Advocacy & Safety - Republican Congressman Blasts Bicycles

This pretty much sums it up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip8nozp7vs8

Ugh. Perhaps he needs to hear from his constituents.

This pretty much sums it up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip8nozp7vs8

Ugh. Perhaps he needs to hear from his constituents.

The Republicans are represented by the elephant, which believes that "bigger is better"; the Democrats are represented by the donkey, which is slow to change; and the Banana Revolution is represented by a clever monkey that believes "small is better" and wants to change ASAP. :rolleyes:

PS: We also use a chihuahua, so take your pick.

this is probably a year old and there have been many threads on him.

this is probably a year old and there have been many threads on him.
And these guys will beat it to death another 20 times (at least) before November.:twitchy:

What a dumb@$$! I don't care if the video does get beaten into the ground. People need to see this idiot who probably drives his car 1/4 mile to the local convenience store.

I am at work and cant see utube, which republican is it?

I am at work and cant see utube, which republican is it?

Representative McHenry from North Carolina, 10th District.

I am at work and cant see utube, which republican is it?

"Rep. McHenry Blasts Dems"

Basically McHenry is mocking some aspect of the Democratic energy plan that encourages cycling as a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil. He does this in a mocking way, acting the clown. Meanwhile, the reality is that bicycles can indeed be used for short trips everywhere... but never mind McHenry, he no doubt considers bicycles as toys and probably "beneath his station."

And his position has not changed much:
http://mchenry.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=96587

There are an estimated 18 billion barrels of recoverable oil in Alaska, the equivalent of 30 years of Middle East imports. Along the Outer Continental Shelf, there are an estimated 86 billion barrels of recoverable oil. In all, the United States possesses enough crude oil to power 65 million cars for 60 years.

Somehow McHenry fails econ 101... even if this "supply" is unleashed on the American public, how exactly does this bring down the price of gas at the pump? The demand will continue to increase as it has.

It will still take time to process any new oil sources and refine that oil and in the meantime the rest of the world will continue to put demands on whatever resources exist.

Perhaps McHenry should consider that alternatives to oil must still be created... and as he points out even the reserve will run out in 60 years (assuming all those "estimates" are correct). I wonder what his grandchildren will use?

Is that not the dude who got into trouble for going to Baghdad and throwing a tantrum when some security guard refused to give him access to some gym . He was so upset about that refusal, he used a cell phone to lodge a complaint and revealed information endangering soldiers. / Yes. It's McHenry. Why would he want access to a gym . Instead he should be on the couch eating pork rinds.
***
Energy Dumb Congressman Endangers US Soldiers
http://firedoglake.com/2008/04/10/energy-dumb-congressman-endangers-us-soldiers/

[QUOTE=genec;7027290]Somehow McHenry fails econ 101... even if this "supply" is unleashed on the American public, how exactly does this bring down the price of gas at the pump? The demand will continue to increase as it has.

QUOTE]

Evidently McHenry has not visited London, Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Munich. Likely even New York, or Chicago. Ever seen Amsterdam. The tens of thousands of bicycles used to commute each day. The affect on gridlock. And , the affect on gasoline consumption. Each day, it likely saves millions of gallons , if each of those cyclists had used the car instead./ I figure in my cycling careeer, I've saved over 1000 gallons in the last 6 years. If all part time motorists would make that statement. likely the cost of petro would actually fall.

[QUOTE=genec;7027290]Somehow McHenry fails econ 101... even if this "supply" is unleashed on the American public, how exactly does this bring down the price of gas at the pump? The demand will continue to increase as it has.

QUOTE]

Evidently McHenry has not visited London, Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Munich. Likely even New York, or Chicago. Ever seen Amsterdam. The tens of thousands of bicycles used to commute each day. The affect on gridlock. And , the affect on gasoline consumption. Each day, it likely saves millions of gallons , if each of those cyclists had used the car instead./ I figure in my cycling careeer, I've saved over 1000 gallons in the last 6 years. If all part time motorists would make that statement. likely the cost of petro would actually fall.

Please do ANYTHING, but don't let the cost of petro actually fall... :rolleyes:

My point here is that for every McHenry that has an open hostility toward cycling, there are 99 legislators who are NOT friendly to bikes. They are all for the status quo, and don't think much about bicycles.

What do you think they drive, bikes or SUVs? :rolleyes:

listen, you have to understand how important it is for the oil companies to make as much money as possible. They pay for the government, so why shouldn't the government give them tax breaks, free access to public land, turn a blind eye towards pollution, and sit on their hands while they manipulate the energy markets?

listen, you have to understand how important it is for the oil companies to make as much money as possible. They pay for the government, so why shouldn't the government give them tax breaks, free access to public land, turn a blind eye towards pollution, and sit on their hands while they manipulate the energy markets?

That's true. You almost make me see the need for a revolution... :rolleyes:

Not until you understand that elemental truth, you will understand that cycling will never be big in America. Biking is simply too cheap and too frugal to be promoted by the hungry beast.

"In a society dominated by the fact of commercial competition, money is necessarily the test of prowess, and wastefulness the sole criterion of power." -Upton Sinclair, book 'The Jungle'

Oh, there's hope, that people take over the roads...

> DOT must make sure its' [sic] bike planners have an important
> say in how new bridge paths and their approaches are built.
> The opening of the Manhattan Bridge path demonstrated that it
> takes time and energy to make proper traffic improvements like
> those now in place on the Manhattan side.

=v= That's a REopening, actually. There's more history here
than you know. Access to the Manhattan Bridge is one of those
cases where, if the people lead, the leaders follow.

=v= I'd say that started one night when some Yehuda Moon types
installed an access ramp on the Brooklyn side so that people
would have an easier time getting their bikes up and down the
stairs. It was an instant success and attracted much ridership.
With some chagrin, the city quietly replaced it with something
more official.

=v= The sheer volume of bikers using that bridge and agitating
for improvments ever since is what has driven the DOT's actions.
The DOT was a combination of unresponsive and blundering until
its current leadership, so the current leadership is certainly
appreciated, but true credit should go to the activists and
advocates who've been working for these improvements for years.
<_Jym_>

[QUOTE=cyclezealot;7027307]

Please do ANYTHING, but don't let the cost of petro actually fall... :rolleyes:

My point here is that for every McHenry that has an open hostility toward cycling, there are 99 legislators who are NOT friendly to bikes. They are all for the status quo, and don't think much about bicycles.

What do you think they drive, bikes or SUVs? :rolleyes:

Check it out Quixote. There is a bicycle caucus in the Congress. Headed by the congressman Earl ( something) from Portland, Or. Not all pols are dumb heads. That caucus does all it can to further bike infrastructure.

Anyone else think to call McHenry's office. It was fun. I asked if the Congressman has ever been out of town. I talked of all the gridlock adverted and gasoline saved in London, Amsterdam, Munich, Barcelona. And suggested he need travel more./ They did not mention the popularity of cycling in Baghdad. Call 202 224-3121. ask for Rep Patrick McHenry.

[QUOTE=DonQuixote1954;7027515]

Check it out Quixote. There is a bicycle caucus in the Congress. Headed by the congressman Earl ( something) from Portland, Or. Not all pols are dumb heads. That caucus does all it can to further bike infrastructure.

Yeah, I think we discussed it before. They can only do so much with little resources. Nothing like the Pentagon, or even NASA. That's where the real money goes.

I'm even sure the War on Drugs gets more money than bikes. Come to think of it, if we brought the Dutch system, we could use that money for bike facilities. :rolleyes:

There are an estimated 18 billion barrels of recoverable oil in Alaska, the equivalent of 30 years of Middle East imports. Along the Outer Continental Shelf, there are an estimated 86 billion barrels of recoverable oil. In all, the United States possesses enough crude oil to power 65 million cars for 60 years.


This is the problem.
No one calls the Rethuglicans on their cockamamie math!

IF ALL this domestic oil IS recoverable (and that's a big IF), the total would be 104 Billion barrels (18B in ANWR, plus another 86B along the continental shelf).

Assuming that US demand stayed flat at 21 million barrels a day (a rather large assumption), that would last us about 13.5 years.

21,000,000 Barrels per Day X 365 days X 13.5 = 103,477,500,000 Barrels.

Don't these idiots have people to check this stuff?

The Republican congressmen from Houston, Texas blocked federal funding for an expansion of commuter rail. They said "Everyone who know drives to work...there is no need for commuter rail in Houston".

Of course, at 8 a.m., driving ten miles on a Houston freeway can take half an hour, but "Everybody" is driving to work.

The fella bragging about all the oil in Alaska missed an interesting story in the paper this week. The oil companies are carrying as "assets" on their books reserves in areas already open to drilling in the lower 48 states big enough to supply the USA for at least five or ten years. But, they refuse to drill in these reserves, preferring to hold them until they can sell their drilling rights for a "windfall" profit.

The oil companies figure that drilling and removing oil from West Texas would cost them $50 per barrel while oil sells for $130 a barrel, a profit of $80 a barrel. They think that if they REFUSE to drill, they can wait to sell their drilling rights ten years from now for $300 a barrel...a profit of $300 a barrel without ever bothering to produce a drop of oil.

So, the oil companies are asking for permission to drill in protected wilderness areas, even while they REFUSE to drill in areas that already open for drilling. In the 2000 election, oil executives bragged that President Bush was "bought and paid for". And, nothing has happened in the past eight years to prove them wrong.

The Republican congressmen from Houston, Texas blocked federal funding for an expansion of commuter rail. They said "Everyone who know drives to work...there is no need for commuter rail in Houston".

Of course, at 8 a.m., driving ten miles on a Houston freeway can take half an hour, but "Everybody" is driving to work.

The only Republican I know about that is doing something good for the country is Schwarzenegger, probably because he plays the good guy in many movies...

Governor Schwarzenegger Announces $136 Million for Transit Projects to Keep Californians and Our Economy Moving

http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/9871/

All others believe in SUVs, war and God. :rolleyes:

The only Republican I know about that is doing something good for the country is Schwarzenegger, probably because he plays the good guy in many movies...

Governor Schwarzenegger Announces $136 Million for Transit Projects to Keep Californians and Our Economy Moving

http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/9871/

All others believe in SUVs, war and God. :rolleyes:

Did he not really kick some aliens butt once? by believe in do you mean as in they exist or they are good?

[QUOTE=cyclezealot;7028158]

Yeah, I think we discussed it before. They can only do so much with little resources. Nothing like the Pentagon, or even NASA. That's where the real money goes.

I'm even sure the War on Drugs gets more money than bikes. Come to think of it, if we brought the Dutch system, we could use that money for bike facilities. :rolleyes:

My impression, Considering the lack of influence , money, and lobbyists they do a decent job of inserting cycling projects into the alternative transportation budget. After all , we have Lance as a spokesmen.

The only Republican I know about that is doing something good for the country is Schwarzenegger, probably because he plays the good guy in many movies...

Governor Schwarzenegger Announces $136 Million for Transit Projects to Keep Californians and Our Economy Moving

http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/9871/

All others believe in SUVs, war and God. :rolleyes:

If Schwarzenegger wants to save the California economy, transportation is equal to water needs. When it comes to solving the water problem , its getting desperate. Someone must have some ideas as what to do.

[QUOTE=cyclezealot;7028158]

I'm even sure the War on Drugs gets more money than bikes. Come to think of it, if we brought the Dutch system, we could use that money for bike facilities. :rolleyes:
Definitely. At least 24 times more (probably more, I used drug war spending data from 2003).

#15 drug war spending 2003. (http://www.drugwarfacts.org/economi.htm)
$800 mil for bike spending under bike advocacy. (http://www.bv.com.au/change-the-world/40984/)

[quote=DonQuixote1954;7029909]
Definitely. At least 24 times more (probably more, I used drug war spending data from 2003).

#15 drug war spending 2003. (http://www.drugwarfacts.org/economi.htm)
$800 mil for bike spending under bike advocacy. (http://www.bv.com.au/change-the-world/40984/)

I think the bike budget would be equivalent to fighting the mosquito plague. :rolleyes:

Did he not really kick some aliens butt once? by believe in do you mean as in they exist or they are good?

OK, the subject here is not aliens, but transportation. I think he's got the Big Three worried.

Don't know what he's done for bicycles though. Anyone knows? :rolleyes:

If Schwarzenegger wants to save the California economy, transportation is equal to water needs. When it comes to solving the water problem , its getting desperate. Someone must have some ideas as what to do.

yeah, what the heck are they going to do about water? same story with all the other western states. i can't see how that much development can possibly be sustainable for more than a few decades.

If Schwarzenegger wants to save the California economy, transportation is equal to water needs. When it comes to solving the water problem , its getting desperate. Someone must have some ideas as what to do.

Is he to blame for the drought? Maybe we all do... Global Warming. :rolleyes:

They are blaming Global Warming for wildfires now.

yeah, what the heck are they going to do about water? same story with all the other western states. i can't see how that much development can possibly be sustainable for more than a few decades.

i remember reading years ago, and I have read some whacky stuff over the years, but it was an article in Omni or Popular Mechanics or something about pushing or pulling ice bergs south to add to california and mexicos water supply. I guess it was not practicle becasue I have not heard of it since. Anybody ever read anything about it since?

Is he to blame for the drought? Maybe we all do... Global Warming. :rolleyes:

They are blaming Global Warming for wildfires now.

California has a well established history of super long droughts. There are just too many users of a finite supply of water and this has very little to do with global climate change.

This is disgusting. I think i might have thrown up a little! this shows you how smart the majority of the republican party is. They use childish insults in a formal setting. How dare he! and they think that our solution is cheaper gas. ugh The solution is no gas at all but rather alternate forms of energy. when are they going to understand that it will eventually run out so why wait? start researching new technologies and changing your ways today! WHY DID THEY KILL THE ELECTRIC CAR!?!?! anyways im just mad cuz i have to buy a new set of cranks!

HAVE A GOOD ONES GUYS
Sean Scott

Is he to blame for the drought? Maybe we all do... Global Warming. :rolleyes:

They are blaming Global Warming for wildfires now.

Not saying that. Spain and Australia are reeling from the same water drought. They are doing something about it. Australia has started a 9 billion dollar desalination program. Spain likewise. Is that the right cure for Calif. But, at least Australia and Spain are doing something./ Meanwhile , Calif. does nothing.

I love to ride my bike, but I have to say the guy really does have a point. We're not going to dig out way out of the energy crisis and higher gas prices with bicycles. As great as they are to ride, they're simply not practical for alot of people. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but facts area facts.

I love to ride my bike, but I have to say the guy really does have a point. We're not going to dig out way out of the energy crisis and higher gas prices with bicycles. As great as they are to ride, they're simply not practical for alot of people. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but facts area facts.

True, but expecting limited resources to be the answer is also a foolish dead end.

What really needs to happen is that rather then giving incentives to oil and encouraging drilling, future thinking needs to be employed. We need to think about the future of our society and what it will take to create an infrastructure that uses renewable resources... and less polluting resources.

More than likely autos of some form will exist forever... just not dinosaur fueled. Using bikes when possible needs to be encouraged, as well as efficient public transit and more efficient vehicles. The status quo of SUV class vehicles to stroke the ego of individual drivers is a dead end.

Bikes are not the full solution as you point out, but really we can do a far far better job of providing for personal transportation than by the sole means of large, mostly empty, very heavy vehicles, to move single persons from place to place... after all this is the country that put man on the moon. The inefficiency of using the typical mostly empty space known as a car for single drivers is the root cause of the overcrowding of our roadways...

If even 5% of all trips were done by bike, there would be a substantial change in traffic density. Imagine a 10% change. Imagine if most remaining "powered vehicles" were the size of Smart Cars rather then Lincoln Navigators.

I love to ride my bike, but I have to say the guy really does have a point. We're not going to dig out way out of the energy crisis and higher gas prices with bicycles. As great as they are to ride, they're simply not practical for a lot of people. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but facts are facts.

There is nothing factual about your post. I see only opinion. I guess cities like Amsterdam, Den Hague, Copenhagen, et al. and all those 'practical' cyclists are just my opinion and not factual.

I agree that [in the USA] cycling is "not practical for a lot of people", where a lot might be 4 or 5 million, however it would be eminently practicable for the remaining 295 million - if people could make more sensible decisions with regard to the where they choose to live and work. Appalling urban planning has not helped America. Over the next 24 months the middle class in the USA and much of the first world is going to experience a very nasty enema.

if people could make more sensible decisions with regard to the where they choose to live and work.

Gotta love the elitism on this board. If only everyone was as good and wise as you, the world would be a much better place. Face facts, most people don't want to ride a bicycle to work or the store. We live in a free country and unfortunately with that freedom comes people who act differently than you think they should.

I think McHenry was simply making political hey out of the Dem's lack of an actual energy policy. All you hear out of them is what we can't do. We can't drill; we can't build refineries; we can't build nuclear plants, etc. I've even heard Dems saying "we can't built wind mills because birds might fly into them and die". The US is the greatest country that ever existed and we didn't get that way by saying "we can't". To think that the bicycle is the solution to our energy problems is a joke, it'll never be more than a drop in the bucket. We do need to look for alternative energy sources to fuel our economy in the future, but we also need to develop our resources we currently have to keep our economy going in the present. And we need leaders that will actively do both.

My personal views are that we should invest in bicycle infrastructure, particularly in suburban locations. I like living in the suburbs and wouldn't move to an "urban center" even at the point of a gun. I conserve where I can. I telecommute all but two days a month and use my bike locally when able. I would likely bike more with better facilities. I do value my car though, and I use it frequently. It's pretty hard to stock up at Costco and carry it home on the back of a bike;) Local communities should support bike to school programs, which could save thousands of trips a day in my town alone. Local businesses should be encouraged (not forced) to be more bike friendly with availability of racks. I've personally spoken with the managers of several stores in my town about installing racks, no racks yet though. So I support bicycling, but to think it will solve the energy problem is a joke.

Peace,

Michael

Oh, by the way, what would you do with the 295 million people who you seem to think should ride a bike? Would you put a gun to their heads? I don't think they're gonna go willingly.

I love to ride my bike, but I have to say the guy really does have a point. We're not going to dig out way out of the energy crisis and higher gas prices with bicycles. As great as they are to ride, they're simply not practical for alot of people. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but facts area facts.

But you saying something doesn't make it a fact. I can think of several groups of people who can't use a bike practically:
* The disabled
* Traveling businessmen and salesmen
* The elderly (although, if they'd kept it up you can ride at quite a ripe old age)
* Farmers (too much cargo, and usually too much distance)

So what about the other 90% of the population? What's their excuse?

Cycling isn't going to solve everything. It's not even going to work for most folks for the simple reason that you have to at least sort of like it. And some people just hate physical exertion, others feel afraid on the bike, and then the other extenuating circumstances already covered. Many others may prefer to wait for a bus: Fine with me! In fact, that's great, it'll support a functional bus service which we'll need when our bikes break down ;).

I think 25% (by bike) is a perfectly reasonable percentage of trips to shoot for, in the US.


I do agree that they won't solve the energy crisis. Even if we all rode, everywhere. We'd still be looking at energy problems down the road. Transportation isn't the whole problem.

Gotta love the elitism on this board. If only everyone was as good and wise as you, the world would be a much better place. Face facts, most people don't want to ride a bicycle to work or the store. We live in a free country and unfortunately with that freedom comes people who act differently than you think they should.

I think McHenry was simply making political hey out of the Dem's lack of an actual energy policy. All you hear out of them is what we can't do. We can't drill; we can't build refineries; we can't build nuclear plants, etc. I've even heard Dems saying "we can't built wind mills because birds might fly into them and die". The US is the greatest country that ever existed and we didn't get that way by saying "we can't". To think that the bicycle is the solution to our energy problems is a joke, it'll never be more than a drop in the bucket. We do need to look for alternative energy sources to fuel our economy in the future, but we also need to develop our resources we currently have to keep our economy going in the present. And we need leaders that will actively do both.

My personal views are that we should invest in bicycle infrastructure, particularly in suburban locations. I like living in the suburbs and wouldn't move to an "urban center" even at the point of a gun. I conserve where I can. I telecommute all but two days a month and use my bike locally when able. I would likely bike more with better facilities. I do value my car though, and I use it frequently. It's pretty hard to stock up at Costco and carry it home on the back of a bike;) Local communities should support bike to school programs, which could save thousands of trips a day in my town alone. Local businesses should be encouraged (not forced) to be more bike friendly with availability of racks. I've personally spoken with the managers of several stores in my town about installing racks, no racks yet though. So I support bicycling, but to think it will solve the energy problem is a joke.

Peace,

Michael

Oh, by the way, what would you do with the 295 million people who you seem to think should ride a bike? Would you put a gun to their heads? I don't think they're gonna go willingly.

That very bill he was blasting was to subsidize solar and wind development. That was the big energy policy. Biking was a tiny item, I have no idea why it got in there. It wasn't the solution at all. Mr. McHenry was using a nasty device called rhetoric, much like you used in the first paragraph.

His logic goes like this:
* These people suggest solution A.
* Solution A can't work.
* These people also suggest solution B.
* Since they were wrong about A they're wrong about B.

It's a complex form of ad hominem, and it's invalid.

I agree that suburbia is a great place to focus efforts on transportation waste. I actually think the bike makes suburbia possible (minus cars). By this I mean good sized houses on good sized lots (60's era suburbs). One of the big problems though is: Big driveways, big garages, and gigantic parking lots. These spread us out more, adding a bigger requirement for cars and extending the range we have to drive.

I don't know what the easy solution to this is. If people drove a lot less it would simply go away: Commercial lots would likely be broken up and turned into more commercial centers, houses would get built closer together in the future.

When you're done you end up looking at 3-10 mile trips. Totally do-able on bike, although 10 is a lot for anything less than work. These aren't very walkable though.

Or we could just say "folks don't like biking" and all go on alli.

We live in a free country and unfortunately with that freedom comes people who act differently than you think they should.
The freedoms you perceive have a very high price, and it is not you or I that pays that price.

Oh, by the way, what would you do with the 295 million people who you seem to think should ride a bike? Would you put a gun to their heads? I don't think they're gonna go willingly.
The good news is we will not need to wait long to see how things are going to conclude. The bad news is the same. Radical and largely unpalatable measures are needed to address the energy crisis. Alas, society has already passed the point when it might have been possible to do anything. Anything done today, or in the near future, will be a case of too little too late.

Main stream media will not use terms like "depression without end" or "total collapse" because they are too alarmist and they are outside of the current meme. We are very close to the point where main stream media will realize that it cannot report the real news and will probably give up any pretense that they are reporting news.

The whole 'oil prices are high because of speculators' is an appalling pantomime that detracts from the real fundamental issue.

Bicycles are not the issue. Zoning laws are the issue. US zoning laws against high density housing mean unless you are wealthy you cannot live near work and shopping. That means you must drive a car. Bicycle advocacy is crap. If you want ordinary people on bikes you must change the zoning laws. Once people live near where they work they will start riding bikes. Otherwise that 20 mi commute is a killer on a bike.

The Ds make nice noises about bikes because they see some hipsters on their fixies, the Rs are against it because the people who vote for them have to slow down on rural roads for city hipsters that go out to the country to see leaves turn red. The Ls are irrelevant but are against government and therefore zoning laws.

My suggestion you might try and convince your local zoning board that high density housing is not the end of the universe. And does not mean homeless people displaced by inner city hipsters will move in.

The alternate energy stuff is mostly crap too. Alternate energy is in fact so stupid that even the people who bought dot com stocks will not invest in it, that is why they want tax dollars.

This is disgusting. I think i might have thrown up a little! this shows you how smart the majority of the republican party is. They use childish insults in a formal setting. How dare he! and they think that our solution is cheaper gas. ugh The solution is no gas at all but rather alternate forms of energy. when are they going to understand that it will eventually run out so why wait? start researching new technologies and changing your ways today! WHY DID THEY KILL THE ELECTRIC CAR!?!?! anyways im just mad cuz i have to buy a new set of cranks!

HAVE A GOOD ONES GUYS
Sean Scott

They are the dinosaur with the small brain, thinking "bigger is better" while denying evolution.

I think somewhere out there there's an asteroid for them. :rolleyes:

I love to ride my bike, but I have to say the guy really does have a point. We're not going to dig out way out of the energy crisis and higher gas prices with bicycles. As great as they are to ride, they're simply not practical for alot of people. I know it's not a popular thing to say on this forum, but facts area facts.

Bicycles can do the job for trips under 2-4 miles, and they represent a large chunk of trips.

Anyway to deny that right to the ones that want to do it is like denying water to the thirsty. :rolleyes:

I hate politicians.

Quit REvoting them in please. It's a fact that 98% get reelected. It's pure job security, and we need to make a stand.

... Brad

Gotta love the elitism on this board. If only everyone was as good and wise as you, the world would be a much better place. Face facts, most people don't want to ride a bicycle to work or the store. We live in a free country and unfortunately with that freedom comes people who act differently than you think they should.

I think "freedom" is defined in this country, not as the option to ride a bike, but as the option to choose among SUVs made by GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, etc, etc. :o

The alternate energy stuff is mostly crap too. Alternate energy is in fact so stupid that even the people who bought dot com stocks will not invest in it, that is why they want tax dollars.

wrong. first solar stock went from $24 to over $260 in a year and a half. that's a 1100% increase.

why do you hate facts?

Bicycles can do the job for trips under 2-4 miles, and they represent a large chunk of trips. ...

Those short trips are also by far the least energy-efficient for motor vehicles, and the hardest on engines, transmissions, and motor oil. It is all a matter of intelligent use of appropriate technology. I commute to work via various combinations of pubic transit, carpooling, jogging, and cycling. Unless I have too much to carry, I make all of my local shopping and errand trips under my own power. Yes, we are driving the 400 miles to this year's family reunion, but we will have four people in a car which can exceed 30mpg at freeway speeds, but which burns about twice as much gasoline per mile under cold cycle stop-and-go conditions.

Bicycles are NOT going to be America's solution to price of energy, pollution, or urban traffic congestion. Outside of college towns and a few "cycling communities", not even 1% of adults are going to turn to bicycles for daily transportation.

During the worst years of America's economy, from 1932 to 1939, the number of adults riding bikes to work in America DECREASED...to zero in most communities. And, the number of people riding the bus or train to work also decreased.

Americans are addicted to having a car in the car, five steps from the kitchen table. Get in, drive to work, park in an underground garage close to an elevator. Never step foot outdoors.

The best hope for a change in behavior is that Americans will buy cars that get 30 mph instead of 15 mpg. The amount of pollution produced by a car is a factor of the fuel used, so a 30 mpg car produces half the pollution of a 15 mpg car.

But, Americans will give up everything else...owning their own home, eating in restaurants, taking vacations, before they give up driving a car.

This is the problem.
No one calls the Rethuglicans on their cockamamie math!

IF ALL this domestic oil IS recoverable (and that's a big IF), the total would be 104 Billion barrels (18B in ANWR, plus another 86B along the continental shelf).

Assuming that US demand stayed flat at 21 million barrels a day (a rather large assumption), that would last us about 13.5 years.

21,000,000 Barrels per Day X 365 days X 13.5 = 103,477,500,000 Barrels.

Don't these idiots have people to check this stuff?

I think you missed one thing. Not all of the 21 million barrels of oil we use each day is for gas. I don't have the exact percentage, but i've heard around 25% (5.25 million barrels a day). That gives a much different number, closer to 60 years when it comes to cars only.

The point is, everyone is focusing on gas prices as it relates to oil, with the assumpition that all the oil is used to power our cars. The fact is, oil is used for many other areas of our economy (including bicycle manufacturing). I agree that we should be doing more to improve fuel economy and reduce the use of cars and oil to power them. Bikes are one of many tools to do that. We also need to be looking at other forms of alternative energy such as wind, solar, nuclear, fuel cells, etc. But the fact remains that we need oil for our economy (at least for now), and we still need to be drilling/exploring for it. We just can't flip a switch and stop using oil. We need to keep our economy moving forward while we develop alternatives to oil.