GSAstuto
Maximum Pace
- Oct 11, 2009
- 974
- 253
As I was on one of my LSD trips the thought started circulating in my mind about determining the carbon footprint of cycling / cyclists. Much like any transportation , a vehicle, energy and support is required to sustain the activity. So what are the REAL effects, ecologically, in using a bike and say compared to using a car or bus or train? Or even just walking? Any ideas?
Some random thoughts on the frame ...
Steel - long life, low embedded carbon, can be machined and welded with readily available energy source (methane, natural gas, etc). Should be pretty low carbon footprint when calculated over the course of a frame's lifetime.
Aluminum - medium life, high embedded carbon, requires higher level technology (energy) to machine and assemble. Probably pretty high footprint over its lifetime.
Carbon - short life, high embedded carbon, exhaustive use of inorganics and areosols. Probably pretty high footprint over it's lifetime, if not the highest.
Titanium - long life, medium embedded carbon, requires higher level of technology (energy) to machine and assemble. Probably medium footprint over its lifetime - mainly due to longevity.
Bamboo - short life, low embedded carbon, low technology (energy) required for assembly. If you are using hemp fabric and polyester resins as opposed to epoxy and carbon, it's probably the lowest overall footprint.
Energy - Fuel:
1) Meat - highest.
2) Remote Vegetables and Fruits - high.
3) Local Vegetables and Fruits - low.
Result - eat from your own garden and / or consume only locally produced food. Airfreighted food must be one of the highest carbon footprints ever.
Anyone?
Some random thoughts on the frame ...
Steel - long life, low embedded carbon, can be machined and welded with readily available energy source (methane, natural gas, etc). Should be pretty low carbon footprint when calculated over the course of a frame's lifetime.
Aluminum - medium life, high embedded carbon, requires higher level technology (energy) to machine and assemble. Probably pretty high footprint over its lifetime.
Carbon - short life, high embedded carbon, exhaustive use of inorganics and areosols. Probably pretty high footprint over it's lifetime, if not the highest.
Titanium - long life, medium embedded carbon, requires higher level of technology (energy) to machine and assemble. Probably medium footprint over its lifetime - mainly due to longevity.
Bamboo - short life, low embedded carbon, low technology (energy) required for assembly. If you are using hemp fabric and polyester resins as opposed to epoxy and carbon, it's probably the lowest overall footprint.
Energy - Fuel:
1) Meat - highest.
2) Remote Vegetables and Fruits - high.
3) Local Vegetables and Fruits - low.
Result - eat from your own garden and / or consume only locally produced food. Airfreighted food must be one of the highest carbon footprints ever.
Anyone?