Cyclists carbon footprint
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: M25 north of Dartford crossing, fences and SPECS
Next: cheapest laptop battery camera battery camcorder battery
From: GT on 22 Jul 2010 09:59 "Graham Harrison" <edward.harrison1(a)remove.btinternet.com> wrote in message news:WZydnZ42x5LG1tXRnZ2dnUVZ7rqdnZ2d(a)bt.com... > > "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message > news:4c4825ec$0$8910$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >> "Graham Harrison" <edward.harrison1(a)remove.btinternet.com> wrote in >> message news:lKidnQyyzvknjtXRnZ2dnUVZ8rqdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>> >>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>> news:4c480a32$0$8953$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>> "FrengaX" <hnkjqrh02(a)sneakemail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:434a3a89-0aa4-4601-9161-b43804fb9a64(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... >>>> On Jul 21, 3:02 pm, Jethro <krazyka...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>> Having just watched a number cars grinding up a hill near me (I was >>>>> walking) because a cyclist was at the head of the queue, and it was >>>>> too twisty and narrow to safely overtake, I started wondering about >>>>> the OVERALL effect cyclists have on carbon emissions. >>>> >>>> Why restrict your pointless venom at cyclists? What is the similar >>>> effect of: >>>> - buses which crawl along/block the road with long queues of cars >>>> behind >>>> - milk floats (if such things exist any more) >>>> - temporary traffic lights left in place where there is no hazard on >>>> the road (apart from the lights themselves) >>>> - People who have accidents on the motorway and cause massive >>>> tailbacks >>>> - Gypsies who decide to descend on Appleby in their horse-drawn >>>> caravans, causing miles and miles of tailbacks on the A65 >>>> - etc >>>> >>>> I would stick my neck out and say that most of the drivers in this >>>> group agree with you, but the original question concerned a particular >>>> example of cyclist deliberately causing congestion, delay and >>>> frustration for many other people. Had he moved over or stopped for a >>>> short time (as the highway code suggests that road users should do when >>>> causing queues), then the problem would have been alleviated, but alas >>>> this rarely happens. >>>> >>> >>> Deliberately? The OP said "was too twisty and narrow to safely >>> overtake". Assume for one moment the cyclist had stopped to let the cars >>> pass; would that have been safe? >> >> Yes. >> >>> Unless the cyclist was able to get right off the road I would suggest it >>> would make little difference and that it might simply bring the queue to >>> a halt. >> >> I fail to see how a stationary object, stopped neatly at the side of the >> road cause everyone to stop. If the road is wide enough for normal >> traffic - lorries, buses etc, then there is plenty of room for a stream >> of cars to drive past a stationary bicycle. >> >>> There are roads round here that qualify for the OP description where it >>> would definitely be safer to continue until a safe pull off rather than >>> stop for the sake of stopping. >> >> But its not 'for the sake of stopping', its stopping to let other people >> go about their lives. And he can get a rest for a minute! >> >>> And, as for moving over (HC suggestion) I agree with you; I just wish >>> that all the juggernauts, tractors, 40 mph "Sunday drivers" would also >>> read the HC. >> >> > > Here's a road > > http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=s&hl=en&q=castle+cary&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Castle+Cary&gl=uk&ei=V0lITNCDKpP60wTbsL2zDQ&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CB8Q8gEwAA > > I'm not sure how clever that URL is so you may need to swing the view > round to face north where you will see a "transit tipper". As you can > see, it fills one side of the road. Now swing around to face south and > tell me if there was a bicycle stopped by the side of the road would there > be space for two cars to pass at the same point as the stopped cyclist? > I can tell you that if the buses that run on that road meet (and the > timetable is such that they do) they have to inch past rather carefully. A fine example of where one shouldn't stop - I have never denied that roads like this exist, but this is rare and usually just for certain stretches of the road. There is usually a gateway or similar just round the corner where smaller queue causing vehicles could pause. In a previous post, someone said he had cycled on a 22 mile stretch of road that is all very narrow and has a solid wall and nowhere to stop. This I simply don't believe. The link you have posted goes to a map and no one would dispute that there are areas on that road where stopping would be silly and cause more queues than not stopping, but on the other hand, I can see many small roads joining that road and many places where it would be safe and sensible to stop. There are some straight parts with somewhere to stop, or farmers gates suitable for a stop, there are also small side roads that could be used for 2 minutes to clear any queues. One doesn't have to stop as soon as a single car arrives behind a slower moving vehicle, but at the earliest convenience, which is not 22 miles later!! > Cyclists (and tractors and HGVs and.....) should pull up (and off the > carriageway) to allow faster traffic to pass, but only where it's safe. > The road pictured in the URL is straight so it would be safe to stop > (safer in the entrance seen when looking north). But if it was bent in > such a way that sight lines were obstructed (as in the OP description) I > would argue the cyclist should continue to the next lay by or entrance > before stopping. Obviously stopping on a blind corner and sticking out into the road is not a good idea, but the majority of corners last for maximum of a couple of hundred yards.
From: GT on 22 Jul 2010 10:02 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c484eca$0$8918$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > "Graham Harrison" <edward.harrison1(a)remove.btinternet.com> wrote in > message news:WZydnZ42x5LG1tXRnZ2dnUVZ7rqdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >> >> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >> news:4c4825ec$0$8910$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>> "Graham Harrison" <edward.harrison1(a)remove.btinternet.com> wrote in >>> message news:lKidnQyyzvknjtXRnZ2dnUVZ8rqdnZ2d(a)bt.com... >>>> >>>> "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message >>>> news:4c480a32$0$8953$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >>>>> "FrengaX" <hnkjqrh02(a)sneakemail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:434a3a89-0aa4-4601-9161-b43804fb9a64(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... >>>>> On Jul 21, 3:02 pm, Jethro <krazyka...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Having just watched a number cars grinding up a hill near me (I was >>>>>> walking) because a cyclist was at the head of the queue, and it was >>>>>> too twisty and narrow to safely overtake, I started wondering about >>>>>> the OVERALL effect cyclists have on carbon emissions. >>>>> >>>>> Why restrict your pointless venom at cyclists? What is the similar >>>>> effect of: >>>>> - buses which crawl along/block the road with long queues of cars >>>>> behind >>>>> - milk floats (if such things exist any more) >>>>> - temporary traffic lights left in place where there is no hazard on >>>>> the road (apart from the lights themselves) >>>>> - People who have accidents on the motorway and cause massive >>>>> tailbacks >>>>> - Gypsies who decide to descend on Appleby in their horse-drawn >>>>> caravans, causing miles and miles of tailbacks on the A65 >>>>> - etc >>>>> >>>>> I would stick my neck out and say that most of the drivers in this >>>>> group agree with you, but the original question concerned a particular >>>>> example of cyclist deliberately causing congestion, delay and >>>>> frustration for many other people. Had he moved over or stopped for a >>>>> short time (as the highway code suggests that road users should do >>>>> when causing queues), then the problem would have been alleviated, but >>>>> alas this rarely happens. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Deliberately? The OP said "was too twisty and narrow to safely >>>> overtake". Assume for one moment the cyclist had stopped to let the >>>> cars pass; would that have been safe? >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>>> Unless the cyclist was able to get right off the road I would suggest >>>> it would make little difference and that it might simply bring the >>>> queue to a halt. >>> >>> I fail to see how a stationary object, stopped neatly at the side of the >>> road cause everyone to stop. If the road is wide enough for normal >>> traffic - lorries, buses etc, then there is plenty of room for a stream >>> of cars to drive past a stationary bicycle. >>> >>>> There are roads round here that qualify for the OP description where it >>>> would definitely be safer to continue until a safe pull off rather than >>>> stop for the sake of stopping. >>> >>> But its not 'for the sake of stopping', its stopping to let other people >>> go about their lives. And he can get a rest for a minute! >>> >>>> And, as for moving over (HC suggestion) I agree with you; I just wish >>>> that all the juggernauts, tractors, 40 mph "Sunday drivers" would also >>>> read the HC. >>> >>> >> >> Here's a road >> >> http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&channel=s&hl=en&q=castle+cary&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Castle+Cary&gl=uk&ei=V0lITNCDKpP60wTbsL2zDQ&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CB8Q8gEwAA >> >> I'm not sure how clever that URL is so you may need to swing the view >> round to face north where you will see a "transit tipper". As you can >> see, it fills one side of the road. Now swing around to face south and >> tell me if there was a bicycle stopped by the side of the road would >> there be space for two cars to pass at the same point as the stopped >> cyclist? I can tell you that if the buses that run on that road meet (and >> the timetable is such that they do) they have to inch past rather >> carefully. > > A fine example of where one shouldn't stop - I have never denied that > roads like this exist, but this is rare and usually just for certain > stretches of the road. There is usually a gateway or similar just round > the corner where smaller queue causing vehicles could pause. In a previous > post, someone said he had cycled on a 22 mile stretch of road that is all > very narrow and has a solid wall and nowhere to stop. This I simply don't > believe. The link you have posted goes to a map and no one would dispute > that there are areas on that road where stopping would be silly and cause > more queues than not stopping, but on the other hand, I can see many small > roads joining that road and many places where it would be safe and > sensible to stop. There are some straight parts with somewhere to stop, or > farmers gates suitable for a stop, there are also small side roads that > could be used for 2 minutes to clear any queues. One doesn't have to stop > as soon as a single car arrives behind a slower moving vehicle, but at the > earliest convenience, which is not 22 miles later!! > >> Cyclists (and tractors and HGVs and.....) should pull up (and off the >> carriageway) to allow faster traffic to pass, but only where it's safe. >> The road pictured in the URL is straight so it would be safe to stop >> (safer in the entrance seen when looking north). But if it was bent in >> such a way that sight lines were obstructed (as in the OP description) I >> would argue the cyclist should continue to the next lay by or entrance >> before stopping. > > Obviously stopping on a blind corner and sticking out into the road is not > a good idea, but the majority of corners last for maximum of a couple of > hundred yards. Sorry - in other words, I agree with you.
From: DavidR on 22 Jul 2010 16:43 "GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c4826e7$0$8965 > > A stationary bicycle at the side of the road therefore does not put anyone > else at risk. The condition of being stationary at the side of the road is not usually a problem. It is the change from being moving to becoming stationary that can be difficult. If there is no room to be overtaken, there is no room to perform the act of stopping unless there is a passing place with adequate surface and lead in.
From: DavidR on 22 Jul 2010 17:00 "Jethro" <krazykara0(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:6842a0c5-6d67-4d78-a6b5-7ce0b485caa7(a)q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > Having just watched a number cars grinding up a hill near me (I was > walking) because a cyclist was at the head of the queue, and it was > too twisty and narrow to safely overtake, I started wondering about > the OVERALL effect cyclists have on carbon emissions. > > Does all the extra carbon produced by cars having to crawl behind > cyclists cancel out, or exceed the carbon saved by the cyclist ? The loss of mechanical efficiency from using a lower gear is probably cancelled out by the reduction in aerodynamic loss. The biggest effect is probably from the way a driver approaches the cyclist - looking ahead and gliding down to match the speed vs. braking at the last moment. But then, the effect of meeting an occasional cyclist is competely down in the noise of all other journey hindrances.
From: boltar2003 on 23 Jul 2010 04:37
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:43:40 +0100 "DavidR" <curedham(a)4bidden.org.uk> wrote: >"GT" <a(a)b.c> wrote in message news:4c4826e7$0$8965 >> >> A stationary bicycle at the side of the road therefore does not put anyone >> else at risk. > >The condition of being stationary at the side of the road is not usually a >problem. It is the change from being moving to becoming stationary that can >be difficult. > >If there is no room to be overtaken, there is no room to perform the act of >stopping unless there is a passing place with adequate surface and lead in. What a load of drivel. Stop bike. Get off and stand next to wall/bush. Let cars past. See , not hard is it? B2003 |