Motorcycle Forums banner
21 - 40 of 135 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Electric bikes wouldn't help the environment since the vast majority of our power comes from fossil fuel burning plants!

Even Hydro isn't very 'green'. Solar and wind require HUGE areas, are unreliable, and only work well in very small areas of the planet (and could never supply much power even if the planet were covered with them).

Nuclear would be totally green if we could find a way to dispose of it. (I say shoot it into to sun where it belongs. In the near future, we'll be able to do that completely safely). So..... GO NUCLEAR!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Re: agree in principle, but you math doesn't add up

Gasoline engines burn fuel at a ratio of 14:1 air/fuel - you're burning 14 units of air with every unit of gas. Therefore, that 27,060 pounds of greenhouse gas needs to be divided again, by 14. That leads to a more reasonable sounding 322.15 gallons of gas, or 4832 miles driven per year at your 15 MPG. Since the average miles driven per year is more like 15,000 it seems that a third of each gallon of gasoline becomes particulate crap, smog, etc.

As for how accurate THAT figure is, I have no idea - but it seems a lot more likely. And SUVs suck no matter what - the number of people who live with large families on otherwise impassable logging trails is minimal compared to the number of pinheads wheeling aimlessly through the mall parking lot in their new Hummer H2s, Escalades, and Excursions. Arseholes...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
All this whining about motor vehicles is a crock. Y'all are forgetting one huge source of carbon dioxide: critters. Collectively, our fauna produce a vast amount of carbon dioxide, and, but for a few exceptions like race horses, hunting dogs, and T-bones-to-be, the fuzz-covered oxygen burners contribute nothing to humanity in exchange for all the CO2 they spew into our atmosphere.



Thus I propose the Surplus Wildlife Carbon Credit Program. The basic idea is that each new motor vehicle sold would be burdened with a requirement to reduce the overall rate of CO2 production by eliminating other, uh, mobile sources. In other words, the CO2 emission rate of the vehicle would be exceeded by that of its roadkill.



By my calculations, mammalian respiration produces roughly 15 grams of CO2 per day per kilogram of body weight. With a typical car emitting something like 10 kilograms per day, it sounds hopeless, right? But wait: A one-kilogram squirrel produces 15 grams a day. Flatten 667 of them--one furry lump of pestilence a week for 13 years--and you’ve canceled out the CO2 emissions from a Honda Accord being driven 10,000 miles a year. Aim a bit higher, poodles for example, and a Corvette meets its quota with one a month for just six years. Bury your bumper in Bambi a few times a year, and that Mercedes will fulfill its environmental obligation before the lease expires. Nail one full-grown bison with your ‘Burb, and you’re set for life.



There are no intractable problems, only unimaginative problem solvers. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
Re: agree in principle, but you math doesn't add up

Not all of us live in or even rear an urban environment. And there will NEVER be enough e-jobs for most people (even if we all had the training). The majority of people will always have to physically work at to some degree (at least until robots learn to think and completely take over). Pleasure riding would certainly be considered illogical and wasteful in such a world. As a pilot, I shudder to think of it.

Kind-of like the Matrix.....Hey, maybe we're all in it now and this is all......yaah
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Jeez, must have been a slow news day... the typical, numbnuts argument against cars, SUVs, whatever... unfortunately, in the unabridged form.



Get a clue, Francis... your bike runs on gas, too, last time I checked...doesn't matter if it burns and gulps less...it's all petrol, and it's all from the very same pumps that Mister or Missy Escalade filled up.



Think about that next time that simplistic sniggering bug crawls up yer arse...
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,449 Posts
There's only one problem with your idea.



If, for example, the US population began to use half the gas, causing the price to plummet, the National Criminal Network, er I mean the Federal and State governments would just raise taxes to put the price right back up where it was. Then they would give these billions in tax revenue directly to Saudi Arabia so that the Saudis could continue to make their debt payments to the World Bank.



Look at the US State Department and their constant cozying up to dictators and other s*****. If you want to deal with all the problems associated with world terrorism cutting the use of gasoline will have exactly zero effect.



A better solution is to stop sending Republicrats to Washington.
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,449 Posts
Re: Riding a Motorcycle and Smoking Pot

Then we wouldn't have to see those guys on 600cc bikes in T-shirts, shorts and sandals! Good idea!
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,449 Posts
Re: Exhaust gas emissions

Now you did it! You ruined the argument with facts. Shame on you.

You'd better learn that you must follow the "common wisdom" no matter how stupid it is. Do you want NPR doing a hitpiece on you, heretic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,459 Posts
>>Excellent Sean<<



Actually, I believe that this article/rant was submitted by Vlad aka Francis Clark, not by Sean.



ps: I fugured you would have found an excuse to somehow link your article about the putative "death of the V-twin in racing" to this thread as well (just giving you a little $hit)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,459 Posts
Good points all -- except I am not so sure about the naked bike bit -- since his closest female friend was a prostitute, he may not have been as opposed to public nudity as the Church might have us believe. I kinda have him on an FZ1. Not totally nude, more in the pasties and a g-string mode, or perhaps in keeping with regional tradition, like a belly dancer. You know, shows enough to give a good idea of the working bits, while still maintaining some sense of mystery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Wow, it really is that simple....



My problem with milage figures like that: How do you propose 6 people get from point A to point B? With luggage? Perhaps 3 Goldwings w/ trailers? Where does the milage go?



With 1 person it seems like more efficient transportation, but a Geo Metro will get +40 mpg, with a few people aboard. Not as fun in the twisties though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
I agree 100 %.

Anyone who drives one of those things has got to be brain dead. There are so many really nice cars that are far less expensive. All a bunch of unpatriotic idiots.

If they had any balls they would buy a bike. Which you know and I know would make them much happier. I had a theory when I was 8 years old.

'the world is a very stupid place" . At this place and time the fact that these vehicles are so popular is incredibly stupid. Welcome my friends to the stupid stupid world. Have you notice how many women are riding around in these things also. Maybe Freud was right. I can buy a 45,000 dollar suv or a 45,000 bmw, and they choose the suv. Idiots.

s stupid

u unpatriotic

v vehicle.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Apparently you're fairly new to the game. Bikes, while they save a bit on fuel often require more frequent oil changes by their owners. Certainly more tire (read oil) changes by their owners.

Since most are opened up to get them to run right. any pollution windfall of stockers is quickly unwound as well.

If you wanna stop terrorism, send the bastards some condoms. Overpopulation in the face of fixed producing resources will ALWAYS produce a class of people too ***** stupid to survive.

Be kind and insist, NO MORE *****!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
729 Posts
I don't want to tee off on Vlad because he seems like a good guy shooting from the hip on a topic that is obviously important to him. Good for you!

I have some problems with the emissions stats cited (as has been very ably pointed out by at least one other reader), but I suppose that my bigger issue would be with most everyone who has responded affirmatively to this piece. To you I say are you nuts? . All of us who drive anything are part of the stated problem. It's just to what degree.

This is a website who's content is almost wholly devoted to motorcycles which, the last time I checked, almost all sport internal combustion engines that use the same fuel as SUV's. And I would be willing to bet more money than I can afford to lose that the majority of bike owners who visit this website, upon acquisition of a new motorcycle, immediately remove most of the stock exhaust in favor of aftermarket bits that increase horsepower and torque (rarely in an exceptionally useful manner for street use) often at the expense of noise, decreased fuel economy, and increased emissions. Besides, I maintain for a number of reasons that a family of five going down the road in an SUV may well be more eco-friendly than most of us on our bikes. I ride my motorcycles because I like them, not because I've fooled myself into thinking I'm doing anyone else a damn bit of good.

The ranting I see against SUV's on this website reminds me of the egregiously self-serving crap I hear from the "Save Yellowstone Park from Snowmobiles" crowd every time I go to a meeting about this issue. Somehow they all seem have the notion that bumper to bumper summertime traffic and throngs of tourists are somehow more benign that snowmobiles, a fact that I have reason to seriously doubt. And, as an aside, it's difficult for me not to notice that every Greenpeace-Save the Earth-eco bumper sticker I see in the parking lot after one of these meetings is attached to someone's car. It makes me want to puke. I'm neither for nor against snowmobiles in Yellowstone; I just have a problem with singling snowmobiles out from all other users of the park when the problem, IMHO, is that the park is overused by everyone .

Enough digression. SUV's are not the problem; they are merely a symptom of a much greater (and much more intractable) problem - too many people. If we had half the number of people as we do I dare say no one would be too concerned about SUV's But as long as every person in this country continues to produce about 2.2 people (one of the lowest rates on the planet, btw) the problems of pollution and unsustainable consumption will continue to escalate. So if you really want to put a dent in environmental/consumption problems you'd probably want to begin with some cogent scheme to begin controlling population growth. Anyone in MO land have one?

I personally dig Kurtz's suggestion: "Exterminate all the brutes," but that's just me.

Anyway, if you want to ride an ultimately unnecessary vehicle like a motorcycle I think that you should be a little more careful about banging on what anyone else chooses to drive around. Besides, we live in a country where you have the right to be completely stupid about what you choose to drive, purchase, go into debt over and say on a website (yeah, baby). What you do not have the right to do is foist your views on everyone else. And it's just plain bad manners to do so even if they make it legal tomorrow. Turn it around for a minute: many hikers and equestrians foster the same notions about motorcycles on public lands, as many MO'ers seem to harbor for SUV's on freeways. What do you, denizens of MO, think about that?

Now, can't we all just get along :)

Cheers

sbp
 
21 - 40 of 135 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top