Forum menu
Bicycle riders wors...
 

[Closed] Bicycle riders worse for the environment than car drivers?

Posts: 9
Free Member
Topic starter
 
[#325934]

http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0722-bikes.html

ha he has a point, ๐Ÿ˜€
but by that rational we killing ourselves would be better for the environment,


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 12:11 pm
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

an excellent example of the theory of unintended consequences ๐Ÿ™‚


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 12:14 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

what a unit!


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 12:15 pm
Posts: 35035
Full Member
 

Bike riders live longer and there are more of them because they are more healthy, ergo they have more of an environmental impact over their lifetimes.

Interesting...


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 12:27 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

I suppose improved medical care could be accused of being 'non-green' too then?


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 12:43 pm
Posts: 13587
Full Member
 

Similar to a discussion I had over a few beers:

Which politician has had the greatest positive environmental impact?


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 1:23 pm
Posts: 13587
Full Member
 

I voted for George Bush

His wars have killed more Americans who are the greatest polluting individuals

He f*cked up Iraq's oil production

His general world policies have screwed the price of oil making people find better ways to get energy

...


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 1:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Given the number of people on this form who will dance for Maggie she must be in with a shout, mass exercise for the working classes - nobody else has managed it ;+)


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 1:35 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Ah, but those wars have seen the use of loads of depleted Uranium, phosphorous and all sorts of other nasty chemicals, WCA; not to mention the incredibly damaging effects of weapons production and testing..

Any news on the job situation?


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 1:41 pm
 Kuco
Posts: 7216
Full Member
 

I thought they Halted the A10's using depleted Uranium shells.


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 1:57 pm
Posts: 12
Free Member
 

Nope. DU ammunition is still being produced by many countries although only the UK and US have admitted using weapons containing DU. The problem is that DU isn't covered under any specific treaty.

It is the possible poisonous secondary effects of DU that is the main concern but the acts covering the use of poisons in war specifically exclude 'nuclear material' because they are covered under their own treaties. Unfortunately the nuclear treaties aren't concerned with the poisonous nature of nuclear materials as generally (in the case of Plutonium/Uranium) its the explosive nature and mass-destruction caused that is the primary concern.

BTW, the A10 is only one of the many weapon systems that uses DU ammunition.


 
Posted : 21/02/2009 2:04 pm