[sustran] Re: Are bicycles good for the environment?

Zvi Leve zvi.leve at gmail.com
Fri Jul 21 23:33:24 JST 2006


The Economist made a similarly perverse argument about smoking: instead of
banning cigarettes, we should be thanking smokers! Cigarettes are one of the
most heavily taxed luxury goods, and the health costs to smokers typically
start to appear as smokers approach retirement age. Thus, smokers pay a
disproportionately large amount of taxes during their working lives, yet due
to their decreased life expectency will receive a relatively smaller amount
in social insurance pay-outs. Personally I think that we should be
celebrating life, rather than worshiping death - the world has enough
suicide bombers already.

I agree that any definition of sustainability should try to account for the
net energy balance of our activities, but this is certainly not an exact
science! Presumably followers of the sedentary lifestyle are more likely to
buy their food (and other products) by driving to a big-box store where
everything is shipped/flown in from great distances. A bicyclist on the
other hand would be more likely to frequent smaller shops which tend to have
a correspondingly smaller distribution network. Who can say which one is
more likely to consume locally grown products?

Interesting argument nonetheless!

Zvi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060721/5673ec3c/attachment.html


More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list