Keith Bontrager once said that everyone who builds or designs bikes, or parts and accessories, should spend a year in the Netherlands.
I can't help but to wonder what my Race-Lite would have been like had he followed his own advice. I liked it a lot; I sold it only because I'd stopped mountain biking and wanted it to have a good home, if you will.
In fact, I wonder what all of his parts--especially his wheels--would have been like. To his credit, his designs were functional: He had no concern for fads or trends, and he cared nothing for aesthetics (though some of his stuff is very attractive). Also, he had no interest in, as he said, making "lifestyle" products and had no intention of releasing a line of leisure wear with his name on it.
In some weird way, I think the mountain bike maven from Santa Cruz, CA would have been right at home in this milieu:
09 March 2013
06 March 2013
Cyclists Cause Pollution
I hate to break this to all of you "tree-huggers": We are polluting the air, after all, when we ride our bicycles.
Oh, but it gets worse: the more and harder we ride, the more we fill the atmosphere with a toxin--namely, carbon dioxide.
Now, I'll admit that I haven't taken a science class since, well, before some of you were born. But the notion that we are fouling the air when we pedal and puff is at least factually and etymologically true--at least in the same sense as another statement made by no less of an environmental scientist than Ronald Reagan. Back in 1981, he said, "Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do."
Would you expect any less from the man who appointed James G. Watt as his Secretary of the Interior?
Apparently, Washington State Representative Ed Orcutt learned his science from Professor Ronnie. Hey, if I had science professors like him, I'd be nominated for a Nobel Prize. In what, I don't know.
But I digress. The Hon. Rep. Orcutt revealed his epoch-making discovery about cyclists to a bike shop owner during a campaign for a proposal to charge a $25 fee on bicycles costing more than $500. That fee would help to pay for transportation facilities.
Orcutt has since apologized for his remarks. However, the furor over his remarks remains.
For me, learning of this story has had at least one good outcome: I found it on the BicycleLaw.com webpage. I'll be visiting it from now on.
Oh, but it gets worse: the more and harder we ride, the more we fill the atmosphere with a toxin--namely, carbon dioxide.
 |
| From The Ottawa Citizen |
Now, I'll admit that I haven't taken a science class since, well, before some of you were born. But the notion that we are fouling the air when we pedal and puff is at least factually and etymologically true--at least in the same sense as another statement made by no less of an environmental scientist than Ronald Reagan. Back in 1981, he said, "Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do."
Would you expect any less from the man who appointed James G. Watt as his Secretary of the Interior?
Apparently, Washington State Representative Ed Orcutt learned his science from Professor Ronnie. Hey, if I had science professors like him, I'd be nominated for a Nobel Prize. In what, I don't know.
But I digress. The Hon. Rep. Orcutt revealed his epoch-making discovery about cyclists to a bike shop owner during a campaign for a proposal to charge a $25 fee on bicycles costing more than $500. That fee would help to pay for transportation facilities.
Orcutt has since apologized for his remarks. However, the furor over his remarks remains.
For me, learning of this story has had at least one good outcome: I found it on the BicycleLaw.com webpage. I'll be visiting it from now on.
04 March 2013
Dear Motorist: Why We Are In "Your" Lane
Last week, I was riding down Second Avenue in Manhattan. I'd stopped at 37th Street, where traffic exits the Queens-Midtown Tunnel. Even the most steel-nerved messengers can't cross that steady stream of cars, taxis, SUVs and livery vans without having green signal or being waved through by a traffic cop.
One of those cops, a young African-American with a boyish face, approached me. "Miss!" You're supposed to ride in the bike lane." He pointed across the avenue to it. "You'll be much safer there."
As I was focused on getting through that bottleneck--Below 34th Street, there's usually much less traffic on Second--I didn't argue with him. I've "educated" more than a few police officers and other people in my time; some were receptive but others became more adamant in their assertion that if there is a lane, a cyclist must use it--or, worse,that bikes simply don't belong on the street at all.
So, I crossed over to the lane and, after I passed the last clump of traffic at NYU Medical Center, I moved back into the traffic lane.
I hadn't been riding that line before I saw the cop because the section of it just below the Queensborough (59th Street) Bridge, which I rode into Manhattan, was blocked off. And, when it opened again somewhere around 52nd Street, it didn't appear to be in very good condition. In the last couple of years, there has been a lot of coonstruction along Second, where a new subway line is being built.
Poor surface conditions are just one reason why some of us don't use the bike lanes, at least some of the time. I found this list of other reasons on NYC Bike Commuter:
The bottom line, dear motorist, is that we are in "your" lane because it's often safer for both us and you to be there. In their infinite wisdom, the designers of lanes next curbs have--probably unwittingly--made things less safe for you as well as for us.
One of those cops, a young African-American with a boyish face, approached me. "Miss!" You're supposed to ride in the bike lane." He pointed across the avenue to it. "You'll be much safer there."
As I was focused on getting through that bottleneck--Below 34th Street, there's usually much less traffic on Second--I didn't argue with him. I've "educated" more than a few police officers and other people in my time; some were receptive but others became more adamant in their assertion that if there is a lane, a cyclist must use it--or, worse,that bikes simply don't belong on the street at all.
So, I crossed over to the lane and, after I passed the last clump of traffic at NYU Medical Center, I moved back into the traffic lane.
I hadn't been riding that line before I saw the cop because the section of it just below the Queensborough (59th Street) Bridge, which I rode into Manhattan, was blocked off. And, when it opened again somewhere around 52nd Street, it didn't appear to be in very good condition. In the last couple of years, there has been a lot of coonstruction along Second, where a new subway line is being built.
Poor surface conditions are just one reason why some of us don't use the bike lanes, at least some of the time. I found this list of other reasons on NYC Bike Commuter:
The bottom line, dear motorist, is that we are in "your" lane because it's often safer for both us and you to be there. In their infinite wisdom, the designers of lanes next curbs have--probably unwittingly--made things less safe for you as well as for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)