BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Bicycle-Fan

Listed below are comments made by Bicycle-Fan between Monday, 20th April 2009 and Monday, 27th April 2009.

«Newer
Older»

G20, Bonn and the climate of opinion 8:50pm on 27 Apr 2009 Although 0.25 degrees of warming in fifty years, is significant if measured as a global average, I doubt it can be that little. If our planet warmed 2 degrees in the last 28 years, 0.25 degrees of warming over 50 years, would mean it cooled 1.75 degrees in the 22 years prior to the 28 years in which it warmed 2 degrees. I could be wrong, but I do not recall seeing evidence of 1.75 degrees of global cooling, anytime in the last century.

Hypothetically, if Antarctica warmed from an average temperature of -20 degrees to an average temperature of -10 degrees, and precipitation increased by 20%, it could increase its ice volume while it warmed.
Hoon's electric vision: How green? 8:58pm on 24 Apr 2009 Road infrastructure does not require huge state subsides?

Surely the transport system that costs the least, provides the most amount of freedom, because we have to work the least amount of time to afford it. If rail can be seven thousand times safer than road transport, and 20 times more energy efficient, then would not maximizing rail and bicycle use, maximize freedom of movement?

Personal mobility as a majority transportation mode is not sustainable, no matter what the automotive companies push in their adverts.

The personal mobility provided by bicycles, is sustainable. If personal motorized transport, is unsustainable, they we do not need to worry about what powers it, only how to move without it.
Test driving an electric car in Motor City 8:20pm on 24 Apr 2009 Although private motor vehicles may be too dangerous to be legal, no matter what powers them, air powered vans, could be an important step towards car-free cities. It might even be possible to convert them to human power, with foot-pumps in place of pedals.

As for fuel-cells? If the linked page states where the power came from, for its cells to produce one million kw/hrs, it is not obvious, so I can only assume it was natural gas.

That company`s renewable energy and heat-pump products have vast potential to mitigate AGW, while its fuel-cell or cogeneration systems, have no potential.
Test driving an electric car in Motor City 09:50am on 22 Apr 2009 apater; #22

I actually do ride one of my many bicycles just about everywhere I go. I almost never ride the bus, but do rarely accept rides in family member`s vehicles, because they are going by anyway and it would be too rude to refuse.

mnpoor; #23

Although highly entertaining, I could not see much evidence of a city designed for bicycles, and crazy stunts have nothing to do with everyday transport.

Cities should be designed for rail and bicycle based transport.
The first Ethical Man film 09:29am on 22 Apr 2009 mnpoor; #25

It cannot be said that because a different rule change, could save ten million or one billion lives, my rule change could not possibly save half a million to one million lives every year.

I do not use any tobacco products, so would be happy if all nations realized they had banned the wrong plant, and will be even happier when the scientific method is used to abolish all true hazards and bad laws.

We cannot do much about who is making the rules. Even when we get the rare chance to vote, a tiny percentage of us get to choose each candidate and most of those people may not be in the winning party.

Hopefully here, we can have some influence on the path our leaders choose to take us.
G20, Bonn and the climate of opinion 09:05am on 22 Apr 2009 And now, we have a mass marketed private motor vehicle lobby, that hides the true carbon, financial and human costs of road transport and has us so under the spell of an open road that we are willing to pay more for electric cars, to sit in gridlock without caring about where the power comes from, and we are unable to even ask for a public transit solution.

Transport safety improvement possibilities are significant, so all the options need to be on the table.

If that is, the people vs the establishment on transport-safety-ism, then our leaders, need to act in all of our best interests. The difference between the status quo, and more rail transport, could soon be half a million lives, and eventually save a million lives a year. So our leader`s choices are too important to leave up to popularity contests.
Human rights make whale meat hard to swallow 08:10am on 22 Apr 2009 manysummits; #131-#133

Firstly I’m not sure how far this thing`s wings will take us, if we cannot leave personal contact info here. I guess you will have to create a non-profit web-site, and try to post a link.

Secondly, although the people that need to act, (those that consume the most), are likely to want population restrictions, I would hope the point of this exercise, is to find the correct solution, not merely the most popular one.

There are only two choices. Either we reduce our numbers, so each of us can pollute more, or we pollute less, to allow a slightly larger number of us, to live in balance with nature.

All we can do about population growth, is limit that growth, because all the population reduction scenarios are too horrific to consider. If our current numbers multiplied by current consumption, brings us out of balance with nature, then our only choice, is to make the consumption balanced with nature.

Our leaders already know that they need to act, so we need to focus our attention on figuring out how they should act.

Yes, we need laws, forcing higher standards, for safety and durability, but we need to decide what to build, before we build everything to last forever.

Everyone needs to know, that even if it is possible, to provide safe, earth-friendly and personal, motorized transport for all, safe and earth friendly rail-transport for all, should still be a priority. And since safe and earth friendly motorized road transport, is highly unlikely to be possible for all, building enough rail-transport to leave city streets free for bicycles, should defiantly be a priority.
Test driving an electric car in Motor City 6:36pm on 20 Apr 2009 There are 6.7 billion peoople on this planet. Thankfully there are still less than 1 billion private motor vehicles on our roads. There is more than enough traffic mayhem and gridlock today. Imagine if eveyone owned a car?

The best path to transporation equality, is more trains and bicycles, and as many car-free cities as possible.
The first Ethical Man film 6:29pm on 20 Apr 2009 mnpoor; #23

You do not really want a system with no rules or think a return to the wild west, would be an improvement, do you?

We need better rules, not fewer rules.

Extrapolate 1 death in 7 billion trips, to 150 deaths in 1 trillion trips, and compare that to today`s 1 million road deaths for every 1 trillion trips.

150, goes into 1 million, 7 thousand times. Since the safest transport system we have built, is 7 thousand times safer than road-based transport, how can it possibly be argued, that car-free cities won't affect that state of affairs much at all?
Human rights make whale meat hard to swallow 06:50am on 20 Apr 2009 Manysummits #112
(we agree on so much, it is a shame to disagree at all)

Population growth should not be number one (let alone present) on any declaration`s priority list, because;

- If the richest 30 percent of humanity consumes 70% of the resources, and emits more than 70% of the co2, then limiting our numbers but increasing the number of middle-class within the present paradigm, will only destroy more habitat and push up co2 emissions.

- Any population problems, can be solved by increasing standard of living, more and better education, and plenty of free condoms.

- The poorest 70 percent of humanity, tend to have the highest fertility rates. So any effort to curb population would affect them most, and seem like the rich `blaming` the poor, for environmental problems caused by the rich.

It is not really so much a matter of guiding spaceship earth, as changing our relationship to it, from one of a destructive parasite to one of a productive steward.

We could do that with the help of solar and wind, trains and bicycles, solar heated shelter, crop rotation, and less meat consumption. All of which are existing technologies.

The alternatives to bringing ourselves into balance with the rest of the biosphere, are too horrific to consider. The status quo, will reach the limits of a finite planet, sooner or later. So we, may as well convert to sustainable practices, so we can stop emissions and begin to measure the results of the great co2 experiment.

Bicycle-Fan

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Bicycle-Fan