How soon does a bike pay back its initial carbon footprint?

http://www.slate.com/id/2300676/

by jseliger • 15 years ago

19 25 15 years ago

gburt• 15 years ago

Don't cars also cost energy to produce? ...likely substantially more than a bicycle too?

And even then, I would imagine, if you're changing your mode of transportation, you're selling your car, and thus preventing someone else from buying a new one? i.e., reducing the number of new cars sold.

kscaldef• 15 years ago

Not many people get rid of their car entirely when they start riding a bike.

mathgladiator• 15 years ago

you'd have to be eating an all-beef diet to offset the environmental benefits of walking or bicycling.

well that's just swell, my paleo diet is bad for the environment.

Locke16892• 15 years ago

Of course it is, why would it be otherwise? Meat is just an inefficient middle stage in terms of nutrient acquisition. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm a vegetarian, just that I'm aware that my diet is not as energy efficient as it could be.

zacharycohn2• 15 years ago

I'm going to go ahead and contribute that line of the article to "creative, non-factual journalism."

Keep up the paleo. :)

Andys• 15 years ago

Only because of modern farming processes.

seabee• 15 years ago

Without modern farming processes, only the upper class could even think about an all-beef diet.

Tichy• 15 years ago

What did you expect? People would hardly have switched away from it if it had been sustainable.

xefer• 15 years ago

The amount of calories we burn does not contribute to the net carbon excess per se; after all, we're part of the natural carbon cycle. The number that matters is the amount of energy used to acquire the calories we do consume. The carbon that matters is the amount desequestered as a result of burning fossil fuels.

zacharycohn2• 15 years ago

There's a huge flaw in this article. You start off in the black, because I'm sure a car takes a lot more to produce than a bike.

davidcuddeback• 15 years ago

I think that assumes that you bought a bike instead of a car. In my case, that's true, but I'm sure in many cases that's not true.

georgemcbay• 15 years ago

I think the article was assuming you're already someone who owns a car and will continue to own that car, not that you own neither and are buying one or the other.

georgieporgie2• 15 years ago

Easy solution: buy a used bike. :-)

Incidentally, as I get older and travel more, I find myself increasingly interested in the classic, low-slung, steel commuter bike. The sort you see Japanese cops, businessmen, and moms riding. Dirt simple, standardized, and indefinite in lifespan.

jseliger2• 15 years ago

To be fair, this is a example of the "standing-in-a-theater" problem from economics: if you buy a used bike, you're doing something "better" for the environment, because the good is already made; if everyone does it, then there are very few used bikes.

Plus, there's a decent chance that you're just subsidizing someone's new bike (incidentally, this is how I pay for new Macs: I sell the old one on Craigslist for a third to half of its original price after 3 – 4 years and use the proceeds to buy a new one. Works pretty well).

georgieporgie2• 15 years ago

I only partially agree. There are a tremendous number of unwanted, used bikes in the world. They're stashed away in garages and barns, they're piled up in thrift stores and junk yards, and they're crushed and recycled en-masse.

If there were very few (unwanted) used bikes due to redistribution, that would be a wonderful thing, for multiple reasons.

samstave• 15 years ago

Good to know. I have paid off my bikes carbon debt then, about 4 times.

I was biking a lot in general - then was biking to work each day and put 12 miles per day on it.

Now though, I work from home, so I have not been using the bike at all :(

nasmorn• 15 years ago

Biking to work is so much more than saving a bit of carbon emissions. It provides physical exertion (which is usually lacking in our society) at a minimal time commitment. I am sure this is hard to quantify in carbon emissions but since a ton of carbon is quite cheap on the exchange and the medical systems quite expensive I guess it is a net win.

Locke16892• 15 years ago

It would probably be more energy efficient to ride an electric powered bicycle.

jrockway• 15 years ago

Is this really a problem people have? "I would bike to work, and I'm not afraid of traffic or being rained on or getting sweaty, but I'm worried that it's bad for my carbon footprint." Yeah, right.

I'm embarrassed that I clicked the link.

jseliger2• 15 years ago

BTW—if you're thinking about riding more often, get a noseless saddle: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/06/before-y... .

burgerbrain• 15 years ago

...I have never had any of those symptoms in my decades of riding, nor have I ever even heard of them. Despite the authors protest, this sounds exactly like just another health scare.

pygy_• 15 years ago

Well, you're lucky, then. Regarding hearsay, perineal paresthesia is not something you brag about, usually.

Pudendal nerve compressions are real and non anecdotic (but probably not widespread either, I don't know the numbers). I wouldn't worry about it before being symptomatic, if it ever becomes the case.

tiddchristopher• 15 years ago

I strongly disagree with your recommendation. The article talks about saddles with relief cutouts or depressions, to make sure no pressure is put on the perineum. Saddles with cutouts are fine--even better than normal saddles for some people. Noseless saddles, on the other hand, address the problem entirely wrong. The tend to produce an uncomfortable position for long rides, as the nose is important for bike handling.

Back to cutout saddles, a cutout only helps if the saddle is heavily padded. When the padding compresses, you don't sink from your sit bones into your perineum. Another option is a firmer saddle. My saddle is hard as a rock, but it supports me properly, and I have no pain or numbness on even the longest rides.

Source: Me, recreational cyclist.

Read what Sheldon Brown had to say: http://sheldonbrown.com/saddles.html

Sheldon on noseless saddles:

"The lack of a nose can compromise lateral control in some cases.

The pads must be angled downward, which tends to make the rider slide forward. This is liable to lead to hand/wrist/neck problems as the rider braces on the handlebar to keep from sliding forward off the seat.

If the pads are not angled downward, they tend to cut off circulation to the thighs, and to interfere with the thigh muscles."

Hyena• 15 years ago

Arguably, if we're going so far as to factor in food, we should factor in health benefits. If bicycling reduces your demand for medical care, it also reduces the portion of your carbon footprint taken up by treatment. Hospitals and medical equipment don't grow on trees.

How soon does a bike pay back its initial carbon footprint?

Related Stories