ten reasons to bike instead of drive

[johnpr]

metro mpg, whats a pirate bike? is it a brand or a particular style? i tried a search on yahoo and came up with lots of different stuff so thought i should just ask

[johnpr]

hey i just found this and thought it was interesting, worthy of its own thread im sure but i dont want to make a thread everytime i find something neat.

How far can the average person bicycle on the energy contained in a gallon of gasoline?
a) around 50 miles
b) around 240 miles
c) around 630 miles



wait for it....







Answer: C. A gallon of gasoline contains about 31,000 calories, and "Bicycles can travel at least 10 times farther on a given amount of energy than the most efficient car," according to Nicholas Goddard, a graduate of Duke University who decided to see just how far he could bike on 31,000 calories. He rode the 633 miles over eight days, eating a wide range of foods, including "two Gatorades, five ham-and-cheese sandwiches, a steak burrito from Cosmic Cantina, a glass of sangria, a quesadilla, chips and salsa, and a pint of beer."

SOURCE: TreeHugger

[MetroMPG]

Oh, sorry. The Pirate Bike is just a junk mountain bike I got last year in our city's "treasure hunt" large item disposal day.

I need to add it to my garage. It's my main mode of transportation for local trips 6 months of the year.

[johnpr]

thats great, i have had many "junk" find bikes and i have always enjoyed fixing them.

also i found this little tidbit about commuting (5 excuse busters)


1. It's too far to bicycle commute. I don't have the time.


This may seem true, but often, if you analyze your situation, you'll find that pedaling is possible -- even practical. For example, we know a commuter who bikes ten miles each way to work who says that it takes her only fifteen minutes longer each way. Plus, she says, "By combining my workout and commute, I get to exercise 1¼ hours per day and only spend an extra ½ hour to do it! Moreover, my car insurance gives me a rate discount of $160 per year to ride!" Keep in mind that by avoiding stop-and-go traffic you can make excellent time on a bicycle. You might also consider driving part way to work, parking, and biking the rest of the way. This saves money, gas, and the environment. And, while everyone else is idling in traffic developing road rage, you're spinning along reducing your stress level.

2. I need to wear dress clothes at work.
We know several attorneys who regularly commute by bicycle. They've solved this problem by leaving their suits at the office. Says one, "I just keep a couple of clean, pressed shirts at the office with a couple of suits." Other bicycle commuters bring their nice clothes and lunches to the office on weekends, so that during the week they can simply dress up once at work. This requires planning, but works great. And, if you drive in on the weekend to drop off your stuff, you at least won't be dealing with rush-hour traffic.
3. I don't have a place to shower. Consider a quick cleanup in the restroom, instead. Or maybe you can use the showers at a nearby health club (sometimes at a discounted shower-only fee). Be creative and check out the facilities near your office. Chances are pretty good that you can find an arrangement that will work. Also, remember that sweat doesn't stink. If you're clean when you leave home and you're wearing clean clothes, no one will know you biked to work. In fact, if you wear the right clothes and don't have to climb steep hills on your commute, you may not even sweat at all!
4. The weather is too rotten to ride my bike. Regular cyclists know that there's no such thing as bad weather, only bad clothing. If you dress in layers and fabrics that block wind and repel rain and breathe, you'll be fine. There are even special gloves and booties to keep your fingers and toes toasty. We can help you select the proper equipment for year-round riding. And, even if you decide to bike only during warm weather, that's still months of not using your car, which will save you big bucks and make you feel great!
5. There's no place to park my bike at work. There should be, and if there isn't, maybe it's time you asked management why they're not encouraging something as healthy and responsible as bicycling to work? After all, they provide parking spots for cars! Bikes take up hardly any space. Look for other areas in the building - a basement, utility room, closet, garage, etc. Or try an adjacent parking area where an attendant can watch out for your bike. Wherever you leave your rig, be sure to lock it (remove anything easily stolen, too, such as your pump, cyclo-computer, light, etc.).

[LostCause]

The number one reason not to ride is safety. I've heard that you are ten times more likely to die riding a bicycle then driving a car (no idea if that is adjusted in any way, though). The famous adventurer Steve Fossett said the only time he was truly scared was when biking the streets of Chicago.

I would ride the 13 miles to school in a heartbeat if I didn't honestly fear for my life in certain sections of surrounding suburbia. Riding across a bridge on a blind corner with no emergency lane in 50mph traffic is where I draw the line...

If only an extensive network of class I bike paths existed like the freeway infrastructure...It took me 40 miles of circuitous bike/street paths to get to a destination 20 miles by freeway. I think it's some kind of conspiracy...

- LostCause

[Peakster]

^^^

Yup, I was pretty scared going down a busy boulevard in Winnipeg during rush hour a few weeks ago. About 30 cars blared their horns, 1/2 dozen whizzed by me about 6 inches away, and one was so determined that I did not belong on the road, the driver veered their car straight into my lane with their horn shrieking, forcing me off the lane.

It is scary (and peak summer, there's a major bicycle-to-vehicle collision every 2nd day in this city of 650,000 people).

But I'm still at that age where I feel invincible, so it didn't deter me from biking.

[johnpr]

safety is always something to be concerned about, but that is one of those "varies from place to place" situations, i personally have never been in an accident on my bike and i used it to commute 10 miles (each way) per day for about 3 years. but on the other hand, i had a friend who got hit twice (he didnt pay attention to what he was doing and cut across an intersection both times) and my brother was hit by a lady who was carelessly pulling out of (where else) a hospital parking lot. so it can go either way on that one.

[newtonsfirstlaw]

Originally Posted by LostCause

The number one reason not to ride is safety. I've heard that you are ten times more likely to die riding a bicycle then driving a car (no idea if that is adjusted in any way, though). The famous adventurer Steve Fossett said the only time he was truly scared was when biking the streets of Chicago.
If only an extensive network of class I bike paths existed like the freeway infrastructure...It took me 40 miles of circuitous bike/street paths to get to a destination 20 miles by freeway. I think it's some kind of conspiracy...

- LostCause

God yes. Correct on both counts.

Some people probably wonder where I went in the last few months. I spent a good deal of it thinking about velomobiles and infrastructure.

What is really key is the infrastructure. Get cars down to human powered speeds with speed limits and traffic calming (i.e. 30kph or so), and they aren't very dangerous. You'd have to be very unlucky to have a collision or die in an accident. This is appropriate on all residential street areas.

I think it's also key to have bicycle bridges over the major roads, so that a person can get from any 30kph section of road to another safely. I think those two things alone will make bicycles popular because it enables a safe option.

However, what human powered transport really screams out for is an elevated grid of freeways with interchanges (which can be made much cheaper than roads because the load needed to carry is much less). As you who ride bicycles know, the human engine is very, very anemic compared to any sort of engine. With aerodynamics, the power loss can be made very small, and average sustainable speed quite large - i.e. 40-50kph with something like the WAW or the Quest. The key is to eliminate all stopping. The solution to that is the interchange and grid freeway system.

A thought experiment:
Q: A velombile is traveling at 45kph. What is the Kinetic Energy possessed if the rider + velo is 120kg?

A: E = .5 * mv^2
= .5 * 120 * 12.5^2
= 9375 Joules

Q: How far can that velomobile travel with the energy lost in that stop if 100 Watts is expended to maintain that speed of 45kph?

A: t = W/P = 9375/100 = 93.75 seconds

At 12.5m/s, you will travel 1171m in 93.75 seconds.

So, every time you get up to speed and stop, you have wasted the equivalent in effort that would have allowed you to travel 1km. Let that sink in.

Think how many forced stops are involved in a typical trip, and wonder why velomobiles aren't yet as practical as they are on paper. It's because they need the infrastructure! But build the infrastructure, provide appropriate legislation, and boom.

For bonus points, convert the kinetic energy to gravitational potential energy and compare to a cyclist traveling at typical cycling speed, and the height of a rise (or road bridge) that can be attacked without having to pedal. The difference is large, all because there is 4 times as much energy involved in traveling at twice the speed.

So that's why I'm not working so hard on ecomodding anymore. My next step is to get a house with a viable path to work via bike-friendly infrastructure. Cars just don't do it for me any more, but my love of aero remains.

[trebuchet03]

Originally Posted by LostCause

The number one reason not to ride is safety. I've heard that you are ten times more likely to die riding a bicycle then driving a car (no idea if that is adjusted in any way, though).
- LostCause

Here's the Adjusted statistic for 1996

Death's per 100,000
Car: .7
Walking: .19
Cycling: .09

And here they are for 1985
Car: .95
Walking: .39
Cycling: .24

You're about 8 times more likely to die in a car than a bike


Top ten list on how people on bikes die when done by a car...
1. 5.1% The bicyclist exited a driveway in front of an on-coming vehicle.
2. 4.3% The bicyclist turned left in front of a passing vehicle.
3. 3.9% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist, cause of the accident unclear.
4. 2.7% The bicyclist was struck while traveling on the wrong (left) side of the road.
5. 1.4% The bicyclist, on the wrong side, turned right in front of a vehicle.
6. 1.3% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist and failed to see him.
7. 1.2% The bicyclist lost control and swerved into the path of the vehicle.
8. .8% The bicyclist made a normal left turn but ignored on-coming traffic.
9. .6% The motorist lost control of the car and struck the bicyclist.
10. .5% The motorist struck a play vehicle (big wheel, bike with training wheels).

http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/...e/ctanbike.htm

AND pedestrians on a sidewalk are 7 times more likely to die than all cyclists as pedestrians have more fatalities per mile (http://www.bikewalk.org/assets/pdf/CASE15.PDF). One would think pedestrians are safer as they can look back much more easily and can jump out of the way...

So... The big numbers



Total Injuries (Not Adjusted)
Car: 3,400,000(1999)
Bike: 61,000 (1996)

Total Deaths (Not Adjusted)
Car: 41,611 (1999)
Bike: 850 (1996)


-----
I guess I should mention... All of the roads I drive on are 35+mph and the longest legs of my daily commute have a speed limit of 45.

EDIT:
Here is an up to date resource - more official like too

http://hazmat.dot.gov/riskmgmt/riskcompare.htm

Car: 1 out of 7,700 died between 1999 and 2003
Bike: 1 out of 410,000 died between 1999 and 2003
Pedestrian: 1 out of 58,000
Large Trucks: 1 out of 55,000

You're 53x more likely to die in a car than a bike.

You're more likely to die on a train or recreational boat than on a bike

[Lazarus]

Originally Posted by trebuchet03

Here's the Adjusted statistic for 1996

Death's per 100,000
Car: .7
Walking: .19
Cycling: .09

And here they are for 1985
Car: .95
Walking: .39
Cycling: .24

You're about 8 times more likely to die in a car than a bike


Top ten list on how people on bikes die when done by a car...
1. 5.1% The bicyclist exited a driveway in front of an on-coming vehicle.
2. 4.3% The bicyclist turned left in front of a passing vehicle.
3. 3.9% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist, cause of the accident unclear.
4. 2.7% The bicyclist was struck while traveling on the wrong (left) side of the road.
5. 1.4% The bicyclist, on the wrong side, turned right in front of a vehicle.
6. 1.3% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist and failed to see him.
7. 1.2% The bicyclist lost control and swerved into the path of the vehicle.
8. .8% The bicyclist made a normal left turn but ignored on-coming traffic.
9. .6% The motorist lost control of the car and struck the bicyclist.
10. .5% The motorist struck a play vehicle (big wheel, bike with training wheels).

http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/...e/ctanbike.htm

AND pedestrians on a sidewalk are 7 times more likely to die than all cyclists as pedestrians have more fatalities per mile (http://www.bikewalk.org/assets/pdf/CASE15.PDF). One would think pedestrians are safer as they can look back much more easily and can jump out of the way...

So... The big numbers



Total Injuries (Not Adjusted)
Car: 3,400,000(1999)
Bike: 61,000 (1996)

Total Deaths (Not Adjusted)
Car: 41,611 (1999)
Bike: 850 (1996)


-----
I guess I should mention... All of the roads I drive on are 35+mph and the longest legs of my daily commute have a speed limit of 45.

EDIT:
Here is an up to date resource - more official like too

http://hazmat.dot.gov/riskmgmt/riskcompare.htm

Car: 1 out of 7,700 died between 1999 and 2003
Bike: 1 out of 410,000 died between 1999 and 2003
Pedestrian: 1 out of 58,000
Large Trucks: 1 out of 55,000

You're 53x more likely to die in a car than a bike.

You're more likely to die on a train or recreational boat than on a bike

Driving is safer then flying? Who would of thunk it.

http://www.ur.umich.edu/0203/Jan20_03/18.shtml

For any distance long enough that flying is an option, traveling on major airlines is far less dangerous than driving on even the safest available roads, an analysis by U-M Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) researchers shows.

The conclusion holds true even when the latest statistics—including the deaths of passengers on the four planes hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001—are taken into account, Michael Sivak and Michael Flannagan write in the January-February issue of American Scientist magazin