Police target South Australian cyclists

scotty72 wrote:
No,

I have heard this 7% trotted out.

That is highly in dispute and I've heard a figure of about 45%.

Your figure is doubtlessly simply calculated on - my car burns x
litres of fuel and x litres of fuel emmits y kgs of exhaust.

You have to also include the pollution costs of manufacturing,
delivery, the endless promotional material for them. (A bicycle is a
timy fraction of a car)

It's not just the burning of fuel, it's the energy required to mine
it, refine it, deliver it etc.

I've heard estimates that the burning of fuel of a car is between 25%
- 33% of its total pollution output.

So, your 7% is a figure I'd expect the NRMA to use to downplay motor
vechiles impact.

I'd much prefer to believe the 45% as it would be far closer to
reality.

You can believe waht you want Scotty. According to

a.. AUSTRALIA'S POLLUTING POWER Coal-fired electricity and its impact on
....
BIGGEST CAUSE OF GREENHOUSE POLLUTION In Australia in 2000 the use of coal
was responsible for the emission of 186 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2, the most
significant greenhouse gas in ...

a.. wwf.org.au/publications/australias_polluting_power.pdf


About 97% of the electricity industry’s greenhouse gas emissions comes from
24 coal-fired power stations. This

relatively small number of power stations produce an amount of greenhouse
pollution equivalent to the annual

emissions from about 40 million cars, four times Australia’s actual car
fleet.

Australia’s 24 coal power stations also produce more emissions than the
total emissions from many entire

countries, including Argentina, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Malaysia,
Pakistan, Portugal, Sweden,

Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, all eastern European countries apart from
Russia and Poland, and all African

countries apart from South Africa.



But believe whatever you want.

Theo

John Tserkezis wrote:

Quoting ARR Oct 1999:

"259 Riding at night
The rider of a bicycle must not ride at night, or in hazardous
weather conditions causing reduced visibility, unless the
bicycle, or the rider, displays: (a) a flashing or steady
white light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres
from the front of the bicycle; and (b) a flashing or steady
red light that is clearly visible for at least 200 metres from
the rear of the bicycle; and (c) a red reflector that is
clearly visible for at least 50 metres from the rear of the
bicycle when light is projected onto it by a vehicle's
headlight on low-beam."

What I really don't get, is the requirement for part (C). I
would have thought the active lighting in part (B) would make
a reflector redundant.

Active lighting can fail. All is susceptible to at least one of
the following:

1. Incandescent bulbs regularly blow.

2. Batteries can fail or go flat before you reach your
destination.

3. Dynamos stop generating when the wheel stops.

I'm surprised a forward-facing white or yellow reflector isn't
also required. But a rear lighting failure is more likely to
go unnoticed.

John

In article slrn-0.9.7.4-25287-9853-200801150636-
, -
astro.swin.edu.au says...
On 2008-01-14, Ray (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
In article slrn-0.9.7.4-31087-23654-200801141945-
, -
astro.swin.edu.au says...
On 2008-01-14, Theo Bekkers (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
Third Party Insurance is what covers people injured by motor vehicles.
Nothing to do with rego. Rego is about ID and Law enforcement.

Except in Victoria, where Euan resides, where TAC _is_ the compulsory
third party injury no-fault insurance, and is paid for by rego.

But Euan, that is only in .vic. Dunno what rego fees pay for in other
states. Probably adminning of the rego system.

Wrong, Victorian registration clearly itemises the rego component
separate to the TPI.
Yes you pay WITH the rego, but the rego is NOT the TPI.

And what's the percentage of the TPI component?



For our car:
($285.00 + $28.50) / $486 = 64.5%

Rego is $173

Regardless, the rego itself does not pay for the TAC.

A nice set of stats that completely ignore and seek to obfuscate the
point I was making.

But, appologising for the oil industry makes you happy, so....

Scotty

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
scotty72 wrote:
No,

I have heard this 7% trotted out.

That is highly in dispute and I've heard a figure of about 45%.

Your figure is doubtlessly simply calculated on - my car burns x
litres of fuel and x litres of fuel emmits y kgs of exhaust.

You have to also include the pollution costs of manufacturing,
delivery, the endless promotional material for them. (A bicycle is a
timy fraction of a car)

It's not just the burning of fuel, it's the energy required to mine
it, refine it, deliver it etc.

I've heard estimates that the burning of fuel of a car is between
25%
- 33% of its total pollution output.

So, your 7% is a figure I'd expect the NRMA to use to downplay motor
vechiles impact.

I'd much prefer to believe the 45% as it would be far closer to
reality.

You can believe waht you want Scotty. According to

a.. AUSTRALIA'S POLLUTING POWER Coal-fired electricity and its impact
on
....
BIGGEST CAUSE OF GREENHOUSE POLLUTION In Australia in 2000 the use of
coal
was responsible for the emission of 186 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2,
the most
significant greenhouse gas in ...

a.. wwf.org.au/publications/australias_polluting_power.pdf


About 97% of the electricity industry’s greenhouse gas emissions comes
from
24 coal-fired power stations. This

relatively small number of power stations produce an amount of
greenhouse
pollution equivalent to the annual

emissions from about 40 million cars, four times Australia’s actual
car
fleet.

Australia’s 24 coal power stations also produce more emissions than
the
total emissions from many entire

countries, including Argentina, Belgium, Greece, Ireland, Israel,
Malaysia,
Pakistan, Portugal, Sweden,

Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, all eastern European countries apart
from
Russia and Poland, and all African

countries apart from South Africa.



But believe whatever you want.

Theo


--
scotty72