Now, Terry.
What make you thing cycling is good for the environment? Ever time you
breath you exhale CO2. The harder you breath the deadly gasses you expel on us
poor commuters. And, has your body
temp raises you cause global warming. If everyone cycled the global temp would
sour and destroy the world. That is if the CO2 doesn't get us first.
Ed.
Terry Dowling wrote:
> Ed,
>
> Firstly, let me confess to being guilty of overuse of cars, too. Owning
> a Morgan is so conducive to getting out and about, sometimes I can't
> resist - that is NOT overuse. But I also use my other boring cars too
> much. Like Harris, I don't want to be a commuter, but my work is in the
> city and my home is in the suburbs. I take full advantage of the
> flexibility of my hours, but I'm still required to make the occasional
> trip in rush hour. No matter which car I use, it takes me at least 30
> minutes to get to work (does that make some of you jealous?) - I get
> frustrated, I have to pay for fuel and parking, and I create pollution.
>
> It takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work - I get my daily exercise and
> all without cost and without adding to the environmental woes. Maybe I
> eat a bit more.
>
> Here's how I define overuse of cars:
> Overuse of cars (yes, maybe overuse of gas is a better term) is using
> cars for commuting when trains and buses would do the job more quickly
> and with a lot less pollution. It results in making millions of miles of
> roads and countless parking bays that, to my mind, are rather
> unattractive and generally are built over good wetlands, parklands etc.
> It also depletes the finite oil reserves - which have a multitude of
> other productive and beneficial uses. Pollution from cars has also been
> linked to increased rates of cancer, asthma etc.
>
> And while many rightly mourn the loss of 60,000 US soldiers during the
> whole of the Vietnam war, or 300 killed in a plane crash, how many think
> about the 45,000 US citizens lost - EVERY year - to road accidents? And
> many, many more are injured.
>
> Cheers,
> Terry
>
> ========================================================
> Standard disclaimer:
> Any recipient of this communication acknowledges that:
> * the Government Employees Superannuation Board accepts no responsibility for
>the contents nor the validity of this communication; and
> * they do not rely on any view given unless it is properly authorised. In the
>case of the Year 2000 issue, there appear to be no Y2K concerns at this time
>and the GESB is operating normally.
> ========================================================
|