Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [carfree_cities] Re: C02: cycling vs. driving

Expand Messages
  • Louis-Luc Le Guerrier
    ... Cyclists are nearly quiet, but when cars are removed you can hear the cyclists, as well as birds and footsteps, a basketball player getting back home
    Message 1 of 15 , Oct 26, 2000
      > Oh and lets talk about auditory emisions. Just the other day
      > I was almost in
      > an accident biking to work... I nearly hit another bike. Why,
      > because I had
      > become so used to listening for cars that I failed to
      > recognize the bike.
      > Well anyways, after this I became atuned to the noice of cars
      > and I would
      > like to point out that you can hear a car far away where a
      > bike is virtually
      > silent.
      Cyclists are nearly quiet, but when cars are removed you can hear the
      cyclists, as well as birds and footsteps, a basketball player getting back
      home dribbling his ball, etc. You hear the sound of life and people you
      cannot feel when only a single car can pull out your attention, because you
      need to locate its position and determine its direction to make sure there
      is no potential danger.

      Moving cars draw the attention of your sight, your hearing, your breathing,
      your heart rate (stress), and your mobility. That's the reason why a totally
      carfree area provides highly superior life quality w/r a place with cars
      (even just a few cars).


      > (well except for that rattle I gotta fix). I have sat
      > at a quiet
      > intersection and counted the number of blocks away I could
      > hear the car
      > after it passed me. I have been able to hear the car up to
      > two miles away.
      > Note. this was a normal car not one missing a muffler or such.

      2 miles away! There should be very few cars where you were standing. I can't
      hear the noise of a car that far because there are always other cars
      passing. That's virtually a constant noise.

      Louis-Luc
    • Simon Baddeley
      By suggesting that the essence of the argument was the ratio ... by Guy and co. to refute ... I found both contributions helpful not only because I am (as a
      Message 2 of 15 , Oct 27, 2000
        By suggesting that the essence of the argument was the ratio
        > between the efficiency of the human and the internal combustion
        > engine I was hoping to do the same thing.>
        > If we re-serve the more fanciful statements of the auto lobby in base
        > terms we may help to expose the absurdities of their beliefs without
        > giving them the opportunity to hide behind "fuzzy math" (sorry,
        > couldn't resist that one).> > That being said, I also admire the attempts
        by Guy and co. to refute
        > their logic more scientifically.> There's more than one way to skin a cat

        I found both contributions helpful not only because I am (as a
        non-mathematician) better informed but I am also better armed with both
        complex and simple arguments to refute the assertion that a cyclist does
        more damage to the environment than a car driver.

        Simon
      • Henning Mortensen
        fortunately my early morning commute takes me through a gridwork of blocks boardered by major arteries. The number of cars I see in this particular part is
        Message 3 of 15 , Oct 27, 2000
          fortunately my early morning commute takes me through a gridwork of blocks
          boardered by major arteries. The number of cars I see in this particular
          part is only a handful. On this particular day there was not a car moving in
          the residential area so I could hear this lone car as it sped it's way up to
          join the major artery.

          I get a lot of incredulity, about the fact that I bike to work. The most
          common concern raised is having to fight traffic on a bike. Funny that
          people don't understand that by biking I am not bound to the high speed
          arteries and can amble through parks, down quiet residential streets, along
          paths (both bike oriented and the impromptu paths of pedestrians seeking the
          shortest path across an expanse). But once again, I am preaching to the
          converted.


          >2 miles away! There should be very few cars where you were standing. I
          >can't
          >hear the noise of a car that far because there are always other cars
          >passing. That's virtually a constant noise.
          >
          >Louis-Luc
          >


          btw. Always thought the way we lay out paths across parks, universities etc
          is wrong. Instead of some planner deciding that a path needs to go from a to
          b, what we should do is plant the entire area in grass, wait for the
          telltale paths of foot traffic to occur and then lay the paths there. Then
          get rid of most of the grass and plant something more interesting. Of course
          this is Regina, Sk and we start out with an empty field. This would not work
          in the mountains.


          _________________________________________________________________________
          Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

          Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
          http://profiles.msn.com
        • Roy Preston
          My Transport 2000 newsletter arrived this morning and I thought you d like to read an item which I found disturbing for the BBC s credibility for impartiality.
          Message 4 of 15 , Feb 28, 2001
            My Transport 2000 newsletter arrived this morning and I thought you'd like
            to read an item which I found disturbing for the BBC's credibility for
            impartiality.

            Roy P



            TOP GEAR the BBC programme for road-hogs, joyriders and members of the
            Association of British Drivers has received a series of blows to its
            credibility -- if it ever had any in the first place. In November 1999 it
            broadcast a programme about the Oxford Transport Strategy, a visionary
            scheme through which the city's High Street has been closed to through
            traffic during the day-time, the main shopping area of Cornmarket
            completely pedestrianised and bus priority measures introduced wherever
            possible. The aim has been to cut traffic, which was choking the city
            centre, get more people on buses and improve the conditions for pedestrians
            and shoppers.

            The Oxfordshire County Council plan has been remarkably successful. More
            people are using the buses, more people are visiting the city centre in
            general, traffic congestion has been cut in most areas and air quality is
            better. The majority of people who live, work or shop in the city are
            supportive and, according to the Chamber of Commerce, companies are queuing
            up to take shop and office space.

            However, the Top Gear 'journalists' sent to the city to cover the story
            missed all this. In a blatant attack on integrated transport in general and
            the restrictions on cars in particular, the programme scoffed at the whole
            scheme. To discredit it they showed film of empty buses, supposedly
            rejected by shoppers, without saying they had waited until the buses had
            dropped off all their passengers outside the shops before turning on the
            cameras. Top Gear also said that business was on the point of collapse,
            whereas in fact 200 retailers were waiting for retail space, and that most
            county council staff were driving to work in the city themselves while
            trying to stop others doing the same, again not true. The final straw came
            in a series of street interviews with passers-by in which clips of anyone
            voicing support for the scheme ended up on the floor of the editing room,
            including a piece with an employee of the city council who had popped out
            of the office to do a hit of lunchtime shopping.

            The county council complained to the BBC, which was forced to admit the Top
            Gear piece was biased, inaccurate and unfair. The Top Gear team was sent
            back to Oxford to do the report again, which was broadcast in February
            2000. This was mainly a heavily edited snippet from an interview with the
            council's Director of Environmental Services, who felt the new item was
            still biased. The council complained again, and the complaint was again
            upheld.

            The motoring hacks were faced with the ignominy of having to return a third
            time to Oxford to redo the piece. This was finally put out in December and
            consisted purely of a Top Gear presenter reading out some positive points
            made by the county council.

            Staff at the county council have resigned themselves to this being probably
            the best they're going to get, but the whole episode raises yet another
            question mark over whether the BBC, with its public service remit and duty
            to report issues with impartiality and fairness, should be broadcasting
            motoring propaganda at all. Many people believe it is time this
            irresponsible and unsavoury programme was involved in a fatal car accident
            itself or taken to the scrapyard and left quietly to rot in a corner.

            As for the Oxford traffic scheme, people are now calling for an extension.
          • J.H. Crawford
            Dawson, got some URLs for us? ... ### J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities postmaster@carfree.com
            Message 5 of 15 , Feb 28, 2001
              Dawson, got some URLs for us?

              >My Transport 2000 newsletter arrived this morning and I thought you'd like
              >to read an item which I found disturbing for the BBC's credibility for
              >impartiality.
              >
              >Roy P



              ###

              J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
              postmaster@... Carfree.com
            • Ronald Dawson
              I m a member of Transport 2000 Canada & Transport 2000 Quebec, but I haven t really heard of any thing until now. http://www.topgear.beeb.com/ Dawson ...
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 1, 2001
                I'm a member of Transport 2000 Canada & Transport 2000 Quebec, but I haven't
                really heard of any thing until now. http://www.topgear.beeb.com/ Dawson

                -----Original Message-----
                From: J.H. Crawford [mailto:postmaster@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 1:14 PM
                To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Neutral Gear?



                Dawson, got some URLs for us?

                >My Transport 2000 newsletter arrived this morning and I thought you'd like
                >to read an item which I found disturbing for the BBC's credibility for
                >impartiality.
                >
                >Roy P



                ###

                J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                postmaster@... Carfree.com


                To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
                Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Simon Baddeley
                Yes - but you can join in the forum on this web site and it s a helpful conduit for feeding moderate criticism into car culture (e.g spooking them). Drivers
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 4, 2001
                  Yes - but you can join in the forum on this web site and it's a helpful
                  conduit for feeding moderate criticism into car culture (e.g spooking them).
                  Drivers are deeply divided among themselves - a broad church. As for your
                  point about the BBC - it went commercial a long time ago ... caught a
                  Transatlantic virus via Mrs T about 20 years ago ... but there are still
                  people there who value the "impartiality" tag.

                  Simon


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Ronald Dawson <rdadddmd@...>
                  To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 4:40 AM
                  Subject: RE: [carfree_cities] Neutral Gear?


                  > I'm a member of Transport 2000 Canada & Transport 2000 Quebec, but I
                  haven't
                  > really heard of any thing until now. http://www.topgear.beeb.com/ Dawson
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: J.H. Crawford [mailto:postmaster@...]
                  > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 1:14 PM
                  > To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Neutral Gear?
                  > Dawson, got some URLs for us?
                  > >My Transport 2000 newsletter arrived this morning and I thought you'd
                  like
                  > >to read an item which I found disturbing for the BBC's credibility for
                  > >impartiality.
                  > >Roy P
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.