can bring to them the household waste that they cannot put in the
> bin or the recycling box and which might otherwise have to be collected
> (whether FOC in the case of enlightened councils or subject to a charge
> in the case of the poorer ones). That means (in the main) larger and
> more bulky items which are convenient to carry in a motor vehicle.

So. I posted a photograph of a bed which I took to th elocal dump by
bicycle. Are you seriously suggesting I could have carried it there
more easily on foot?

Or the builders bag (cubic meter) of hedge clippings.

Or on the way home from the supermarket, 6 crates of groceries?

Have you forgotten to take your medication today?

...d

 

[JNugent]

David Martin wrote:

> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:

>> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
>> bikes? I can carry when walking more than I could balance - safely - on
>> a bike.
>> But so what? The facilities we are discussing were created in order that
>> people can bring to them the household waste that they cannot put in the
>> bin or the recycling box and which might otherwise have to be collected
>> (whether FOC in the case of enlightened councils or subject to a charge
>> in the case of the poorer ones). That means (in the main) larger and
>> more bulky items which are convenient to carry in a motor vehicle.

> So. I posted a photograph of a bed which I took to th elocal dump by
> bicycle. Are you seriously suggesting I could have carried it there
> more easily on foot?

You didn't "carry" it there by bicycle if the photo was of relevance.
You towed it there on a trailer, pulled by a bicycle. In total, the
articulated vehicle had at least four wheels. You could not have loaded
that bed onto that bike.

> Or the builders bag (cubic meter) of hedge clippings.
> Or on the way home from the supermarket, 6 crates of groceries?
> Have you forgotten to take your medication today?

I haven't forgotten that you did not show a picture of a bicycle but of
something altogether different (heck, I could tow a load heavier than
that by hand with that trailer).

 

[Clive George]

"JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> David Martin wrote:
>
>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
>>> bikes? I can carry when walking more than I could balance - safely - on
>>> a bike.
>>> But so what? The facilities we are discussing were created in order that
>>> people can bring to them the household waste that they cannot put in the
>>> bin or the recycling box and which might otherwise have to be collected
>>> (whether FOC in the case of enlightened councils or subject to a charge
>>> in the case of the poorer ones). That means (in the main) larger and
>>> more bulky items which are convenient to carry in a motor vehicle.
>
>> So. I posted a photograph of a bed which I took to th elocal dump by
>> bicycle. Are you seriously suggesting I could have carried it there
>> more easily on foot?
>
> You didn't "carry" it there by bicycle if the photo was of relevance. You
> towed it there on a trailer, pulled by a bicycle. In total, the
> articulated vehicle had at least four wheels. You could not have loaded
> that bed onto that bike.
>
>> Or the builders bag (cubic meter) of hedge clippings.
>> Or on the way home from the supermarket, 6 crates of groceries?
>> Have you forgotten to take your medication today?
>
> I haven't forgotten that you did not show a picture of a bicycle but of
> something altogether different (heck, I could tow a load heavier than that
> by hand with that trailer).

Try reading the thread title.

Is it cheating to use a trailer to take stuff to the tip?

 

[POHB]

On 12 Feb, 15:43, JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
> Clive George wrote:
> > "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> POHB wrote:
> >>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> What would be the point of going to the tip (or recycling point) on a
> >>>> bicycle? Come to that, what be the point in going there as a
> >>>> pedestrian?
> >>> To avoid the huge queue of cars and vans that snakes out of the site
> >>> and down the road at weekends, same as there is at Waitrose.
> >> Well, yes... but limited to dumping what one can lift, carry, drag, etc.
> >> You might as well just drop it in a litter bin.
> > You don't have a clue how much people can carry, do you - whether it be
> > on foot or on a human-powered vehicle.
>
> I know how much *I* can carry - and how much I am prepared to
> countenance my family carrying. For the amounts involved, we would not
> go the recycling centre on foot (it's way too far for a start). We
> could, of course, carry even less on a bicycle than on foot.
>
> If you've been successful in completing the Charles Atlas correspondence
> course, congratulations. I often wondered who replied to those adverts.

The dump is a couple of miles away, I can carry stuff to the dump much
faster on my bike than I can on foot. At busy times I can get there,
in and out again much faster on a bike than in a car. I've even been
known to make two trips by bike rather than sit feeling grumpy in a
queue in the car with one big load.

 

[JNugent]

POHB wrote:

> On 12 Feb, 15:43, JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Clive George wrote:
>>> "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> POHB wrote:
>>>>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>> What would be the point of going to the tip (or recycling point) on a
>>>>>> bicycle? Come to that, what be the point in going there as a
>>>>>> pedestrian?

>>>>> To avoid the huge queue of cars and vans that snakes out of the site
>>>>> and down the road at weekends, same as there is at Waitrose.

>>>> Well, yes... but limited to dumping what one can lift, carry, drag, etc.
>>>> You might as well just drop it in a litter bin.

>>> You don't have a clue how much people can carry, do you - whether it be
>>> on foot or on a human-powered vehicle.

>> I know how much *I* can carry - and how much I am prepared to
>> countenance my family carrying. For the amounts involved, we would not
>> go the recycling centre on foot (it's way too far for a start). We
>> could, of course, carry even less on a bicycle than on foot.

>> If you've been successful in completing the Charles Atlas correspondence
>> course, congratulations. I often wondered who replied to those adverts.

> The dump is a couple of miles away, I can carry stuff to the dump much
> faster on my bike than I can on foot. At busy times I can get there,
> in and out again much faster on a bike than in a car. I've even been
> known to make two trips by bike rather than sit feeling grumpy in a
> queue in the car with one big load.

I dare say all of that is correct.

It's all going to depend on what is being dumped - and apparently also
on whether the council allows bicycles (or, pace certain other posters,
bicycles-and-trailers) into the compound.

 

[Mark T]

JNugent writtificated

>>>> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
>>>> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
>>>> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
>>>> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
>>>> effect...
>
>>> I see.
>>> So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
>
>> Blimey, you're being a bit bizarre today. Why choose to assume that the
>> rules of the road aren't being followed?
>
> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
> bikes?

Not when they're being pushed:

<www.psywarrior.com/BicycleSuppliesTrail.jpg>

 

[Mark T]

JNugent writtificated

>> Y'know, you don't exactly make yourself look good by asking such a
>> stupid question.
>
> When I asked "What would be the point...", I assumed that there might be
> some practical point to it (other than dutifully throwing the control
> switch of an electric blanket into the "electricals" container).
>
> But you and others have confirmed that there is no real practical point
> to it (as opposed to using the dustbin or the recycling container) -
> it's just a fun run.

Some of the stuff at the at the recycling centre goes straight to landfill.
The contents of some other skips, such as electrical items, don't go
straight to landfill.

 

[JNugent]

Mark T wrote:
> JNugent writtificated
>
>>>>> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
>>>>> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
>>>>> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
>>>>> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
>>>>> effect...
>>>> I see.
>>>> So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
>>> Blimey, you're being a bit bizarre today. Why choose to assume that the
>>> rules of the road aren't being followed?
>> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
>> bikes?
>
> Not when they're being pushed:
>
> <www.psywarrior.com/BicycleSuppliesTrail.jpg>

Well, that's different (and OK).

 

[JNugent]

Mark T wrote:
> JNugent writtificated
>
>>> Y'know, you don't exactly make yourself look good by asking such a
>>> stupid question.
>> When I asked "What would be the point...", I assumed that there might be
>> some practical point to it (other than dutifully throwing the control
>> switch of an electric blanket into the "electricals" container).
>>
>> But you and others have confirmed that there is no real practical point
>> to it (as opposed to using the dustbin or the recycling container) -
>> it's just a fun run.
>
> Some of the stuff at the at the recycling centre goes straight to landfill.

The majority of it does. It might just as well go in the bin, or be
collected by the "bulky rubbish" team. We only take to the tip things
which are too big for the bin and yet small enough for the car boot.

> The contents of some other skips, such as electrical items, don't go
> straight to landfill.

What happens to them?

I'm interested.

It may be possible to usefully "break" TV sets, PCs and monitirs, but I
still think that small (and quite useless) items like old TV remotes,
hairdryers and electric blanket control units go into landfill.

 

[JNugent]

Clive George wrote:
> "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> David Martin wrote:
>>
>>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
>>>> bikes? I can carry when walking more than I could balance - safely - on
>>>> a bike.
>>>> But so what? The facilities we are discussing were created in order
>>>> that
>>>> people can bring to them the household waste that they cannot put in
>>>> the
>>>> bin or the recycling box and which might otherwise have to be collected
>>>> (whether FOC in the case of enlightened councils or subject to a charge
>>>> in the case of the poorer ones). That means (in the main) larger and
>>>> more bulky items which are convenient to carry in a motor vehicle.
>>
>>> So. I posted a photograph of a bed which I took to th elocal dump by
>>> bicycle. Are you seriously suggesting I could have carried it there
>>> more easily on foot?
>>
>> You didn't "carry" it there by bicycle if the photo was of relevance.
>> You towed it there on a trailer, pulled by a bicycle. In total, the
>> articulated vehicle had at least four wheels. You could not have
>> loaded that bed onto that bike.
>>
>>> Or the builders bag (cubic meter) of hedge clippings.
>>> Or on the way home from the supermarket, 6 crates of groceries?
>>> Have you forgotten to take your medication today?
>>
>> I haven't forgotten that you did not show a picture of a bicycle but
>> of something altogether different (heck, I could tow a load heavier
>> than that by hand with that trailer).
>
> Try reading the thread title.
>
> Is it cheating to use a trailer to take stuff to the tip?

Not at all.

But the resultant combination is not a bicycle, any more than an
articulated lorry is a tractor unit.

 

[David Hansen]

On 12 Feb 2008 18:26:26 GMT someone who may be Mark T
<pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>
wrote this:-

>Some of the stuff at the at the recycling centre goes straight to landfill.

Indeed. The most recent time I used one we separated "good" wood
from things like chipboard. The latter went to landfill.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

 

[David Martin]

On Feb 13, 12:00 am, JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
> Clive George wrote:
> > "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> David Martin wrote:
>
> >>> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>> You surprise me. Do the rules about overloading a vehicle not apply to
> >>>> bikes? I can carry when walking more than I could balance - safely - on
> >>>> a bike.
> >>>> But so what? The facilities we are discussing were created in order
> >>>> that
> >>>> people can bring to them the household waste that they cannot put in
> >>>> the
> >>>> bin or the recycling box and which might otherwise have to be collected
> >>>> (whether FOC in the case of enlightened councils or subject to a charge
> >>>> in the case of the poorer ones). That means (in the main) larger and
> >>>> more bulky items which are convenient to carry in a motor vehicle.
>
> >>> So. I posted a photograph of a bed which I took to th elocal dump by
> >>> bicycle. Are you seriously suggesting I could have carried it there
> >>> more easily on foot?
>
> >> You didn't "carry" it there by bicycle if the photo was of relevance.
> >> You towed it there on a trailer, pulled by a bicycle. In total, the
> >> articulated vehicle had at least four wheels. You could not have
> >> loaded that bed onto that bike.
>
> >>> Or the builders bag (cubic meter) of hedge clippings.
> >>> Or on the way home from the supermarket, 6 crates of groceries?
> >>> Have you forgotten to take your medication today?
>
> >> I haven't forgotten that you did not show a picture of a bicycle but
> >> of something altogether different (heck, I could tow a load heavier
> >> than that by hand with that trailer).
>
> > Try reading the thread title.
>
> > Is it cheating to use a trailer to take stuff to the tip?
>
> Not at all.
>
> But the resultant combination is not a bicycle, any more than an
> articulated lorry is a tractor unit.

Would you expect a carrier to physically hold the goods he carries?
You are being silly. It is no less carrying by bicycle than using
panniers, or adding a roofrack is carrying by car.

Too small minded to admit when you are wrong?

...d

 

[Dave Larrington]

In news:[email protected],
JNugent <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

>> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
>> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
>> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
>> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
>> effect...
>
> I see.
>
> So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.

Vietnam? Rules of the road?

(Falls about laughing)

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Nicht in die laufende Trommel greifen.

 

[JNugent]

Dave Larrington wrote:
> In news:[email protected],
> JNugent <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
>>> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
>>> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
>>> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
>>> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
>>> effect...
>> I see.
>>
>> So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
>
> Vietnam? Rules of the road?
>
> (Falls about laughing)

I wouldn't expect them to be followed there either. Here is another
matter (or should be).

 

[Mark McNeill]

Response to Dave Larrington
> >> Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
> >> than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
> >> given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
> >> takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
> >> effect...
> >
> > I see.
> >
> > So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
>
> Vietnam? Rules of the road?
>
> (Falls about laughing)


The original reference, m'lud, was to the Vietcong: I shall later be
calling witnesses to rebut the contention that the NLF and the broader
grouping of North Vietnamese armed forces were scrupulous in their
observation of traffic regulations on the Ho Chi Minh trail.


IOW, did JNugent lose the plot a little more than usual last night?


--
Mark, UK
If a man would register all his opinions upon love, politics, religion,
learning, etc., beginning from his youth and so go on to old age, what a
bundle of inconsistencies and contradictions would appear at last!

 

[Roger Thorpe]

Mark McNeill wrote:

> Response to Dave Larrington
>
>>>>Well, people less disabled than you can carry rather more on a bike
>>>>than on foot - should be obvious to all but the most blinkered that
>>>>given a suitable surface, it's going to be the case, since the bike
>>>>takes the weight. I believe the vietcong demonstrated it to great
>>>>effect...
>>>
>>>I see.
>>>
>>>So they didn't follow the rules of the road, either.
>>
>>Vietnam? Rules of the road?
>>
>>(Falls about laughing)
>
>
>
> The original reference, m'lud, was to the Vietcong: I shall later be
> calling witnesses to rebut the contention that the NLF and the broader
> grouping of North Vietnamese armed forces were scrupulous in their
> observation of traffic regulations on the Ho Chi Minh trail.
>
>
> IOW, did JNugent lose the plot a little more than usual last night?
>
>
I think that he was trying to demonstrate that a non-cyclist can't say
much about cycling, in order to prove that as a non-motorist I can have
nothing to say about driving.
That's my theory.
Roger thorpe

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, JNugent
[email protected] says...
> David Hansen wrote:
>
> > Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote this:
>
> >> In Walsall, they don't allow you into our local dump on bicycle, on
> >> Health & Safety grounds.
>
> > What does your local councillor say when you point out that this is
> > at variance with the words the council undoubtedly has about
> > encouraging cycling?
>
> What would be the point of going to the tip (or recycling point) on a
> bicycle? Come to that, what be the point in going there as a pedestrian?
>
>
To recycle stuff that they don't take at kerbside collection or the
local recycling points? Just guessing. If I have some bottles to
recycle I often take them on my bike to the recycling point at a nearby
supermarket - I can carry almost a green box's worth in a pair of large
panniers.

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, JNugent
[email protected] says...

> You didn't "carry" it there by bicycle if the photo was of relevance.
> You towed it there on a trailer, pulled by a bicycle. In total, the
> articulated vehicle had at least four wheels. You could not have loaded
> that bed onto that bike.
>
The other day my car broke, so I went home, loaded a bike with some
tools (2 ton trolley jack, axle stands, socket set, impact driver, a
couple of hammers, various other tools) then rode it back and fixed the
car. Now at a pinch I probably could have carried that stuff in a big
rucksack, or on a trolley, but it would have been a long couple of miles
back to the car and entirely impractical over a greater distance. The
bike handled it easily, and was useful for a quick trip to Halfords to
get parts.

 

[Colin]

JNugent wrote:

>>>
>>> What would be the point of going to the tip (or recycling point) on a
>>> bicycle? Come to that, what be the point in going there as a pedestrian?

>
> Why not just leave it out for the recycling collection or put in the
> bin? The stuff you "tip" goes to the same place as the contents of th bin.

<snip>

> But you and others have confirmed that there is no real practical point
> to it (as opposed to using the dustbin or the recycling container) -
> it's just a fun run.

Our council does not yet collect plastics for recycling from the
doorstep. Our nearest plastics recycling point is 3/4 of a mile away,
and as squashed milk containers neither take up much room or weight, can
be successfully transported in panniers or the cycle trailer for larger
quantities. Just because *you* can see no practical reason to go to the
recycling center by bike, it does not follow there is *no* practical
reason to go.

--
Colin

 

[Mark T]

JNugent writtificated

> I dare say all of that is correct.
>
> It's all going to depend <snip>

I'm confused. What is going to depend?