You are reading a single comment by @bq and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@bq
The pollution study is irrelevant as it is based on a 6 year old question and 9 year old data which predates the introduction of Euro II and III (and therefore any) emissions standards for motorcycles. Leaving aside that they have deliberately omitted buses (odd given it's about bus lanes) for which the same pollution figures are a disgrace, It is also skewed against motorcycles being a measure of emissions per passenger and vehicle KM. Most motorcycles will only carry one person, and motorcycles travel far fewer km than cars do. If you were to look at the total amount of pollution caused by motorcycles per year: i.e. how much worse the actual air quality is because of them, you would find the figure far lower than any other form of motorised transport.
These figures will have reduced even further and will keep reducing. Motorcycles sold since 2006 will all meet euro 3, most sold now are likely to meet euro 4 as it will be mandatory next year. For example catalytic convertors and fuel injection are now fitted to a lot of new bikes. This should see emissions level drop to those of cars and possibly below them. Very few 2 strokes are available anymore which should see PM10 emissions drop to negligible levels.
You're right that motorcyclists are by far and away the most vulnerable group of road users. Which is why there should be more done to preserve their safety, not less.
As for noise pollution, it appears from a quick web search to be no worse than buses (at 75-85Db depending on which google hit you read)
So what are the arguments for motorycles? They look good, go fast, make a lovely sound, are practical, quick through traffic and above all, FUN.