Bicycle v. Train

This morning I received this abstract in my inbox:

Cycling is widely viewed as a transport mode with marginal environmental impacts. However, such a view fails to take account of such factors as the increase in carbon dioxide exhaled as a result of increased physical activity or the emission embodied in the manufacture of the bicycle. This paper presents estimates of emission factors for various forms of commuter transport in Ireland that allow comparison against emissions from cycling. When indirect energy is taken into account, the results presented here indicate that a cyclist commuting an equivalent distance to work releases an almost equal amount of carbon dioxide as that attributed to a passenger of an electrically propelled train at full occupancy during peak service times. Travel by bicycle is much less carbon intensive when compared to passengers travelling at off-peak times. Transport by car and sports utility vehicle is the most carbon intensive of the commuter modes of transport studied, however, travelling in a fully occupied car has an emission factor approaching that of off-peak bus transport.

Yeah, there have been a lot of arguments about how biking is not “green”. Most of them are fundamentally flawed. A very popular one is the assumption that people who bicycle eat more so that they can power said bicycle (than people who do not). Um, proof? Another is that “bicycle factories” are somehow worse than other types of factories. Duh, we know they exist, but don’t pretend to be well informed about them when you’re obviously not. (Quality bicycle frames, when properly cared for / barring accidents, should outlive their rider. Can we say the same of these electric trains? We certainly can’t about most cars.)

This carbon footprint one is funny because the people in the train are certainly releasing “emissions” at the same time that the commuter train is. Did they take that into account? Did they take into account that, over time, a train and its infrastructure will require more / added maintenance over an individual bicycle and its infrastructure (the roads everyone already use)? And of course the comparison uses an electrically powered train. As if that is even an option for most people.

Their comparison is tenuous at best. Maybe, just maybe, this mass transportation is more efficient than bicycling at peak times. However, they admit that “Travel by bicycle is much less carbon intensive when compared to passengers travelling at off-peak times.” (I.E. not rush hour, because the train is always belching out the carbon dioxide it takes to move several tons of steel and plastic even though the train itself may be empty or carrying only a few passengers!) They also gloss over the fact that trains aren’t an economical option in less populated, rural areas (that basically can’t support having a train). Bicycles can go anywhere. Populated or less populated. Infrastructure or no infrastructure.

The abstract also ignores factors like the health benefits of bicycling, which you can’t put an emissions price on. Or convenience: it is entirely possible that it will be more timely to commute by bicycle than by train. I can get to work in less than half the time it takes my bus to get me there. That ratio tips wildly in the bicycle’s favor during rush hour, when mass transit has reduced hours (pretty much all the time for the bus I would take, but predominantly evenings and weekends), or when mass transit strikes.

So, Conor Walsh, Phil Jakeman, Richard Moles and Bernadette O’Regan, stop trashing bicycles and start padding your resumes with worthwhile research. We don’t live in your fantasy world where the nations are already latticed with electric train systems that always run on time, often, and at full capacity.

:: Bibliography ::

• Science Direct – Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. Elsevier. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VH8-4T83387-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9684227e0ee55e4dcbc (19 November 2008).

Homemade roller coaster? Yes please!

Check out this video of a guy that made his own roller coaster. I prefer mine in amusement parks that have a large staff, deep pockets, and hefty insurance policies, although I guess that doesn’t make for much of a thrill ride.

Now all I have to do is coerce my friends (specifically Brian) into going to Kennywood with me. I haven’t been there since the Spaniards took it over, and would like to make sure it has retained its Western Pennsylvanian integrity. For those of you not familiar with Kennywood, it’s an amusement park with several excellent roller coasters (The Racer, Jack Rabbit, Thunderbolt, and Steel Phantom/Phantom’s Revenge) that are renowned for exploiting the park’s natural topography (hills, gullies, etc.) to great effect.