Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

motorcycles aren't green

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by twistngo, Jul 26, 2008.

  1.  Top
  2. Interesting point and it doesn't seem too fair, so have sent the senator an email. But can't help feel a bit hypocritical. They would have to look at bikes and rank them for environmental impact the same way as they do for cars.

    I was talking at a party last night to some scooter riding folks who get a whole lot more milage out of their rides than I ever did out of my 250 MC. My upgraded bike is nearly 50% more costly to run than that. A bit like the gas guzzling 4WD equivalent of the MC world. Plus I ride just to ride and where ever possible don't carry anyone else in my vehicle, but will ride in a mob on single vehicles to the same place.

    Though definately believe low petrol/electric vehicles need to be added.
     
     Top
  3. I've wondered how long it would take the anti-bike lobby to run with this one.
     
     Top
  4. despite all that I use less resources if I ride my bike than if I take the car.
    less petrol, less damage to the road
     
     Top
  5. The reason no government will actually advocate powered two wheelers is the increased safety risk. It contradicts their duty of care to be seen to encourage people to adopt a mode of transport that puts them at a greater risk of being killed or injured.

    They may possibly acknowledge the reduced footprint, but never expect them to actually tell you it's a good idea. Fact of life.
     
     Top
  6. Which one?

    It's a lie by omission.

    To entertain the notion that motorcycles and scooters aren't more environmentally-friendly transport than cars is an indefensible position.

    Or do you mean you wondered how long their bullshit would go uncontested?
     
     Top
  7. Wouldn't surprise me that that would be the thinking.

    Indiviual risk could be argued to be outweighed by the cumulative benefits of using lower emissions vehicles and thereby helping not to destroy all humans. Of course governments must focus on three/four year goals, not the long term.
     
     Top
  8.  
     Top
  9. Clearly she is wong.....
     
     Top
  10. Not totally indefensible, if they want to pull a Today-Tonight style use of emotional language and selective use of statistics.

    They could eagerly point to the VTR1000 Firestorm and its astounding "uses more fuel than Spots' supercharged sportscar" efficiency.

    They could eagerly point out, quite rightly, that as yet no motorcycle in Australia is required to have a catalytic converter and therefore we're belching all sorts of wonderful pollution and toxins unchecked. Even my brand new Tiger doesn't have one despite overseas models including it. The huge valve overlap and camshaft durations on most bikes don't help either.

    They could eagerly point out that while my mother's Honda Jazz can get 6L/100km with five occupants on the highway, my Tiger only gets 5L/100km with 2 people.

    (Of course, my mother's Honda Jazz doesn't have a power/weight ratio of 350hp/tonne wet, with rider, but why compare apples to apples when you can name-and-shame oranges in the comparison!)

    They could also do a beat-up on how motorcycles selfishly take up 1 5-occupant-car space with a 2-occupant vehicle (nevermind that the law forbids us from parking more than one motorcycle to a metered car space). That one might be too easy to see through though, since many of the 'green' commuter cars such as the Smart forTwo are 2-seat-only.

    So many fun ways to show just how evil motorcycles are!
     
     Top
  11. Yea you could be right,


    1.my bike stinks more from the exhaust than my car does.

    2.My car has a catalytic converter which changes harmful carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide which plants can change to oxygen.

    3.my bike only carries 1 person compared to 5 in a car, so it needs to pollute 5 times less

    4.my car is fitted with anti-pollution devices such as a charcoal canister which my bike doesn’t have, for escaping fumes

    5.most cars these days are fuel injected and burn more efficiently than the majority carburetor bikes

    But then again, the polar ice caps are melting on mars too, and they don’t have traffic, maybe the sun is just in a hot cycle, and carbon tax and global warming is a shame for some people to make money.
     
     Top
  12. Well I learnt something out of this, I was unaware that you cannot have more than one motorcycle per car parking space! :?
     
     Top
  13. *nod* Australian Road Roolz - No more than one vehicle (of any type) to a marked parking bay.

    I suspect any parking officer who enforced this would be lynched, though. It'd be a bit mean to enforce it on 4 motorcycles who're touring as a convoy - they arrive and occupy the bay together, and all leave the bay together.
     
     Top
  14. my instructor on the pre provisional, told me to park my bike in his space during the road ride stop at macas
    but then again macas and shopping centres are private land cant get fined?

    I park infront of the electric door at the shopping centre, could they book me there or tow me away legally?
     
     Top
  15. The ZX9 comes with a cat converter in standard OEM guise. I thought all modern bikes did... ??
     
     Top
  16. My 98 ZX-6R had a cat as stock. Not anymore though :wink:
     
     Top
  17. Overseas the Tiger's sold with a catalytic converter... It's not present on Aussie ones - there's a plain piece of pipe in its place - so it mustn't be a requirement here.

    Makes sense to sell Australia the same bike that's sold everywhere else, in full compliance with Euro3 emissions standards. That way there's no different 'special model' just for our niche market.

    One presumes Triumph felt that a cat on a cat would be redundant. :LOL:
     
     Top
  18. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and potentially more environmentally harmful/

    Your bike has the potential to carry 2 people - your car has the potential to carry 5. that makes it 2 1/2 times not 5.

    the amount of escaping fumes is minimal for a motorcycle anyway

    Most larger modern bikes are fuel injected. One of the issues is that because motorcycles spend less time idling in traffic then their emissions are much lower overall for a given commuting distance - even though the engines may produce more nasties. Although newer bikes meeting the European standards are actually pretty good.

    PP - you're back! we've missed you... :LOL: :p
     
     Top
  19. Yeah Rob Slave, they do.
    Bikes also eat tyres quickly, compared to all other vehicles. Wonder how that part fits in.
     
     Top
  20. My bikes not green anyway, it's red! :p
     
     Top