Cyclists actually increase emissions

We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic - and
'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel at
12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an increase
in pollution!


"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to increase
pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon dioxide
emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking in
stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic flow was
smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for minimising
vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On Mar 10, 1:16*pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic - and
'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel at
12mph.

But it gets worse. *By slowing down the traffic, they cause an increase
in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to increase
pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon dioxide
emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking in
stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic flow was
smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for minimising
vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic -
and 'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel
at 12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an
increase in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to
increase pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon
dioxide emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking
in stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic
flow was smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for
minimising vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

but which would involve less cost and inconvenience the least number of
people?

Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic -
and 'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel
at 12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an
increase in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to
increase pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon
dioxide emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking
in stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic
flow was smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for
minimising vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Orcutt suggested that as heavily breathing cyclists put out extra CO2
(compared to a car driver himself , not counting the car), it has been
suggested that taxing them on that basis would be a good idea, but
apparently cyclists CO2 is not the same as ordinary CO2 (shades of Doug
logic there)

"It's a question of where that CO2 comes from," Ackerman said. "CO2 is only
a pollutant when it comes from fossil fuels."

On 10/03/2013 14:17, Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic - and
'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel at
12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an increase
in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to increase
pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon dioxide
emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking in
stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic flow was
smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for minimising
vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Car design has improved by leaps & bounds over the last few decades -
push bikes however, remain in the dark ages.

--
Dave-Cyclists VORT
Motorists pay £45 billion a year in extra taxes, specifically so they
can use the roads.
Only £10 billion of this is spent of roads.

On Mar 10, 3:19*pm, Dave-Cyclists VORT
wrote:
On 10/03/2013 14:17, Squashme wrote:







On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic - and
'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel at
12mph.

But it gets worse. *By slowing down the traffic, they cause an increase
in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to increase
pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon dioxide
emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking in
stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic flow was
smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for minimising
vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Car design has improved by leaps & bounds over the last few decades -
push bikes however, remain in the dark ages.


Where they do not emit.

Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 3:19 pm, Dave-Cyclists VORT
wrote:
On 10/03/2013 14:17, Squashme wrote:







On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic
- and 'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only
travel at 12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an
increase in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to
increase pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates.
Carbon dioxide emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and
braking in stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if
traffic flow was smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum
speed for minimising vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Car design has improved by leaps & bounds over the last few decades -
push bikes however, remain in the dark ages.


Where they do not emit.

Bicycles are made in a factory. The factory uses electricity to power the
machines that make the bicycle. The electricity has been created by burning
polluting fossil fuels such as oil and coal. The materials used to
manufacture the bicycle have been mined and refined. This uses electrical
power produced in power stations by burning fossil fuels, in turn creating
more pollution. The materials are transported to the bicycle manufacturing
plant in lorries burning petrol or diesel, again creating pollution.
Finally, the bicycle is transported in lorries / delivery vans to the
bicycle shop where it is sold. If the bicycle has been manufactured in China
and is transported by ship to the UK/Europe again more polluting fuel has
been burnt to transport it thousands of miles around the world.

Even a bicycle leaves a carbon footprint.

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
news
Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 3:19 pm, Dave-Cyclists VORT
wrote:
On 10/03/2013 14:17, Squashme wrote:







On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic
- and 'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only
travel at 12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an
increase in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to
increase pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates.
Carbon dioxide emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and
braking in stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if
traffic flow was smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum
speed for minimising vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Car design has improved by leaps & bounds over the last few decades -
push bikes however, remain in the dark ages.


Where they do not emit.

Bicycles are made in a factory. The factory uses electricity to power the
machines that make the bicycle. The electricity has been created by
burning polluting fossil fuels such as oil and coal. The materials used to
manufacture the bicycle have been mined and refined. This uses electrical
power produced in power stations by burning fossil fuels, in turn creating
more pollution. The materials are transported to the bicycle manufacturing
plant in lorries burning petrol or diesel, again creating pollution.
Finally, the bicycle is transported in lorries / delivery vans to the
bicycle shop where it is sold. If the bicycle has been manufactured in
China and is transported by ship to the UK/Europe again more polluting
fuel has been burnt to transport it thousands of miles around the world.

Even a bicycle leaves a carbon footprint.

+1

Mrcheerful wrote:

[snip]

Even a bicycle leaves a carbon footprint.

It is relatively insignificant, though... I mean it must be, what with
cyclists and their machines being such an insignificant minority
anyway - so, no problem there, then.

On 10/03/2013 18:25, Squashme wrote:
On Mar 10, 3:19 pm, Dave-Cyclists VORT
wrote:
On 10/03/2013 14:17, Squashme wrote:







On Mar 10, 1:16 pm, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
We are constantly told by the psycholists that they are saving the
planet - and that they have the right to weave in & out of traffic - and
'take the lane'

All of which holds up tax paying motorists, becuse they only travel at
12mph.

But it gets worse. By slowing down the traffic, they cause an increase
in pollution!

"The TRL report said cutting speeds below 40mph was likely to increase
pollution, such as nitrogen oxides and particulates. Carbon dioxide
emissions would also go up.

This is because of the increased amount of acceleration and braking in
stop-start driving, although these could be reduced if traffic flow was
smoothed. The report said 40mph was the optimum speed for minimising
vehicle emissions and pollution".

So, simple solution to emission levels - get rid of the cyclists.

So, simple solution to emission levels - better car design.

Car design has improved by leaps & bounds over the last few decades -
push bikes however, remain in the dark ages.


Where they do not emit.

But they cause emissions. Please pay attention.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."