Forum menu
Probably the most environmentally friendly thing we could do is gather all the marketeers in the world, pile them up in a huge pyramid, and burn the lot. 🙂
and burn the lot.
All the fine particulate and burning bull....er...oney would be an environmental disaster. Better just to let the pile rot down and use it for fertilizer. That being what they are good at in the first place makes it ironic. I think.
Yup, marketing is just a process to make you dissatisfied with what you've got.
Recycle your old bike yourself...
What do people do with old chains and cassettes? Most of my linger in the garage, but should we find a way to recycle (no pun etc) them?
mine go in the recycling bin?
‘There are of course some 40+ year old steel frames still about, indicating the materials longevity if looked after, but how many of them are in regular use?’
My Rouke, now 40 years old is still in regular use and my Stumpy, now 32 years old is also in regular use!
I was pondering this very topic the other day.
Carbon appears to be a bit of an environmental horror show due to lack of recycling options. Alu is recyclable but not easily repairable and steel is both repairable and recyclable so surely this makes it the most eco-friendly material? Maybe a tad simplistic but there's some logic there.
It would make for a fascinating PhD study or something!
I've used old chains to make home made chain whip tools. Used some to hold up some shelving too. I probably wouldn't trust it to hold a lot of weight but it was pretty nice looking.
I have a good excuse for running my tyres to the carcass – I’m saving the environment
But all those plastic particles are going into the environment.
Don't underestimate the CO2 that goes into a metal frame, or recycling one.
I reckon the best frame material is one you get from the scrappy and build into a bike frame with minimal energy use.
Are biodegradable tyres a possibility?
I can't remember which company but isn't someone scaling up the production of dandelion latex/rubber for tyres? Probably not biodegrade after the fact, but a more sustainable source than rubber trees (higher yield power acre I think it said) and oil.
Edit- here it is, comparable yield, but in 6 months, weather dependant like many crops.
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/product-news/continental-launches-bike-tyre-made-dandelions-424634
then the global economy would go into major recession, no?
Why would that be a bad thing? Why do we consider growth to be a good thing?
Maybe it’s time for a new material? One that’s tough, has low environmental impact to produce and is easily recyclable. I have no idea what that might be though unfortunately.
I would guess that the impact of the frame would be negligible in comparison to, say, driving to the trails, buying new gear regularly, using a water bottle or hydration pack only a few times or having a steak when you get back.
Why would that be a bad thing? Why do we consider growth to be a good thing?
Because the free market capitalist brainwashing has worked?
Favourite bikes that still get used regularly are an 80's Peugeot road bike & early 90's Diamondback mtb, and a 1940's Raleigh Clubman, all steel frames that have needed nothing, not much in components replaced over the years and suspect they will keep going forever. Find 8 speed drivetrains are great too, right balance of sturdiness/longevity and gear ranges.
mine go in the recycling bin
What? The one for cardboard, plastic, tin..? Or does your council have a special "bike parts" recycle bin?
Cam I just be controversial and say it's probably whichever allows people to enjoy riding the most? The environmental and social benefits of building that bike vastly outweigh the costs.
Also only a small proportion of the materials in the bike are in the frame so you need to consider other components particularly consumables.
Maybe it’s time for a new material? One that’s tough, has low environmental impact to produce and is easily recyclable. I have no idea what that might be though unfortunately.
Horses?
Because the free market capitalist brainwashing has worked?
So far, but encouraging stuff I've been reading lately suggests that reconsidering growth as good is entering relatively mainstream thinking.
roach
Member
If everybody started buying used stuff and making more sustainable choices then the global economy would go into major recession, no?
Yip, which is the pertinent point. It's the entire system that has to change, individual do gooders are doing heehaw but make themselves feel a bit better.
It's like I see adverts for people living environmentally and off grid. Aye that's all fine and good if you've the cash resources to do that, but it's simply not scaleable, nor an option available to the majority.
Ultimately, it's all a game of brinkmanship, well keep going till the shit hits the fan. And then probably a bit further...
Systemic change will happen. I heard someone mention the concept of Eco-authoritarian governments of the future elsewhere. I guess something I like that could possibly happen.
A few individuals making feel good choices ain't going to do heehaw though. Consumerism and growth will continue until to breaking point..
Necessity will be the mother of invention I'd guess.
disk brakes will and have improved things as the rims do not wear out using disks although no doubt the brake fluid is pretty bad for the environment.
When I changed out my road bike's knackered three year old drivetrain last month, my first ride on it was to the county recycling area to chuck the old stuff in the metal skip. My mountain bike is a 2006 steel frame I bought off here plus 12 year old wheels and (steel) forks. And, and, I take the train to get to rides! I'm going to save the planet!
Nah, not really, we're ****ed. The 'recycling' gets shipped to Bangladesh or the Philippines for sneaky dumping, but at least I get the warm glow.
Might be better to rephrase the question to 'which frame material is worse for our planet in production and end of product life terms'
I might suggest that would make a Carbon fibre the worse (as a whole bike a Carbon e-bike would be even worse)
If everybody started buying used stuff and making more sustainable choices then the global economy would go into major recession, no?
Not necessarily. It would depend on the speed of the change and how well businesses responded to it. There is a growing movement towards "right to repair" for electronic devices. The companies that are supplying parts and repair services are doing quite well. The money that comes out of phone makers and into repairers is still in the economy and still moving around which is the key.
Buggy whip makers had hard times. Car makers picked up the slack and then some.
The ‘recycling’ gets shipped to Bangladesh or the Philippines for sneaky dumping, but at least I get the warm glow.
I'd be surprised it that was true of metal. There is a market for it. Plastic and the like, though.....
Also the Phillipines (I think) is getting tough. Wasn't it them that recently demanded the US or Canada take back a bunch of rubbish that was supposed to be recycling?
Carbon appears to be a bit of an environmental horror show due to lack of recycling options
Well yes, but it's actually very repairable and doesn't suffer from fatigue due to repeated flex unlike metals, so if you were prepared to repair it when damaged, it could conceivably last a very, very long time.
BadlyWiredDog
Subscriber
doesn’t suffer from fatigue due to repeated flex unlike metals
Metals only suffer flex fatigue if it's above their tolerance. This is the part of the post where I say "Young's modulus", and then pretend like I really know what that means.
Metals only suffer flex fatigue if it’s above their tolerance. This is the part of the post where I say “Young’s modulus”, and then pretend like I really know what that means.
Yeah I know, but in real life, most metal frames crack eventually, just more quickly if they're badly designed. It's the reason I can't bring myself to buy a Cotic SodaMAX despite it being a frame I'd really like in theory. I can't contemplate a £1700 ti frame with a two-year warranty.
Talking of which, a genuine lifetime, repair-based warranty would be good for sustainability, but then you have to factor in other stuff - my Ragley Ti went back to the States for a warranty repair, was sent back to them, modified, and then sent back to me. So it crossed the Atlantic four times, five times if you include the original export from the US to the UK, which probably wasn't very good for its sustainability rating even if it extended the life of the frame.
Ecological cost isn't always where you think it is in a process - it may be the packaging or the way the factory and offices are run or in the distribution rather than in the product itself.
Bottom line though: the most sustainable thing we can do is simply to buy less stuff, but we've built a world based on consumption of unnecessary crap, including bike-shaped unnecessary crap.
Metals only suffer flex fatigue if it’s above their tolerance. This is the part of the post where I say “Young’s modulus”, and then pretend like I really know what that means.
I thought that was true of steel but Alu would fail due to flex fatigue even if it was below tolerance - its a work hardening cumulative thing.
Young's Modulus, err pythagorean theorem, and er Schroedinger's cat.
Horses?
I’m liking your thinking. The only downside is that their shoes are made from metal and that puts us back at square one.
Do they need shoes if you only ride them off road?
Metals only suffer flex fatigue if it’s above their tolerance.
The jury is still out on this, for practical purposes you can consider a limiting stress but it's pretty low.
And then you have stress concentrations, some around flaws, some of which will be planar flaws, which will give a theoretically infinite SIF. And you have residual strains.
So practically, for something like a bike, if it's well designed, it won't crack for a long time, but it will crack. A carbon frame won't necessarily fatigue (individual crack in a single fibre doesn't really matter), but it will one day suffer from some other degradation mechanism. Or get crashed badly.
I thought that was true of steel but Alu would fail due to flex fatigue even if it was below tolerance – its a work hardening cumulative thing.
Aluminium and some stainless steels have no elastic limit, and there's no suggestion that they have an endurance limit. They also in reality are worse from a fatigue point of view as their stress-strain behaviour follows the Ramberg-Osgood curve rather than having a linear portion up to yield stress - noting that fatigue damage is determined by strain cycles not stress cycles.
follows the Ramberg-Osgood curve
If thats the one where stress/strain cycles cause the fatigue limit to drop slowly, then hit a cliff then flatten to almost infinite but not actually infinite limit. So as the material hits a point at which its stress limit is much lower than new and never hits 0 but comes close.
Then thats what I was thinking of. Whereas cromoly and the like retain much more of their original limit for much longer.
Do they need shoes if you only ride them off road?
There are a couple that hang out in a field near my house. I’ll ask them next time I’m passing. Always best to get this sort of information straight from the horses mouth.