Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

aviewfromthecyclepath.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 72 posts

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#11

Post by csours »

Up front: I believe that Global Climate Change is a result of human created greenhouse gasses.

That being said, this article conflates two different kinds of pollution from transport.

One category of pollution is immediately harmful to humans: lead, nitrous oxides (NOx), particulate, sulfur compounds, unburned and partially burned fuels, dust, carbon monoxide, and others like this.

Lead causes developmental issues. Particulates, NOx, dust, and partially burned fuels cause asthma and lung irritation. Sulfur compounds (in the automotive realm, primarily from diesel fuel) cause acid rain. Partially burned fuels and NOx lead to smog.

The other kind of pollution is not immediately harmful to humans: CO2. We should definitely control CO2, but we should also be very clear that these are very different things.

The first category has been greatly reduced, to the point where some cars leave behind "cleaner" air than they take in (excluding CO2). Claiming that cars are just as harmful as they ever were is incredibly disingenuous.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#12

Post by yesbut »

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…

Yeah, no kidding. The way things are today in many parts of the US make cars the only viable option.

The real alternative to cars is better public transportation. Even cities with terrible weather can have great public transportation solutions. Cars are fine for rural areas, but no reason cities and suburbs shouldn't be re-engineered for bicycles and better public transport.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#13

Post by EngineerBetter »

A typical article decrying EVs on the assumption that nothing will change.

If every house ends up with a solar array and an equivalent of a Tesla Powerwall (other brands are available) then there won't be massive demand on the grid.

You don't have to fast-charge a Leaf. You can charge it overnight.

I pay for a "100% renewable" electricity tariff. Of course not all of the energy I draw is from renewables, but it is all reinvested in renewables.

If people continue to adopt EVs, adopt renewable tariffs, and adopt self-generation and self-storage, everything will be fine.

No, an EV is not as green as a bike. But have you ever tried getting furniture from IKEA 60 miles across country on a bike, with a baby and toddler in tow?

Disclaimer: avid cyclist (6 miles a day to commute) and EV driver since 2013.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#14

Post by EngineerBetter »

EngineerBetter wrote: post #13

A typical article decrying EVs on the assumption that nothing will change. If every house ends up with a solar array and an equivalent of a Tesla Powerwall (other brands are available) then there won't be massive demand on the grid. You don't have to fast-charge a Leaf. You can charge it overnight. I pay for a "100% renewable" electricity tariff. Of course not all of the energy I draw is from renewables, but it is al…

Also, countries like Norway manage to generate most of their electricity from renewables. Just because most countries don't doesn't mean it's impossible.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#15

Post by npsimons »

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 AWD monstrosities here in the North East.

I'd link to icebike.org where they used to have pictures of people cycling in Chicago in winter and articles on suitable clothing and tires, but that domain got bought out and commercialized into some mountain bike advertising site.

ETA: Here you go: http://web.archive.org/web/19990221182354/http://www.enterac...

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#16

Post by averagewall »

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…

Cycling isn't that great. Humans are about 10% efficient at converting food energy to power. Plants are about 10% efficient at converting sunlight to food energy. So that's 1% efficiency from solar to pedals. Once you count the fossil fuels used in farming, which I forget the numbers for, I think a motorbike works out better for greenhouse gas emissions than cycling. Electric bike is probably the best.

That's assuming you don't reduce other workouts to make up for it. So riding your e-bike to the gym defeats the purpose.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#17

Post by vvanders »

sxates wrote: post #8

Though I would argue with some of the author's assumptions about carbon footprints and power grid challenges, he's right that fewer cars ultimately means a better environment and less carbon. No argument with that. However... As much as I'd love to just tell everyone to ride a bike to work, or the grocery store, or to drop off their kids, or whatever, the reality is that in most cities (especially US cities) a car is…

+1.

It's not even inside our cities, getting between our cities is a complete mess. I'm ~15mi from the nearest big(2k pop+) city. There's zero buses that run these routes.

Getting to the large metro area? I'd burn 7 hours on the train for the same drive that takes me ~2.5 hours to go 150mi. When I have to travel into the office I literally can't make a day trip of it(train arrives at 12:30pm, leaves at 1pm) if I didn't use a car.

Steps in the right direction is the key.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#18

Post by xyzzyz »

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.

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

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#19

Post by clarkbw »

The linked article about the problems with battery storage is from 2011 and battery technology continues to change at a rapid pace that couldn’t have been predicted then. The article uses lead acid as the example of cheapest batteries that still can’t scale but science wasn’t looking to solve that st the time. I’ve see several new battery options built from simpler and more available materials. Assuming storage is viable the arguments against solar and wind don’t hold as much weight.

Re: Driving a "Green car" vs cycling

#20

Post by tjr225 »

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…

In addition- bicycling is incredibly energy efficient. According to the citation in this Wikipedia article it is The most effecient means of movement available! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance

You could say bicycles and vim are my favorite tools.

Post reply on HN