Comments on: Biking in Tandem Saves a Marriage

By: Benjamin Jones

Benjamin Jones — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:44:45 +0000

I am curious as to where you are getting this idea from, as you have cited no sources. A while a good my friend crunched the numbers out to cyclists getting above 1000mpge: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/equivalent-mpg-cycling-garage-feature-293.html

If you consider the cyclist as burning X many calories per mile or hour, you will find that cyclists use much less raw energy than do internal combustion engines. Gasoline has 36.6 kWh per US gallon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline#Energy_content). With the average commuter putting out something like 200 watts/hour (just guessing based on myself), you can see there is quite discrepancy there that cannot be made up for by inefficient food sources etc.

By: Smither

Smither — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 02:27:39 +0000

“The simple machine known as the bicycle remains the most efficient form of transportation on the planet.”

Really? Are we talking about fuel consumption per mile? Because if we are then that is simply false. I believe the most efficient form of transportation would be some spacecraft such as the shuttle or one of the saturn rockets, which travel hundreds of thousands of miles a day. Also more fuel efficient than cycling would be planes, trains and buses. Even cars may qualify. They all use less fuel to take you further and faster. Their fuel also doesn’t take nearly so much processing as ours does, or require so many different chemicals in correct proportions.

I say this despite being a big fan of cycling. A couple of years ago I went on a cycling trip from the north of scotland to the south of england, so I’m reasonably knowledgeable about using a bike as a mode of transport. It’s just a shame for the first line to be untrue.

By: Allison D

Allison D — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Does anyone know how to get a copy of this poster? I’d LOVE to hang it in my office. And perhaps we can mail a copy to the police Chief here in Tucson. ;D

By: Ben

Ben — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

More people need to be aware of this reality! Think of how cities would change if personal vehicles weren’t allowed in. This poster is great, it doesn’t even need a caption to convey its message.

By: T

Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Wow. This really puts things in perspective. I’m glad one of my resolutions was to take more public transit.

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I would like to order a poster to
Or can someone find a better quality of the picture above ?

Peter

By: nicster

nicster — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The Portland Bicycle Transportation Alliance did a similar poster several years ago. It’s available at: http://www.bta4bikes.org/gear/poster.php .

By: Mark R.

Mark R. — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I’ll make the same comment here I made on Ecogeek.org.

While that is a neat picture re the cars/bus triptych. It is CRAP, and I’ll start my rant now. I love how they cropped the image with the cars to make it look like there wasn’t enough room on the street to hold all the cars. BOGUS! LOOK CLOSE. It makes the “green” minded people look bad with this type of bogus trickery. Same kind of thing the “green” would hammer Bush on. So let me hammer away. BOGUS BOGUS BOGUS. There is at least 50 yards x 25 yards of street missing at the top of the picture with the cars you could probably fit another 20-30 cars on the street behind where the image is cut off. The image is bogus, then if you look again you can count the arches on the first floor and you will see there are 5 arches missing to the bottom left of the car photo. Which means if you overlaid the 2 images the back bumper of the bus is about even with the front bumper of the first row of cars. so your looking at about another 8 cars that will fit on that stretch of road. Bogus misleading crap advertising!!!!!

Just calling it like it is, I’ve ranted now I feel better smilies/grin.gif

PS I agree with getting the cars off the road and walking or riding a bike, and buses. but lets all vote for TRUTH IN ADVERTISING. Not misleading people with feel good LIES.

By: Gloria

Gloria — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

These pics are not meant to show how many cars can fit on the street but how much space is saved not using cars. I looked at the cropping you pointed it out but it doesn’t make a difference how or if they cropped it. To prove my point…park your car inside your living room and stand beside it. Now get rid of your car and stand in your living room. Notice the difference in space? Common sense would tell you a lot of space is saved without cars, picture or no picture. Could they have messed with it and cropped it to make the scenerio look worse….Sure! Some people will go to the extreme to prove a point. Or maybe they just had a bad photographer that couldn’t take the picture at the same spot….but neither of these possibilities changes the fact that a car takes up space. Now add all the cars up together….see what I mean?

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I have to agree with Mark. They have deceptively cropped the car image to make it look like they take up more space than they do. The cars *do* take up more space than the bus/bikes and it would be amazing if cars were banned in city centres, but it’s pretty sad that they cheated to emphasize this.