Another day, another anti-cycling rant in a local newspaper (Sunday Post)
On average a human produce about 30 grams per hour of CO2, well below the 100g/km
And far more importantly, that is CO2 that is already part of the existing carbon cycle, rather than releasing “new” CO2 into the atmosphere that was previously trapped in fossils.
(I doubt this buys any leverage with the ABD by the way, as they don’t believe in climate change either)Posted 4 years agoBigButSlimmerBlokeMember
The bike, on the other hand, is inherently unsafe because even the safest (most skilled and road aware) rider is vulnerable at all times.
But we’re not. We’re only vulnerable when people are driving cars near us. It’s non-logic.Posted 4 years ago
Well no, neither of my last bike related trips to hospital involved cars or even being on road.miketuallySubscriber
the ABD have an amazing facebook page with 879 likes!! funnily enough they are whingeing about cyclists hijacking the comments section in the sunday post responses. They also have some MP patrons! wow heavy hitters, we should all be awestruck at their prestige and influence.
One of their supporters is the UKIP MEP who doesn’t think we should give money to “Bongo Bongo Land”.Posted 4 years agobailsSubscriber
Well no, neither of my last bike related trips to hospital involved cars or even being on road.
Hmmm, bit like countering the point that travelling by foot isn’t inherently dangerous by pointing out people who died while attempting to climb Everest.
Unless of course you were doing 10mph on a ‘sit up and beg’ bike on a well surfaced, segregated cycle path. Seeing as this is an MTB forum I’m assuming it was an ‘extreme sport’ type of incident.Posted 4 years ago
My mrs and her roadie mate recently got pulled over by traffic poilce for not using a cyclepath: riding on the road not the badly-maintained (random patches of tarmac, random 10″ ‘sinkhole’ where it goes over a railway, tree roots lifting tarmac) shared footway/cyclepath on the opposite side of the 40mph dual carriageway. (not especially busy, they were doing 25mph) 😕Posted 4 years agomolgripsSubscriber
A police offier stopped me once for riding on a dual carraigeway, the A470 Southbound towards Cardiff. It’s got a hard shoulder as wide as a normal lane, so you are much further from the traffic than you are on a normal road. It’s also really fast, I was using it because it was late and I wanted to get home. As long as you take proper care on the exits and use the non-suicide technique, It’s fine.Posted 4 years ago
Graham, oh yes it was in the UK. She and her friend pointed their speed, (and the lack of impact on traffic and the guidance not to use shared use paths at that speed) out the the officer at the time but he seemed unconvinced. They both complained, (about the same incident) one girl got a really helpful response from one duty sergeant who is apparently coming to our local monthly cycling/council liaison meeting, and the other got a different sergeant who couldn’t see anything wrong whatsoever with the traffic officer’s view or actions. 😕Posted 4 years agoormondroydMember
They also have some MP patrons! wow heavy hitters, we should all be awestruck at their prestige and influence.
Unfortunately they do have influence, with stupid local authorities who consult them, stupidly, on stuff (while ignoring other groups like the London Cycling Campaign)Posted 4 years ago
The way lobbying reform is heading, your local authority can ignore London Cycling Campaign for a whole year before elections too (and have them prosecuted if they campaign too hard/expensively). http://blogs.ncvo.org.uk/2013/08/22/still-too-many-questions-around-non-party-campaigning-rules/ 👿Posted 4 years ago
I confess,the day before yesterday on the way home I deviated off the shared use path and onto the road to avoid a pedestrian deafened by headphones weaving across the generous four feet afforded to pedestrians and cyclists for that 1 mile stretch. I will now go and reflect on my actions and order an air zound.Posted 4 years ago
Actually I agree with grum and I’ve said as much in the past too.
Some folk always seem to turn their nose up at a cycle path even when it offers a better, safer and possibly even faster environment than the road. But I think that’s really just a symptom of the fact that the vast majority of UK cycle paths are not fit for purpose, so that colours their view a bit.
That said, I fully support the right to ride on the road. Cyclist’s should never be forced off roads that they are legally entitled to use, regardless of what other options are available.Posted 4 years agogrumMember
And today’s troll award goes to …..Grum!
Not trolling. I’m all for cyclists being able to use roads if they prefer, but there does seem to be a culture where it’s not seen as the done thing to use cycle paths if you are a ‘proper’ cyclist, which is daft. There are some really good ones about (and some really terrible ones).Posted 4 years ago
I would suggest if they offered a better, safer and faster route than the road then we wouldn’t be having this conversation as other cyclist would come to the same conclusion.
They (cyclist) don’t because the cycle paths are not better, safer or faster, they are to one degree of another worse in one or more respects than using the road the difference may be subtle, including all the points mentioned in this thread and others but whatever the reasons are the message is clear they don’t get used because they not the best option.
And why shouldn’t I use the best option for me, it’s mine paid for by my taxes, I’m using it thanks.Posted 4 years ago
IanW: I’m sure people have their reasons, but I have had conversations with fellow cyclists, including people on here, who are opposed to segregated cycle paths on ideological grounds and claim that they would never consider using them, regardless of how good they may actually be, because they have the right to use the road and they will exercise that right.Posted 4 years agomolgripsSubscriber
have had conversations with fellow cyclists, including people on here, who are opposed to segregated cycle paths on ideological grounds
I’m partially opposed on practical grounds. Coercion to use them would ruin my road cycling, to be honest. They are nice for tootlers, but not for fast cyclists. And I’d worry that drivers would not be expecting cyclists to be on the roads. It’s not simple.
You can’t make good progress on most cycleways, and even the widest best one I know (Bristol-Bath) is scarier than the roads at peak times because of the sheer numbers of cyclists and fast roadies weaving in and out at 20mph or more.Posted 4 years agofranksinatraSubscriber
Terrible article but there are far too many ‘serious cyclists’ who seem to think that cycle paths are beneath them. Quite a few of them post on here.
I agree and have posted on this before, I got flamed for it!Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Another day, another anti-cycling rant in a local newspaper (Sunday Post)’ is closed to new replies.