This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
Anons argue in comments
Human beings literally exhale CO2. This makes me curious what the actual carbon efficiency is when using a calorie to CO2 analysis factoring in the carbon footprint of the diet needed to fuel said travel.
Because IIRC carnivores are only 10% efficient, so this feels like a complicated problem. And then of course the carbon footprint of the manufacturing of various methods of transport and break even points over what periods of time.
This is an argument for ebikes, though not the strongest one, I think. The carbon output per mile traveled on an ebike is actually a bit lower than a regular bike because the food you eat has a carbon output. Yes, this includes charging the ebike from a coal power plant.
It does output more CO2 during initial manufacturing, though. Never does quite catch up with a regular bike over their expected lifetime. Both are better than cars and it's not even close.
Interesting, I never knew that was an argument for ebikes, but as you say, if they never break even it's a moot point. Unless... Perhaps having the ebikes promoted more cycling over driving, then perhaps it changes it enough.
The only important carbon part is the carbon used in transporting and growing the food in the form of fuel. We're not releasing trapped carbon when we're eating food as the only way we would save carbon in that situation is if we grew the food and buried it. Worrying about raw energy efficiency gets nonsensical because soon you'll be factoring in the solar energy conversion efficiency between growing and eating plants vs growing and burying plants to turn them into oil.
The better point is just that a bicycle is an incredibly efficient machine for moving a person in terms of energy input to work done compared to the hunks of metal cars are.
Well the meat industry is a large source of emissions isn't it? So if our meat consumption increased due to increased caloric intake, that should have a carbon impact right?
Sure but if you're using anything but carbs and fats to power exercise you're doing it wrong.
Bikes dont contribute to climate change
Well, I understand what you mean but they do a little. Metal and rubber production are the obvious parts. Compared to a car that burns fuel it's meaningless ofcourse.
because conservatives are fat
They conserve their fats
I was worried this wouldn't be politicized and reduced to red v blue and red bad, but you saved the day.
red is more fat
Unsure if that's actually true but regardless it is fact that red is more rural.
I'm a fat cyclist.
FWIW as an avid cyclist I've been yelled at numerous times by car drivers, and it's always skinny middle-aged dudes smoking cigarettes and driving well-dented vehicles. I've always wanted to be yelled at by a fat person so I can shout "enjoy your third heart attack" at them but it's never happened.
Because showing up to a client meeting dripping in sweat on a 103 degree day is considered to be poor form. Because I got a new job and don’t have an extra two hours in my day to ride a bike back and forth, and moving isn’t in the cards. Because I have to carry a couple kids and all the crap the goes along with them.
because the US sucks ass and the entire world just does what the US does is also sucking of the ass.
It's not that I disagree with you, it's that we can do better and we're not.
Y’all would like Ivan Illich.
Or Vladimir Iliich.