Driving a "Green car" vs cycling • Hacker News Board

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#31

Post by Rebelgecko » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:46 AM UTC

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #22

One issue is that in the United States, bicycle fatality for mile traveled is around 3-10x worse than for cars. https://bicycleuniverse.info/bicycle-safety-almanac/ Given the prevalence of cars in the United States and the lack of protected bicycle lanes in many places, it is probably safer to go to where you want by car than by bike.

I'm having trouble finding a source right now, but I think I read somewhere that on average the small increase in the chance of dying on your commute is offset by the health benefits of cycling

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#32

Post by xyzzyz » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:47 AM UTC

IgorPartola wrote: post #23

xyzzyz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's call it a human assisted electric motorcycle then.

I am trying to make a distinction between fully powered vehicles and not. You could also make a distinction between fully protected vehicles (two tons of steel around you in the form of a car) and not.

Human assisted electric motorcycles are fully powered when the human is not assisting them. You are of course right that popular ICE vehicles, cars and motorcycles, are much, much heavier than humans, and so have little hope to achieve similar efficiency to humans on bicycles. However, if your constraints is to go as fast as bicycles, and be as safe as bicycles, I don't understand why you wouldn't be able to be more green. Electric engines are very, very efficient at transforming electricity to mechanical power, and solar panels are more efficient at transforming solar power to electricity than the plants are at converting solar power to edible calories.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#33

Post by Steltek » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:52 AM UTC

The environmental angle is only one part of the story for bikes vs cars.

1. Cars make you fat. Or at least, they certainly don't help. A bicycle (or transit) commute serves double duty as a commute and as exercise.

2. Cars are damned deadly. Drivers kill an absurd number of people for absurd reasons. You'd have to be exceptionally unlucky to be killed by a bicyclist.

3. Cars are expensive. For everyone. Even electric cars. Roads don't maintain themselves and asphalt's durability doesn't have a difference between a 1 ton Tesla and a 1 ton Ford. Also, you need a lot more asphalt to handle the same capacity. And that's just the public cost.

4. Cars are still expensive. Amortize out the up front cost, the interest, excise taxes, registration fees, repairs, fluids/filters/brakes. Even electric cars have a significant annual cost.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#34

Post by ianai » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:54 AM UTC

d1zzy wrote: post #28

I don't know about others but the reasons why I bike to work have nothing to do with reducing carbon or being green or being healthy, it's simply that I find it a lot more fun to get to work by bike than drive. It actually takes 20 more minutes by bike (and that's without including the immediate shower and changing clothes afterwards) but I can get a nice workout, feel refreshed and full of energy and it feels nice t…

I wish I worked where I could shower and change there.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#35

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:55 AM UTC

IgorPartola wrote: post #10

xyzzyz wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget cars. A motorcycle is probably the smallest powered vehicle that is street legal. Smallest one still will weigh at least 250lb. Moving just that mass alone, you’ve blown your energy budget vs a bicycle. Electric bicycles are much lighter than 250 lb, and are definitely street legal.

But that’s a bicycle.

It's an electric motorcycle. Fundamentally no different than this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_motorcycle#/med....

or these: https://www.google.com/search?q=board+track+motorcycle&tbm=i...

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#36

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:56 AM UTC

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #5

Wow I'm an avid cyclist (though not by the definition of this article, since I take the subway to work and back (there's no alternative)) and I had never heard of a velomobile. That is really cool.

Velomobiles are pretty common on bike paths between cities but you rarely if ever see them in inner city traffic. They don't do well in dense traffic but they are super nice for longer distances.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#37

Post by rorykoehler » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:57 AM UTC

d1zzy wrote: post #28

I don't know about others but the reasons why I bike to work have nothing to do with reducing carbon or being green or being healthy, it's simply that I find it a lot more fun to get to work by bike than drive. It actually takes 20 more minutes by bike (and that's without including the immediate shower and changing clothes afterwards) but I can get a nice workout, feel refreshed and full of energy and it feels nice t…

Same. I'm working from home atm but when I worked from an office I would use the commute for pleasure and exercise. Instead of walk & train for an hour each way I biked for 40 mins each way. Actually saves me time irregardless of commute time as if I didn't do that I would have to fit in exercise another way.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#38

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:57 AM UTC

Rebelgecko wrote: post #31

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #22

One issue is that in the United States, bicycle fatality for mile traveled is around 3-10x worse than for cars. https://bicycleuniverse.info/bicycle-safety-almanac/ Given the prevalence of cars in the United States and the lack of protected bicycle lanes in many places, it is probably safer to go to where you want by car than by bike.

I'm having trouble finding a source right now, but I think I read somewhere that on average the small increase in the chance of dying on your commute is offset by the health benefits of cycling

Maybe, but when and how you die make a big difference. The health benefits are likely to make a difference after decades of life. The risk of dying on your commute makes a more immediate impact.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#39

Post by rwfilice » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:57 AM UTC

npsimons wrote: post #15

IgorPartola wrote: post #7

No car is ever going to be as green as a bicycle. Forget cars. A motorcycle is probably the smallest powered vehicle that is street legal. Smallest one still will weigh at least 250lb. Moving just that mass alone, you’ve blown your energy budget vs a bicycle. Oh I suppose you could argue about the environmental cost of producing the extra calories consumed by the cyclist. Growing and transporting that grass fed steak…

> Oh I suppose you could argue about the environmental cost of producing the extra calories consumed by the cyclist. The human body is very efficient. I'd be extremely surprised if my 15 minute bicycle commute to work burned more than 100 calories on top of my BMR. There's just no comparison. > I guess all you valley dwellers should probably cycle to work to save the planet for us all. We will applaud you from our AW…

Get them Conti Four Seasons baby baby

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#40

Post by lkbm » Wed, Feb 07, 2018, 1:58 AM UTC

Rebelgecko wrote: post #31

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #22

One issue is that in the United States, bicycle fatality for mile traveled is around 3-10x worse than for cars. https://bicycleuniverse.info/bicycle-safety-almanac/ Given the prevalence of cars in the United States and the lack of protected bicycle lanes in many places, it is probably safer to go to where you want by car than by bike.

I'm having trouble finding a source right now, but I think I read somewhere that on average the small increase in the chance of dying on your commute is offset by the health benefits of cycling

http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d4521

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...

https://archive.org/details/pubmed-PMC3831097

This is Spain, Denmark, and England, which might be safer than the US, but still some significant results. I'm also not sure if there are other studies that found the opposite--a systematic review would be nice.