Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
I am not disagreeing, I have simply never seen a good study to back up your comment.
How is it more environmentally friendly? At the manufacturing point? At the end point? Overall in every way measurable?
What i have read is this-
- it takes 14 times more energy to create a CF frame vs a steel frame.
- steel and aluminum frames and components can be recycled. There is no established recycling process for CF frames or components.
- CF doesnt break down over time due to the very properties which make it so appealing as a finished product.
There are steel frame bikes still in use which are 50 years old. Millions of 20-40 year old steel frame bikes are still able to be used in the US alone. Seriously- millions.
At what year of use does a steel frame catch up to carbon?...after 10 years? 20?
I am genuinely interested in this topic so please link specifics showing in what way(s) metal frames are environmentally worse, and measurably how much worse they are.
Really- Worse in terms of water use at the point of manufacturing? Worse in terms of pollutants released durong manufacturing? Worse how?
I've really questioned how much waste is produced manuf carbon frames. I know a lot of the companies use vacuum bags, so essentially a plastic bag for every component produced, which is tossed. It gets complicated since you have to look at the whole supply chain, soup to nuts. Steel seems better instinctively, but when factoring in large scale production, mining ore, shipping....who knows.