ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-01-2013, 12:48 PM   #46
randyo
Beastly Adventurer
 
randyo's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Northern NewEngland
Oddometer: 1,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grinnin View Post
I think the math in this discussion doesn't start with realistic assumptions. When people go hiking it's often in groups. Put 2 hikers in a car that gets 30mpg and you have the equivalent of 60mpg per person. Or 3 in a SUV that gets 20mpg. That puts those about even with the typical motorcycle.

These people may all commute one-per-vehicle during the week, but I usually see groups getting out of each car at a trail head.

The MPG race for motorcycles and hikers looks like a wash to me.

Bicyclists, in my experience, are more likely to arrive one-per-car.

Do my observations or math match what others see?
again, your putting the impact to the environment as the trip to the recreation area, it's miniscule, the impact is parking, compacted soil and open unvegetated areas that absorb more heat from the sun and increase flooding, soil erosion and stream and lake sedimentation. The road itself that ya get there on or the twisty that you ride on has more impact than the gasoline you burn.

Very few roads are actually engineered to be environmentally friendly
__________________
RandyO
IBA # 9560
07 VeeStrom
99 SV650
82 XV920R
A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject
randyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 01:25 PM   #47
Long Gone
Objectivist
 
Long Gone's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Ivor VA
Oddometer: 242
Save the earth?

Just what are people trying to save the earth from? Ourselves it looks like, but since every bit of this planet has been at the bottom of an ocean numerous times in the last 4.5 billion years we severely exaggerate mankind's importance. We'll fade away or move somewhere else and the earth will recycle the crust with all the minerals while the flora and fauna repopulate just as they have numerous times before. Of course we can poison our air with pollutants but the argument that a gas that comprises only .04% of the atmosphere is creating a warming trend when we've accurately measured temperatures for only a few generations is irrational. A volcanic eruption puts more carbon dioxide and other much more deadly gases into the atmosphere that the whole of the Industrial Revolution. We really aren't a factor in how the climate changes. BTW, the coal in Antarctica didn't originate in Pennsylvania and the last Ice Age didn't end because of campfires.

We should all try to keep the place up while we're here and respect the rights of others but I see no need to feel guilty about enjoying ourselves. The estimates of available fossil fuels go up weekly and the quicker we burn them up the quicker we'll be forced to find alternatives. Just my $.02, it's worth what you paid for it.
__________________
Chris

“One travels more usefully when alone, because he reflects more” Thomas Jefferson
Long Gone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 03:42 PM   #48
Ceri JC
UK GSer
 
Ceri JC's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: All over, usually Wales or England
Oddometer: 2,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwalsh View Post
Wow, really? A foot does as much damage as a knobby?
No, but hiking boots do damage trails: Hell, even bunny rabbits using them does.

The problem is the binary divide a lot of people (hikers) seem to create whereby:
Human walking = no impact
Vehicle = earth-raping orgy of destruction
As opposed to recognising it as the phenomenally complex and multi-faceted subject that it really is. Someone walking barefoot causes less damage than someone wearing hiking boots. Someone with Trials tyres causes less damage than someone with hill climb knobblies. There are an infinite number of shades of grey in terms of the impact someone makes. As someone else mentioned, the eco-mentalist with 4 kids and their future progeny will do far more to harm the planet than someone childless will, even if that person drives a hummer with knobblies through the Appalachians.

Not that it should in any way alter the way my comments are taken, but just as an I've been a hiker a lot longer than I have a DSer and have hiked far more miles than I have ridden offroad (and indeed, more than many of the NIMBYing hikers who are so vehemently anti-vehicle have).
__________________
I like my bike because I can overtake 4x4s down farm tracks with a week's worth of shopping on the back.
Ceri JC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 07:15 PM   #49
bwalsh
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Hell town
Oddometer: 9,970
Damn, this thread was started to discuss Carbon footprint. I has now morphed into noise pollution, tree huggers and environmental impact, none of which relates to ones carbon footprint...

The amount of carbon dioxide emitted due to the the consumption of fossil fuels by a particular person, group, etc.

Source
Definition of CARBON FOOTPRINT

: the amount of greenhouse gases and specifically carbon dioxide emitted by something (as a person's activities or a product's manufacture and transport) during a given period

Source



It has nothing to do with noise. It has nothing to do with the attitude of the hippy down the block. It has nothing to do with compressed earth.
Of course the blogger was just as misinformed as to what "carbon Footprint" actually meant so I guess...carry on!

This reminds me of being down in Jo Momma!
__________________
2004 XR650L / 2001 R1150GS
NWVA TAG NWVA TAG MAP RTE THREAD & IN LIST



bwalsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 07:42 PM   #50
blitchfield
Gnarly Adventurer
 
blitchfield's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Near The Notch, CT
Oddometer: 223
Ruin-errr

from the LA Times and I've seen other bits and pieces like it,

"This story is about emissions. More specifically, it's about the surprising level of emissions spewing from on-road motorcycles and scooters. In California, such bikes make up 3.6% of registered vehicles and 1% of vehicle miles traveled, yet they account for 10% of passenger vehicles' smog-forming emissions in the state. In fact, the average motorbike is about 10 times more polluting per mile than a passenger car, light truck or SUV, according to a California Air Resources Board comparison of emissions-compliant vehicles."


http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun.../hy-throttle11

yes the bikes burn less gas but spew more shit into the air. Either way give the evil eyed hikers the adv salute next time you see em , it's here for everyone to enjoy ( so long as your doing it legally)

I would say if I was concerned with my carbon footprint I would have to abandon all modern comforts, so long heating and cooling, so long shelter, so long mass produced clothing and sell off the toys. In short, life would suck (more)
blitchfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2013, 08:02 PM   #51
slartidbartfast
Love those blue pipes
 
slartidbartfast's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Louisiana or Southern England or ...
Oddometer: 4,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Gone View Post
... the argument that a gas that comprises only .04% of the atmosphere is creating a warming trend when we've accurately measured temperatures for only a few generations is irrational.
You are up against all the credible scientists in the world with your idea of what is rational and what's not. CO2 tends to hold heat in the atmosphere far more than nitrogen or oxygen do - It's an effect that is measurable and well understood. Therefore it's influence is far greater than the relatively small proportion might suggest. Also the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by around 40% since pre-industrial times (up from about 0.03%, mostly since about 1950) - Again, this measurement is fairly well understood and not disputed.

Quote:
A volcanic eruption puts more carbon dioxide and other much more deadly gases into the atmosphere that the whole of the Industrial Revolution.
This is a totally fabricated fact that has been put about by those with an anti-global-warming axe to grind. It is absolutely NOT true. Volcanic activity releases less than 1% of the amount of CO2 that is emitted from fossil fuel burning each year.
__________________
MSF Ridercoach IBA: 35353 95 R1100GSA, 93 GTS1000, 85 R80RT, 93 DR350/435, 99 RX125, 78 DT100
January 2010 New Zealand South Island ride
Summer 2009 UK to Alps ride
Summer 2008 UK End-to-End ride
slartidbartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 03:24 AM   #52
Grinnin
Forever N00b
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Location: Maine
Oddometer: 2,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by randyo View Post
. . . the impact is parking, compacted soil and open unvegetated areas that absorb more heat from the sun and increase flooding, soil erosion and stream and lake sedimentation. The road itself that ya get there on or the twisty that you ride on has more impact than the gasoline you burn.
You may be right.

The article that started this thread is not about impact at all. It's about finger-pointing. It's about justifying one's own activities and blaming the activities of others. It is also about denying the blame that other groups spread around.
__________________
Motorcycles are magical.

Grinnin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 05:45 AM   #53
Ginger Beard
I have no soul
 
Ginger Beard's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: Sunny Northern Cuba (aka: South Florida)
Oddometer: 5,813
Why even bother arguing with pissed off hikers ? You are on a bike for fecks' sake!!! Just roost them and carry on your merry way.



















__________________
"I have great faith in fools; self-confidence my friends call it." ~Edgar Allen Poe~
My HD Scram-ster build
Help Save a Pit-Bull
Ginger Beard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 07:38 AM   #54
randyo
Beastly Adventurer
 
randyo's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Northern NewEngland
Oddometer: 1,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwalsh View Post
Damn, this thread was started to discuss Carbon footprint.
I didn't read that anywhere, even between the lines, carbon footprint was discussed by the OP however carbon footprint is prolly the least impacting aspect of environmental impact

1. were coming out of an ice age and in a global warming mode by nature

2. how often do you see a smog cloud over the recreational areas outside of metropolitan areas

maybe we should be more concerned with the primary impacts

erosion
sedimentation
trash
habitat destruction
introduction of invasive species (insects & diseases that have left eggs, larvae, spores on camping gear, etc.)
__________________
RandyO
IBA # 9560
07 VeeStrom
99 SV650
82 XV920R
A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject
randyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 09:24 AM   #55
mikem9 OP
Wanderer
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: North Georgia
Oddometer: 1,183
OP here. I just thought it was interesting. I think a lot of the authors purpose was just trying to be humorous while making a bit of a point. Most of us that have ridden shared use trails have felt that stink eye stare of other user groups from time to time. Some riders say F-em. I don't know about that. I enjoy getting along with fellow outdoor enthusiasts. All except maybe the unreasonable extremists who feel their particular way of enjoying the outdoors is absolutely the only way. Those seem to be in the minority. For those, I say kill them with kindness, unless they become a personal threat - and then I believe in doing whatever is necessary.

I can empathize with other forest users who've had encounters with loud obnoxious motorcyclists who roost by and don't seem to give a hoot about those around them. But, a good number of back country, enduro dual sport types, are courteous, care a lot about conserving the environment and most have stories of helping other users in need. As you know our vehicle choice is the best in the forest for covering ground, except for maybe a helicopter. So, in times of need - searching, bringing food/water, going for help etc. Motorcyclists often have a lot to offer other forest users in emergency situations. Most of us have stories of helping other users.

Regarding the impacts and sharing with other users. I also hike and mountain bike and have seen the issue from those users point of view. In the backcountry, those motorcycle riders who come along usually standing on the pegs and wearing a backpack, a style of riding with good smooth singletrack skills - using momentum vs. roosting everywhere and quiet pipes. They often have some of the best enduro skills. They stop for others users or go slowly by. They give a nod or a wave as they ride by.These folks make a good impression.

Vs. the other types of backcountry riders at the other end of the spectrum. Loud bikes. The roosting starts in the parking lot, throwing gravel, roosting the start of the trail head. No courtesy for other users. An entitlement mentality.

For most of us that ride backcountry and in the forest. We love the mountains and the forest as much as other users. We want to see it kept healthy. But, we feel that the proper use of our vehicles won't do significant or long term damage.
Private, commercially owned riding areas have proven that the forest can be kept healthy by proper management, even with high levels of vehicle traffic.

I think at the root of most of this discussion is common courtesy. In a closed course, motorized only environments, quiet pipes aren't as big of a deal. Also, we can all roost to our hearts content. It's part of motocross or Hare Scrambles. But, if we are sharing space with hikers, horse riders, rock climbers, mountain bikers etc, quiet pipes are a courtesy issue. Slowing down and minimizing roosting around others is a courtesy issue. Not roosting trail entrances and in parking lots - all common courtesy.

In summary - As riders, most of us really love the forests and mountains. We care about the environment and feel the impact we make is acceptable. Regarding other users, common courtesy will go a long way.
mikem9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 10:49 AM   #56
Long Gone
Objectivist
 
Long Gone's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Ivor VA
Oddometer: 242
Puke Credible???

Quote:
Originally Posted by slartidbartfast View Post
You are up against all the credible scientists in the world with your idea of what is rational and what's not. CO2 tends to hold heat in the atmosphere far more than nitrogen or oxygen do - It's an effect that is measurable and well understood. Therefore it's influence is far greater than the relatively small proportion might suggest. Also the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by around 40% since pre-industrial times (up from about 0.03%, mostly since about 1950) - Again, this measurement is fairly well understood and not disputed.

This is a totally fabricated fact that has been put about by those with an anti-global-warming axe to grind. It is absolutely NOT true. Volcanic activity releases less than 1% of the amount of CO2 that is emitted from fossil fuel burning each year.
Credible scientists? The one's who skewed the data and had it revealed in emails? Sorry, but ALL the credible scientists don't agree on anything much less that climate change is being caused by human activity. Maybe ALL the "credible" scientists you choose to listen to agree on that but ALL credible scientists certainly do not. There are quite a few real scientists who don't publish to gain more government hand-outs or grants and who have a different and supportable opinion. Seeing a hypocritical "D" student like Algore as the spokesperson for this tripe ought to be the first clue that it's fad pseudo-science being foisted on a largely uninformed populace that thinks Entertainment Tonight is journalism. The anti-capitalist leftists that jumped on the environmentalist bandwagon when the Soviet Union imploded would love to have us join the Kyoto accords while the worst polluters in the Third World get a pass. All the accords will do is help drag us down to their level. Now the UN wants the industrialized west to pay through the nose to cover supposed damage done to the less developed world due to climate change. That money won't do a thing except end up in the pockets of the people who rule that part of the world and keep it underdeveloped because they become richer and more powerful when we cough up our wealth. I'm old enough to remember when Time magazine was warning of the coming ice age. What happened to that? I've had enough of Chicken Littles who think 100 years is a long time in the life of this planet.
__________________
Chris

“One travels more usefully when alone, because he reflects more” Thomas Jefferson
Long Gone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 11:23 AM   #57
p0diabl0
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego
Oddometer: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Gone View Post
Credible scientists? The one's who skewed the data and had it revealed in emails? Sorry, but ALL the credible scientists don't agree on anything much less that climate change is being caused by human activity. Maybe ALL the "credible" scientists you choose to listen to agree on that but ALL credible scientists certainly do not. There are quite a few real scientists who don't publish to gain more government hand-outs or grants and who have a different and supportable opinion. Seeing a hypocritical "D" student like Algore as the spokesperson for this tripe ought to be the first clue that it's fad pseudo-science being foisted on a largely uninformed populace that thinks Entertainment Tonight is journalism. The anti-capitalist leftists that jumped on the environmentalist bandwagon when the Soviet Union imploded would love to have us join the Kyoto accords while the worst polluters in the Third World get a pass. All the accords will do is help drag us down to their level. Now the UN wants the industrialized west to pay through the nose to cover supposed damage done to the less developed world due to climate change. That money won't do a thing except end up in the pockets of the people who rule that part of the world and keep it underdeveloped because they become richer and more powerful when we cough up our wealth. I'm old enough to remember when Time magazine was warning of the coming ice age. What happened to that? I've had enough of Chicken Littles who think 100 years is a long time in the life of this planet.
Wow, someone certainly had their Fox News this morning.
p0diabl0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 11:25 AM   #58
slartidbartfast
Love those blue pipes
 
slartidbartfast's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Location: Southern Louisiana or Southern England or ...
Oddometer: 4,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Gone View Post
Credible scientists? The one's who skewed the data and had it revealed in emails? Sorry, but ALL the credible scientists don't agree on anything much less that climate change is being caused by human activity. Maybe ALL the "credible" scientists you choose to listen to agree on that but ALL credible scientists certainly do not. There are quite a few real scientists who don't publish to gain more government hand-outs or grants and who have a different and supportable opinion. Seeing a hypocritical "D" student like Algore as the spokesperson for this tripe ought to be the first clue that it's fad pseudo-science being foisted on a largely uninformed populace that thinks Entertainment Tonight is journalism. The anti-capitalist leftists that jumped on the environmentalist bandwagon when the Soviet Union imploded would love to have us join the Kyoto accords while the worst polluters in the Third World get a pass. All the accords will do is help drag us down to their level. Now the UN wants the industrialized west to pay through the nose to cover supposed damage done to the less developed world due to climate change. That money won't do a thing except end up in the pockets of the people who rule that part of the world and keep it underdeveloped because they become richer and more powerful when we cough up our wealth. I'm old enough to remember when Time magazine was warning of the coming ice age. What happened to that? I've had enough of Chicken Littles who think 100 years is a long time in the life of this planet.
You have a strange understanding of "credible". Perhaps I should have said "respected" or "mainstream" but you've probably got a trite rebuttal for those terms too.

"Not a fucking clue!" is a huge understatement. You also seem to be having a hard time separating conjectural unwanted political outcomes (UN actions, etc.) from the science.

...and if one incident related to data manipulation is enough to turn your opinion against all those who believe in anthropogenic climate change, how do you feel about those who simply make facts up? (Like the well-circulated, oft repeated BS about relative CO2 emissions from vulcanism?)
__________________
MSF Ridercoach IBA: 35353 95 R1100GSA, 93 GTS1000, 85 R80RT, 93 DR350/435, 99 RX125, 78 DT100
January 2010 New Zealand South Island ride
Summer 2009 UK to Alps ride
Summer 2008 UK End-to-End ride
slartidbartfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 12:03 PM   #59
randyo
Beastly Adventurer
 
randyo's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Northern NewEngland
Oddometer: 1,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikem9 View Post
Vs. the other types of backcountry riders at the other end of the spectrum. Loud bikes. The roosting starts in the parking lot, throwing gravel, roosting the start of the trail head. No courtesy for other users. An entitlement mentality.

For most of us that ride backcountry and in the forest. We love the mountains and the forest as much as other users
My observation of the "bad apples" so to speak is that they are generally local yahoos, if they trucked to the area, it was only a short distance. As locals, they feel they are entitled cause they were there first, "flatlanders" are an invasion from the outside. I know this because its the people I have grown up with. They have loud pipes usually cause its a reflection of the state of repair as much as any other reason. But if it's what their got to ride with, their gonna ride. I was a teenager once, so I've seen it firsthand, then of course, there are some that are really assholes
__________________
RandyO
IBA # 9560
07 VeeStrom
99 SV650
82 XV920R
A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject
randyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2013, 02:39 PM   #60
Knute Dunrvnyet
marooned in realtime
 
Knute Dunrvnyet's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Location: CNY: "Traveler's Rest"
Oddometer: 1,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Long Gone View Post
Credible scientists?...
The irony of your self-description is not lost on me.
__________________
"You gotta be happy all the time. That's why we're here" - Peter Hardy
"I used to be an adventurer like you; then I took an arrow to the heart."

[advwhiner since 1973]
"Ride Hard, You can Rest when you Die."- Emmett Watkins, #245, 1958-2005
Knute Dunrvnyet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014