On Sun, 20 Oct 2019 23:03:49 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 19/10/2019 18:39, MrCheerful wrote:

Far more fuel is wasted during the holdups caused by cyclists, not to
mention the additional pollution.

Well, there is a trite answer to this:

Compared to cars of 50 years ago, modern cars, etc...
[courtesy J Nugent]


Alternatively:

You need to quantify it before you can state it as fact. While the
driver sitting behind the cyclist must use more fuel than if the
cyclist
was not there (and will see a peak in instantaneous consumption), it
wouldn't be significant enough for the driver to notice when looking at
the journey average.

But there is a flaw in the argument. The bicycle user is also doing a
journey. If that person was to do their journey by car instead, then
two
cars would be consuming and polluting. The notion falls over.

.....

As a supplementary, the load of the headlamps is roughly similar to the
effect on rolling resistance of 100kg of weight in the car.

For instance, my previous car only came with a can of foam so when I
put
a wheel, jack and brace in the boot, I added something like 30kg. This
would have increased rolling resistance by 3N which converts to 1 litre
per 2000 miles (and is extra to the additional KE that gets dissipated
through the brakes). I wouldn't be able to isolate that contribution
even though I keep a spreadsheet and know it is present.


Please! You're presenting a logical argument based on facts; this is a NG
for personal bickering dog-walking anecdotes and fanatical attention to
the level of fluid in screenwash bottles.


--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.