Looks like our free ride may be over.

[Drunken Monkey]

I've done this argument before, I think.

Cars = way less soot and more CO² per gallon burned (catalytic converters' convert soot into CO²)

Bikes = way (way!) more "soot" and a bit less CO² per gallon burned


Less CO² means less global warming. More soot means less global warming (see "global dimming") 

So, depending on what you care about (local vs. global) you can argue bikes are better.

[Desmostro]

I think it's all of the above factors together. Including the space taken up.
The question is always about sustainability. As in, can the situation be sustained indefinitely, like everything in nature. If we are eventually going to run out of finite resources because of a particular activity, then it ain't "green."

If it pollutes faster than the nature we're paving over can clean it up, it's not sustainable and will eventually choke it's self.

You can factor in your individual lifestyle to calculate what damage or good you are causing. If you buy only locally made everything, commute a very short distance infrequently, live in a super efficient home, then your vehicle's pollution rate is less important.
If you have a Prius but commute 3 hours a day, live in a energy sucking house, and buy everything made in China, your Prius isn't helping much. It's better than an SUV however.

In other words, it's not just the object, such as a moto or car, it's how it's used. It's total lifestyle that counts.

Manufacturing & materials certainly have a place, but I think it's small as a fraction of the total. I've heard numerous times (on radio news shows, forums, etc) that the total energy required to produce a vehicle is tiny compared to the energy that vehicle will consume in its operational lifetime. Here's one example, with a few references:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=433981

So while we can certainly feel a bit smug about using less energy and fewer materials, the real bacon is in the operational efficiency. If you can use a small increase in the energy/material of manufacturing to improve the operational efficiency of a vehicle, you can get a net reduction in the amount of energy a vehicle uses over its lifetime. And if bikes do indeed expel more pollutants per mile of operation that do cars, that's another factor to consider. We may use less energy, but if we're putting benzene, NO, and other nasty bits into the air at a higher rate than cars, bikes may not be so green after all.

All of this begs the question: what is green? Is it simply using less energy during operation? During manufacture? Is it the type and quantity of pollutants the bike expels during operation? The more complex the answer, the more difficult it is to compare vehicles.

Oh, and your bike only gets 44mpg because of that extra shim you had in your valves after that wrenching day in my garage

[desmoquattro]

...
You can factor in your individual lifestyle to calculate what damage or good you are causing. If you buy only locally made everything, commute a very short distance infrequently, live in a super efficient home, then your vehicle's pollution rate is less important.

If you have a Prius but commute 3 hours a day, live in a energy sucking house, and buy everything made in China, your Prius isn't helping much. It's better than an SUV however.

If you're gonna take the holistic view, then we vegetarians are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay greener than the rest of ya. In fact, not eating meat would allow me to drive an H1, tow a trailer with 4 Desmosedicis on it, and run straight pipes on it all, and still be greener than you

DISCLAIMER: You guys know I don't trip on eating meat...just givin ya a bad time.

[Drunken Monkey]

Yeah well, uh.

I'm having my roof painted white, I win. 

[sally101]

Yeah well, uh.

I'm having my roof painted white, I win. 

Hmmm my bike is white.. Can I get an exemption based in that? You people with dark colored bikes.. You are the real problem!

[desmoquattro]

Yeah well, uh.

I'm having my roof painted white, I win. 

Yeah, well, um, my roof has always been white

[johnc]

If you're gonna take the holistic view, then we vegetarians are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay greener than the rest of ya. In fact, not eating meat would allow me to drive an H1, tow a trailer with 4 Desmosedicis on it, and run straight pipes on it all, and still be greener than you

DISCLAIMER: You guys know I don't trip on eating meat...just givin ya a bad time.

i though vegitarians were more of an orange color from eating all those carrots, not green.

[desmoquattro]

i though vegitarians vegetarians were more of an orange color from eating all those carrots, not green.

Fixed. First of all, spell it right man. I know you Canadians spell things like colour and aluminium like your UK overlords, but that's taking things a bit too far.



And we vegetarians eat far more green than orange...besides....Bugs never turned orange.

[Vindingo]

Yeah well, uh.

I'm having my roof painted white, I win. 

With all the motos and soot around, lets see how long that roof stays white...      

Oh, and your bike only gets 44mpg because of that extra shim you had in your valves after that wrenching day in my garage

That "shim" destroyed my piston rings and now the bikes spews black smoke... I'm just doing my part to give the city a little character.  and save the earth with "global dimming"

[Spidey]

You're not gonna argue that your bike isn't dirty, right Vin?   

[hypurone]

It seems to me that there is much more low-hanging fruit out there. SUVs, light trucks, and single-person commuters all seem like much larger sources of pollution and/or carbon.

Yeah, like f*ckin' DIESELS!! And I'm not referring to semi's here.  Now they MAY (really unsubstantiated as there no accurate testing equipment designed for this type of spewage, at least when I was in the biz) put out less CO2 but jeebus, what about the sulphur, NOx, Nitric Acid and HUGE amounts of particulate matter just to name a few.... God I wanna know who got paid off on that one!

<rant off>

[hypurone]

Here is the reply I got from Mark Leno (or his office or ??) when I wrote him about this bill, asking him to have it stuck down or at minimum, add a "grandfather" clause:

Thank you for writing to express your opposition of SB 435, authored by Senator Fran Pavely. I appreciate you taking the time to voice your opinion on this important issue.

SB 435 would require the department to include model-year 2000 and newer motorcycles in the smog check program beginning January 1, 2012. I will keep your comments in mind when this bill comes before me in the Senate.

Thank you again for contacting me. If you have any further questions or thoughts regarding this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact my office at (415) 479-6612 (San Rafael), (415) 557-1300 (San Francisco) or visit my website at www.senate.ca.gov/leno.

Sincerely,

Mark Leno

Senator, 3rd Senate District

Pretty standard and non-committal. Pretty much what I was expecting if I even got a reply. I hate to say it but I think we are doomed...

[Popeye the Sailor]

Long as they leave the old cars alone  

[hypurone]

Long as they leave the old cars alone  

That's next!

[Desmostro]

Long as they leave the old cars alone  

That's next!

OOoh. Now I get it. New car sales. New bike sales.