The morality of carbon bikes- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 92 of 92
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    106

    The morality of carbon bikes

    It is my understanding that carbon bicycle frames are unable to be recycled in a economical fashion.

    Being a lover of nature and a mountain biker, I try and do my part to reduce my footprint as much as I can. I understand this is only a section or a much larger conversation but for the sake of the discussion let's not get wrapped up in "if you ride your carbon bike instead of drive your car you'll have a smaller footprint"

    How are you guys justifying riding something that can't be recycled and is from what I can gather, a burden to our overall footprint especially when you consider how many mountain bikers there are. Aluminum is easily recyclable and can be reused many times over.

    Not judging anyone, I am just in the market for a new bike and really want a carbon frame but want to also be honest with the impact

    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    EAT MORE GRIME
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,136
    in b4 lock
    "Put your seatbelt back on or get out and sit in the middle of that circle of death." - Johnny Scoot

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iliketexmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    850
    I found these wheels which don't use epoxy, making them recyclable. Revel Bike wheels
    https://www.revelbikes.com/our-bikes/revel-wheels/

    These guys have a different manufacturing process that reduces the carbon waste and epoxy, their manufacturing is done in the US subject to EPA regulations, and they powder coat which emits zero VOCs. Guerrilla Gravity:
    https://ridegg.com/pages/revved-carbon

    Aluminum frames can be awesome too. So can steel. Pretty much bikes are awesome

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,542
    With all the real environmental issues in this world the relatively small number of unrecycled carbon bikes is a non issue.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    800
    Carbon bikes can be repaired pretty easily if damaged. Now that geo updates and changing standards seems to have settled down a little someone can get dramatically more life out of a carbon frame compared to most aluminum frames which are trash after they crack.

    There are more recycled carbon products now along with products like GG's Revved carbon manufacturing process. If we stop using carbon the development on cleaner carbon manufacturing and recycling will stop.

    I wouldn't mind a sweet magnesium frame though.

  6. #6
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,297
    Why do you really want a carbon frame, especially if you're having moral difficulties with carbon frames? Buy steel or aluminum and go ride and be happy with yourself.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    You can make yard art with your carbon frame when it's useful service life is over.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    He he he he. How much non recyclable rubbish does the average consumer throw out each week? And you're worried about a kilo of CF with a useful lifespan of 10? years plus?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,680
    Personally i would be more concerned with AA or AAA batteries. How do we recycle them?

    carbon frames just ride real nice.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    My full-time job is to write about and inform the public about issues like recycling, water quality, etc. The best data I have gotten from my sources is that the average Texan is responsible for about five pounds of waste sent to landfills per day (not including water treatment sludge and the spike in demolition waste that skewed the data after Hurricane Harvey).

    I think carbon fiber bike parts is an overall small issue, so I would not let the fact that "carbon fiber cannot be recycled" stop me from buying CF bicycle parts. The only CF product I own is a seatpost on a CX bike. cost is the main deterrent for me, followed by familiarity with metal alternatives. (don't get me started on my "budget" for bike stuff.)

    HOWEVER, carbon fiber can be made recyclable. Revel rims were mentioned earlier and Guerrilla Gravity's proprietary "Revved" CF can be recycled. I know someone who works for them and he was especially stoked on this. https://ridegg.com/pages/revved-carbon

    I hope we see more of this in the future. it's inevitable that we embrace it. CF bicycle parts in landfills probably make a TINY fraction of the overall solid waste stream, but other, much larger things are made from the material and end up in the dump. hopefully that technology will trickle down from automotive and aerospace to bike parts.

  11. #11
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    8,417
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    You can make yard art with your carbon frame when it's useful service life is over.
    My old parts usually go on the garage wall

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,963
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    My full-time job is to write about and inform the public about issues like recycling, water quality, etc. The best data I have gotten from my sources is that the average Texan is responsible for about five pounds of waste sent to landfills per day (not including water treatment sludge and the spike in demolition waste that skewed the data after Hurricane Harvey).

    I guess I never thought about this but each person throws out close to a ton of garbage every year? Is this total garbage or just non degradable stuff?

    And to the OP, the lack of recycling with carbon is one thing, the junk that is made when it is created is another.
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    I guess I never thought about this but each person throws out close to a ton of garbage every year? Is this total garbage or just non degradable stuff?
    there are several categories of municipal solid waste, some of it is landfilled, recycled, or composted. the data to which I am referring is MSW that goes to landfills, by weight, minus industrial/construction waste and wastewater treatment sludge. divide that by the population of Texas (that's where I work, so I don't know how it compares to other states) and divide that by 365 days a year, and the experts with whom I have consulted confirm that the figure "five pounds per person per day of waste sent to landfills" is as close to accurate as we can get. that does not mean that the average person actually throws five pounds of waste into garbage cans every day (that would be a lot!) but the overall amount of waste that goes into landfills from domestic sources pans out that way.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    195
    Guerrilla gravity for the win.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    174
    I live in an area that does not require recycling. Never the less I recycle over half of my household waste. I am concerned with real pollution not pseudo pollution.
    I live in the rust belt because I have been involved in heavy industry for my entire carrier.
    All materials are heavy on pollution to manufacture and can be just as heavy on pollution to recycle. A carbon frame is no different and slightly less polluting than aluminum and steel to produce. A carbon frame is not going to leach bad things in a landfill and will eventually break down as carbon is the building block of all life forms.

    Contamination is the big bugga boo of recycling. Is the aluminum frame painted? Yes? pollution goes up. Is the aluminum frame contaminated with other metals such as steel bearing races, screws, labels, cables, grips? If so pollution to recycle goes way up. Is the aluminum used in the frame heavily alloyed? Probably so pollution to recycle goes up.

    Something like a beer can is easy to recycle. Known aluminum alloy content + almost non-existent label contamination + known likely internal contamination.

    A bicycle frame, not so much Can't put that in with your recyclables, needs to go to a salvage yard. 1st step is shredding followed by magnetic separation to remove steel, followed by blower to remove light plastics and paper. It might even go through a wash and float separation. What's left is graded for contamination and priced accordingly. If its decent it stays local. If it is not it goes to third world buyers. Do you think they care about the pollution? Ever seen a salvage yard? Do you think they capture all the washed off contamination or let it seep into the ground?

    My point is, making a decision based on the morality of recycling is a little like fukin with your socks on. It might give you a warm fuzzy feeling but it does not significantly alter the outcome of your actions and may even cost you more in the long run.

  16. #16
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    CF can be chopped up and recycled into CFRP, which while not as outright strong, is more versatile for shapes and cheaper to make into complex shapes.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  17. #17
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,391
    I am amused that people think owning an aluminum frame is less harmful for the environment than a carbon fiber frame.

    Despite failing at making good bicycles, the owner of Pole has been very successful at convincing people that aluminum comes from pixie dust, and not bauxite ore mines.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I am amused that people think owning an aluminum frame is less harmful for the environment than a carbon fiber frame.
    I don't find people's concern for the environment funny. It's endearing that people care enough to consider their bicycle purchases in that equation. the topic needs a great deal of education for all, myself included. Are paper shopping bags better than plastic? Is a vegetarian diet inherently better for the environment than one that includes meat? is buying and driving a new electric car really better than a late-model, well maintained gas-powered one? there are many nuances that make it impossible to answer questions like that. (those are rhetorical questions! please don't drag those topics into this thread!)

    the truth is that the material that your bicycle is made from is a small part of your lifestyle and a smaller part of how our civilization affects the environment in negative ways. If you want to reduce your "footprint," buy less stuff! buy fewer bicycles (blasphemy!), and when you do, buy something that lasts, maintain it, and replace it only when you're gotten the most out of it. repurpose your old gear by donating it to bike co-op or something like that. stop buying cheap knock-off crap that does not last. when you can, support companies that have a legitimate claim to making things with sustainable practices that aren't just greenwash.

  19. #19
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,391
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I don't find people's concern for the environment funny. It's endearing that people care enough to consider their bicycle purchases in that equation. the topic needs a great deal of education for all, myself included. Are paper shopping bags better than plastic? Is a vegetarian diet inherently better for the environment than one that includes meat? is buying and driving a new electric car really better than a late-model, well maintained gas-powered one? there are many nuances that make it impossible to answer questions like that. (those are rhetorical questions! please don't drag those topics into this thread!)

    the truth is that the material that your bicycle is made from is a small part of your lifestyle and a smaller part of how our civilization affects the environment in negative ways. If you want to reduce your "footprint," buy less stuff! buy fewer bicycles (blasphemy!), and when you do, buy something that lasts, maintain it, and replace it only when you're gotten the most out of it. repurpose your old gear by donating it to bike co-op or something like that. stop buying cheap knock-off crap that does not last. when you can, support companies that have a legitimate claim to making things with sustainable practices that aren't just greenwash.
    My point, which I did not articulate very well, is that the very notion of aluminum being "less bad" is questionable, at best, and very likely incorrect.

    But, because it CAN be recycled, somehow that bauxite mine, the excavation and earth moving equipment, the processing facility, the 1000' freighter, the smelter, and the energy required to produce, forge and CNC it apparently don't exist.
    Death from Below.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    Is a vegetarian diet inherently better for the environment than one that includes meat?


    Yes, no doubt about that one.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,331
    I wont speak for Le Duke but what I believe he is saying is that consumers tend to focus on the end use of a product instead of the full life cycle of a material when evaluating the "greenness" of said product.

    On this specific subject, I'll have to agree, I believe carbon fiber to actually be the greener option for several reasons. Carbon is chemically synthesized...aka not mined from the earth itself like aluminum. It has a longer useful life span. And how many people are actually recycling their old aluminum frames?

    The recycling world is not as well executed and efficient as you as a consumer believe it to be. Much of what you "recycle" does in fact end up in a landfill especially now that china has stopped imports of most recyclables. Global pricing has plummeted due to this. Domestic suppliers have raised their quality standards due to less outlets for materials and its causing once recycled material to be landfilled.

    I can speak fairly knowledgeably on the subject. Over the last 4 years I've taken a manufacturing facility that produces over 20 million pounds of waste and moved it from 50% landfill diversion to a zero waste-to-landfill facility in 2020. The last 6 million pounds I had to move waste to energy...is it better to be burned than buried? I'm not so sure of this actually.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Yes, no doubt about that one.
    take it to Off Camber!

  23. #23
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    343
    My religion dictates that I ride as light a bike as possible. Therefore anything other than carbon, at the moment, would be immoral for me to ride.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    take it to Off Camber!


    You raised the question.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    You raised the question.
    rhetorically, and a said it was rhetorical. it's an example of the kind of question that has nuances that make easy, prescriptive answers difficult. I was careful to frame it as an example to keep the thread from going off the rails. If you want to discuss it, PM me. it's been an important question for me for many years. I'll even share my seitan recipe with you if you're interested.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    My point, which I did not articulate very well, is that the very notion of aluminum being "less bad" is questionable, at best, and very likely incorrect.

    But, because it CAN be recycled, somehow that bauxite mine, the excavation and earth moving equipment, the processing facility, the 1000' freighter, the smelter, and the energy required to produce, forge and CNC it apparently don't exist.
    You said it. The power required to smelt aluminum is beyond most peoples imagination. It takes three electrons per atom of aluminum for reduction. You don't make aluminum with renewable energy sources except hydroelectric. Aluminum smelting requires a lot of very consistent dependable electricity. The kind that introduces some pollution.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,716
    Carbon fiber frames are readily repairable by a number of companies or at home if you're crafty.

    Aluminum nope. But it can be recycled.

    I do my part to recycle everything I can. Another carbon fiber frame in the dump is nothing compared to the amount of plastic bags & wrapping I throw away every year.

    But from a environmental standpoint any recreational activity is morally wrong. You should be spending all of your free time cleaning the beaches, removing non native species and planting trees. Not riding around on a grease and oil covered hydrocarbon machine.

    Get your priorities straight! (The earth is f'd, we'll need more than this little pandemic to put things straight)
    83 Ritchey Everest
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2015 Kona Operator Supreme
    2015 Kona Process 153
    2019 Kona Process 153 CR 29

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    rhetorically, and a said it was rhetorical. it's an example of the kind of question that has nuances that make easy, prescriptive answers difficult. I was careful to frame it as an example to keep the thread from going off the rails. If you want to discuss it, PM me. it's been an important question for me for many years. I'll even share my seitan recipe with you if you're interested.


    Pretty much every thread here gets derailed, sometimes even by someone other than me
    I brake for stinkbugs

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    If it is entirely true that carbon fiber is inherently superior from an environmental standpoint and I wanted to base my purchasing decisions on that, I'll have to find a new hobby. decent quality CF is simply too expensive for me and for most people. to me, that implies that the cost of most bicycle stuff we buy is cheap because it's purchased resources stolen from future generations, and the present on in many ways. if you dig a little deeper, you'll find that most of the things we enjoy are totally unsustainable as well. yes, I lose sleep over stuff like this.

  30. #30
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    343
    I imagine of you light a carbon frame on fire that the carbon would then be returned into the great circle of life of carbon or whatever it's called.

  31. #31
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,124
    "I used to operate a haul truck at an open pit copper mine. Aluminum is mined in a similar manner. My truck used 3200 liters of diesel in one shift. The mine had 92 of them working two 12-hour shifts. We are all guilty. When you consider the mining or manufacturing of materials, there is no higher ground."

    —Dustin Adams, We Are One Composites Founder


    From a pretty good piece on both materials


    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/alumin...ls-debate.html
    2020 SC CC Hightower

  32. #32
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,391
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    "I used to operate a haul truck at an open pit copper mine. Aluminum is mined in a similar manner. My truck used 3200 liters of diesel in one shift. The mine had 92 of them working two 12-hour shifts. We are all guilty. When you consider the mining or manufacturing of materials, there is no higher ground."

    —Dustin Adams, We Are One Composites Founder


    From a pretty good piece on both materials


    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/alumin...ls-debate.html
    Yeah. Having seen ore mining first hand, and having read the Pole owner's bullshit on PinkBike, I was amazed at how many people bought it. The energy costs of recycling the excess material from Pole's manufacturing process alone outweigh the negatives of a carbon fiber frame. I'm guessing they produce scrap aluminum at a 20:1 ratio for every one of the frames they make, if not higher.

    Assuming they actually recycle that, that means that, unlike traditional tube to tube construction, someone else is re-smelting the vast majority of the material they use. So, in order produce one ~7lb frame, they are melting down all of the scrap produced via their subtractive/CNC machining process. I'm guessing that is in excess of 150 lbs of T6 per frame. Yeah, super environmentally friendly.
    Death from Below.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    I wonder what is the environmental cost of making a e-mtb. *dives for cover from the coming flame war*

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    the truth is that the material that your bicycle is made from is a small part of your lifestyle and a smaller part of how our civilization affects the environment in negative ways. If you want to reduce your "footprint," buy less stuff! buy fewer bicycles (blasphemy!), and when you do, buy something that lasts, maintain it, and replace it only when you're gotten the most out of it. repurpose your old gear by donating it to bike co-op or something like that. stop buying cheap knock-off crap that does not last.
    The 3R's right? Reduce, Reuse, Recycle (in that order). It's much more important to reduce consumption and reuse/repurpose products when possible than recycling. It seems weird to draw a line in the sand over which bicycle frame is worse for the environment when there's much more impactful issues to worry about.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    106
    Some really good points in this thread... it is going a lot smoother then anticipated when I made the thread too lol.

    Seems like it may be the same story as the Prius, the battery manufacturing negates any possible climate gains made by the gas mileage... If you really want to be environmentally friendly, drive a used Civic..

    Transitional sentinel here I come

    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    The 3R's right? Reduce, Reuse, Recycle (in that order).
    the first R is refuse: refuse to buy things you don't need. live with less and there will be less of a market for throw-away goods. i dunno, is that the same thing as "reduce"?

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,940
    When I look at the full life cycle impacts of my mountain biking hobby the differences in frame material aren't really that important. I keep bikes 4-10 years so I am not serial bike flipper. I have been enjoying steel and aluminum frames lately and don't have a carbon bike at the moment. I would get another carbon bike if the right one came a long. Most likely a Guerrilla Gravity where I know they are trying to be low impact and the frames will be strong enough to have a long service life.

    I think spending time ensuring you buy the right bike that you'll love and use for many years is more important for the environment than what it's made out of.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Sender420shred View Post

    Not judging anyone, I am just in the market for a new bike and really want a carbon frame but want to also be honest with the impact

    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk
    You shouldn't mountain bike at all. The money you spend on bikes could be used to lift hundreds out of poverty.

    Solar panels are a disaster. All they really do is concentrate highly toxic rare earth elements, dug out on the backs of poor third world people and leak the toxins into dumps where the elements poison the water.

    A single carbon reinforced blade on a wind turbine (which lasts a very short time and can't be recycled) could be used to make hundreds of mountain bikes.

    If you have an electric car, the pollution footprint is ridiculous to build it in addition to the fact that it may run off coal.

    Now, I don't give a sh*t about any of that, but if you do, you should sell all your belongings and move into a mud hut! The ones and zeros that went into this nonsense can't be recycled.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,409
    I wonder how many people keep their frames for 10 years...and how many will go ahead and repair them when its cracked? I remember when a customer would warranty a carbon frame...the manufacturer would just tell us the cut the old frame in half send them a picture...then throw it in the dumpster. I'm sure there are bikes getting warrantied every day...everywhere.

    I usually get a new frame every three to four years. I'll try and use the components for as long as possible...especially forks. I built up a bike last year and I'm pretty happy with the other bikes I have...so I don't see getting anything in the near future. My road bike I bought in 2012 and still riding it.

    I guess the good part is that bikes, frames, and bike parts will get passed on to other people...since the prices on bikes and bike parts are becoming so expensive...people are buying used.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I am amused that people think owning an aluminum frame is less harmful for the environment than a carbon fiber frame.

    Despite failing at making good bicycles, the owner of Pole has been very successful at convincing people that aluminum comes from pixie dust, and not bauxite ore mines.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yup. I reckon they're just pissed off that they couldn't get the production quotes down far enough.

    Here's what a bauxite mine looks like. https://imgur.com/1pnzmCo

    The little yellow things at the bottom are dump trucks that are bigger than your house.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    739
    Something to think about:
    - owning one bike for many years will have less impact than owning many bikes and replacing them frequently
    - driving the car to the trails or driving the bike to LBS can have a significant impact vs. riding to the trails
    - if you don't ride, you have some alternative hobby or sport. Unless it is running or lifting weights at home, most hobbies require more material things (Boat, Harley, snowmobile) that will have a larger environmental impact than either bike frame material. Even if you only watch TV, you need a couch and wear out a TV and use electricity.
    - the frame of a bike can be minor compared to all the grips, bladders, specific shoes, shirts, pants, and all other goodies people have in varying quantities and need to replace more often than the typical frame.
    - some people use disposable CO2 instead of a pump... just think about that waste over the life of a bike
    Mayor v4
    Giant Toughroad

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by Sender420shred View Post

    Not judging anyone
    Then I'll judge you for a sec...

    Aluminum is easily recyclable and can be reused many times over.
    Bauxite is strip mined in south America, causing massive environmental destruction. Then its carted up by Canada on a train or ship, smelted with electricity derived from hydroelectric dams that upset rivers and prevent salmon from spawning.

    It can be recycled... by re-melting it, using more electricity, killing more salmon off, and yielding only a fraction of the original aluminium due to oxidation, which then has to be dumped in a landfill.

    We haven't even got to making it into tubes, by extrusion, then drawing, which consumes yet more electricity, then welding...

    It's a bit like the idea a prius is environmentally friend cause its electric... It's not when you consider total footprint start to finish. Of course the most eco friendly car is the one you have already - don't buy a new one!

    Same goes with bikes.. don't buy a new one if you have environmental concerns.

    To add, riding your bike is not environmentally friendly. It just moves the energy source to your body, which needs to eat more food, and on we go... The earth is a closed system, there is no winning. If you want something, you have to pay for it one way or another.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,618
    Quote Originally Posted by smashysmashy View Post
    It's a bit like the idea a prius is environmentally friend cause its electric... It's not when you consider total footprint start to finish. Of course the most eco friendly car is the one you have already - don't buy a new one!
    But dooood.... marketing!

    I always tell people their "clean" cheap hydro power actually runs on salmon. We're only beginning to grasp the impact damns have on the big picture.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,430
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    I wonder what is the environmental cost of making a e-mtb. *dives for cover from the coming flame war*

    Considering the majority probably get ridden three times, then sit in the garage while the owner prefers the couch, then the battery is kaput after a couple years of sitting uncharged, I’d guess the answer is: “not great”.
    whatever...

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    But dooood.... marketing!

    I always tell people their "clean" cheap hydro power actually runs on salmon. We're only beginning to grasp the impact damns have on the big picture.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    I think people assume hydro is niagra falls, which, while not perfect either, is a one off in the world. Most dams are man made disasters.

    We need fusion. But even then, as I said, the earth is a closed system, and there will be a price to pay for that too.

  46. #46
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    You shouldn't mountain bike at all. The money you spend on bikes could be used to lift hundreds out of poverty.

    Solar panels are a disaster. All they really do is concentrate highly toxic rare earth elements, dug out on the backs of poor third world people and leak the toxins into dumps where the elements poison the water.

    A single carbon reinforced blade on a wind turbine (which lasts a very short time and can't be recycled) could be used to make hundreds of mountain bikes.

    If you have an electric car, the pollution footprint is ridiculous to build it in addition to the fact that it may run off coal.

    Now, I don't give a sh*t about any of that, but if you do, you should sell all your belongings and move into a mud hut! The ones and zeros that went into this nonsense can't be recycled.
    So much fiction in this post.

    Just to take one of those, there are a bunch of startup companies taking wind turbine blades and chopping them down to make CFRP type products. They were "piling up" for a while, but that's not the whole story, and the recycling companies are looking to do some big business with these.

    You need to stop spouting party lines and do your own research.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  47. #47
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by smashysmashy View Post
    I think people assume hydro is niagra falls, which, while not perfect either, is a one off in the world. Most dams are man made disasters.

    We need fusion. But even then, as I said, the earth is a closed system, and there will be a price to pay for that too.
    Hydro takes many forms, only once of which is damming, arguably the most destructive, but definitely not the only game in town. We have one of the "other" types here.

    The fusion one interesting. Maybe one day that will pay off, but one of the biggest problems with nuclear isn't the waste (although that's a problem for fission), it's the massive infrastructure that's necessary to support it, everything from security, to the massive industrial complex, the engineers, inspections, layers of fail-safes and agencies to provide oversight, etc., in the end, it costs so much to make it work that it's not worthwhile, except in a few places. It seems more that there's a "right fit" for most places and it's definitely not nuclear across the board. Cities love natural gas-turbines because they are so easily scale-able, you literally just plug another one in when the demand rises, with little infrastructure necessary.

    It's been amazing to live in a time when the world is "weening" off of oil.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  48. #48
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    One thing I try to do is buy a bike I intend to keep and ride for several years. I usually get a custom shock or tune which helps to "lock me in". I plan to replace the bearings and keep it going. I feel that a lot of bikes are only intended to last a season or two and then the bearing receptacles and moving parts seem to wear out, not retaining the same stiffness as new, having play in them, and so on. Then there's proprietary parts where you are up **** creek a few years later. My old Specialized Enduro had bearings pressed into the rear swingarm in such a way that they were non-removable, you had to buy a new swingarm if you wanted new bearings. I feel that much of the proprietary stuff is such a marginal advantage, if it really ever is an advantage, that the negative effects outweighth the positives every time. It's like they try to sucker you into buying an Epic with the Brain, hoping you'll chuck the bike in a season or so or maybe after the first Brain rebuild, and then it will be somebody else's problem-that doesn't get the original warranty. Another example is shimano brakes, the cylinder bore is cast and scores the main piston, eventually the lever seal gives out, but you can't buy the seals because shimano has decided to not offer replacement parts...at all. So the weeping caliper pistons, failing lever seals and wandering bite points are things we deal with (the more extreme the riding, the more you deal with this) using shimano brakess, and their philosophy is that they are "disposable brakes". You can't get ready for the upcoming season by replacing your seals, ensuring they'll be "good for another season", you are just hoping you don't have a catastrophic failure during a critical time.

    So yeah, I try to buy and ride my bikes and parts with the idea that I'm going to get as much useful life out of them. I do break stuff, I try to replace it with better stuff or fix the issue. I want to get my money's worth in terms of enjoyment and I don't care about selling it second hand later on (some people REALLY care about this). It's not that I have tons of money, but I bought the bike for enjoyment and at that point, it wasn't about what I can get for it years later. There are parts that if they blew up tomorrow, I wouldn't be sad, because I know I got a great useful life out of them.

    But people aren't this interested in bikes on the whole, they just want their bike to work and when it doesn't, they just want to fix the problem with the least amount of work, which often means buying a new bike.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Another example is shimano brakes, the cylinder bore is cast and scores the main piston, eventually the lever seal gives out, but you can't buy the seals because shimano has decided to not offer replacement parts...at all. So the weeping caliper pistons, failing lever seals and wandering bite points are things we deal with (the more extreme the riding, the more you deal with this) using shimano brakess, and their philosophy is that they are "disposable brakes". You can't get ready for the upcoming season by replacing your seals, ensuring they'll be "good for another season", you are just hoping you don't have a catastrophic failure during a critical time.
    Glad you can still manage to turn any thread topic into a bash shimano one...

    "the cylinder bore is cast and scores the main piston" Though? Seriously man... Shimano has so many things you could legitimately bash, and you need to invent a fake one...

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    So much fiction in this post.

    Just to take one of those, there are a bunch of startup companies taking wind turbine blades and chopping them down to make CFRP type products. They were "piling up" for a while, but that's not the whole story, and the recycling companies are looking to do some big business with these.

    You need to stop spouting party lines and do your own research.
    No fiction https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...p-in-landfills

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Cities love natural gas-turbines because they are so easily scale-able, you literally just plug another one in when the demand rises, with little infrastructure necessary.

    It's been amazing to live in a time when the world is "weening" off of oil.
    What’s the difference between burning a finite resource (oil) or another finite resource (natural gas)? We’re a race of pyromaniacs. Civilisation and industry is built on burning sh!t. We’ve done it ever since we rose upright and walked around on our hind legs. There is a need for change for sure. The way we’re currently going about it is not the right way. Currently, it’s just a vehicle for the rich elite to feel warm and fuzzy about themselves.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    What’s the difference between burning a finite resource (oil) or another finite resource (natural gas)? We’re a race of pyromaniacs. Civilisation and industry is built on burning sh!t. We’ve done it ever since we rose upright and walked around on our hind legs. There is a need for change for sure. The way we’re currently going about it is not the right way. Currently, it’s just a vehicle for the rich elite to feel warm and fuzzy about themselves.
    There's a lot of difference. In chemistry, combustion of a hydrocarbon *should* give you co2 and water. In real life, you have incomplete combustion, and impurities, which is the main reason it's "bad". Natural gas is the closest to a complete reaction, so it is the cleanest to burn by a long way. co2 (greenhouse) and waste heat is more controllable in a central power plant as well, so it is not as bad as burning fuel at the point of use, like in a car.

    So, in *threory* an electric car powered by a natural gas power plant can be cleaner than a car powered by natural gas directly. Of course, in current times, the battery inefficiency, and the battery materials themselves mean this isn't true, yet. It will be, hopefully at some point in the near future.

    Then, we have the process of getting natural gas, which can be as problematic as crude oil. Again though, that's because of us, and not the fuel itself.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    734
    OP needs to put the bong down and wake up

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by Sender420shred View Post

    Seems like it may be the same story as the Prius, the battery manufacturing negates any possible climate gains made by the gas mileage..

    That is the problem with brain dead people, trash in and trash out.

    The batteries are recyclable, and the prius line is one of the most green cars on the market right now, with the volume they sell. Toyotas hybrid patents own close to 70+ percent of the hybrid market. All new Sienna vans are hybrid only, and more and more hybrids are being required for clean air rules.


    Toyota Prius' Battery Recycling Plan. Actually, Toyota's plan began with the development stages of the new Prius. The car as a whole is 85 percent recyclable and more than 95 percent of its materials can be recovered through a process that accounts for two percent of its full life cycle CO2 emissions.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    734
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    . Civilisation and industry is built on burning sh!t. .
    Was, is the key context. Hybrids are in our current future because its all our technology matches at this time. You have hydrogen vehicles being tested, and that may surpass hybrid technology, or evolve with it. Battery technology is still behind the 8 ball at this time for electric only. They are making a lot of advancements but what I stated is where we are at at this time.

  56. #56
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    Directly from the article, they can be recycled:

    One start-up, Global Fiberglass Solutions, developed a method to break down blades and press them into pellets and fiber boards to be used for flooring and walls. The company started producing samples at a plant in Sweetwater, Texas, near the continent’s largest concentration of wind farms. It plans another operation in Iowa.

    “We can process 99.9% of a blade and handle about 6,000 to 7,000 blades a year per plant,” said Chief Executive Officer Don Lilly. The company has accumulated an inventory of about one year’s worth of blades ready to be chopped up and recycled as demand increases, he said. “When we start to sell to more builders, we can take in a lot more of them. We’re just gearing up.”
    https://resource-recycling.com/plast...ing-operation/


    In Iowa, Waste Management Inc. “worked closely with renewable energy companies to come up with a solution for wind mill blade processing, recycling and disposal,” said Julie Ketchum, a spokeswoman. It disposes all the blades it receives, with as many as 10 trucks per day hauling them to the company’s Lake Mills landfill.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  57. #57
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Outhouse View Post
    Was, is the key context. Hybrids are in our current future because its all our technology matches at this time. You have hydrogen vehicles being tested, and that may surpass hybrid technology, or evolve with it. Battery technology is still behind the 8 ball at this time for electric only. They are making a lot of advancements but what I stated is where we are at at this time.
    It will be interesting to see where we go with hydrogen vehicles.

    Imagine a car whose only non-energy output is...water.

    Obvious there is inherent danger in the production and storage of hydrogen via electrolysis, particularly to lay people. But, with enough minds at work, I have to imagine someone will find a way to make it safe, cheap and convenient.
    Death from Below.

  58. #58
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    It will be interesting to see where we go with hydrogen vehicles.

    Imagine a car whose only non-energy output is...water.

    Obvious there is inherent danger in the production and storage of hydrogen via electrolysis, particularly to lay people. But, with enough minds at work, I have to imagine someone will find a way to make it safe, cheap and convenient.
    Too much energy wasted with logistics IMO, not just the issue of storing it at a gas station, but transporting it to the ends of the country by trucks, ships and whatever, and all the energy that's required to make all of those things. The genius of electricity is it doesn't care where the power comes from, fission, fusion, geothermal, solar, wind, gas-turbine, tidal, etc. I don't see hydrogen ever going anywhere because it still requires you to go to "gas stations", etc. Electric is far beyond this. It'll take a while for electric to get everywhere, like planes and industrial equipment, but even if there are niches that are hard to fill with electric I doubt they would go hydrogen, there just doesn't seem to be any point.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  59. #59
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by speedygz View Post
    What’s the difference between burning a finite resource (oil) or another finite resource (natural gas)? We’re a race of pyromaniacs. Civilisation and industry is built on burning sh!t. We’ve done it ever since we rose upright and walked around on our hind legs. There is a need for change for sure. The way we’re currently going about it is not the right way. Currently, it’s just a vehicle for the rich elite to feel warm and fuzzy about themselves.
    They've achieved 65% efficiency with (natural gas) gas-turbine powerplants, that's what's different. Again, it's also easily scale-able, easy to get another GT power unit and hook it up to the grid (relatively) or build a new plant. It's also far easier to control emissions and air quality. They operate with little maintenance and don't have a huge environmental impact compared to other sources. They work especially well supplementing diverse sources of energy. Good to not have your eggs all in one basket.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  60. #60
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,391
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Too much energy wasted with logistics IMO, not just the issue of storing it at a gas station, but transporting it to the ends of the country by trucks, ships and whatever, and all the energy that's required to make all of those things. The genius of electricity is it doesn't care where the power comes from, fission, fusion, geothermal, solar, wind, gas-turbine, tidal, etc. I don't see hydrogen ever going anywhere because it still requires you to go to "gas stations", etc. Electric is far beyond this. It'll take a while for electric to get everywhere, like planes and industrial equipment, but even if there are niches that are hard to fill with electric I doubt they would go hydrogen, there just doesn't seem to be any point.
    In theory, couldn't you just make hydrogen with a water source, and a power source?

    Plant a "gas station" on the interstate next to a big wind farm and a river, lake, reservoir.
    Death from Below.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    I think we also have an issue in the world of selectively addressing only what we can see. Cars are nothing. The fossil fuels used by cars are only a small fraction of the fossil fuels burned. You could make all cars run on fairy dust and you wouldn't do jack to reduce emissions.

    What I want to see is what's happened because of this virus. Less car travel, but also virtually no air travel, factories closed or production reduced. We have all sorts of theories and simulations of what might happened if the stop or reduce burning fuel... well, now we have. I wonder what it actually did. We should find out over the next year. If it has done something significant (one would imagine it has), will the government finally get off their ass and coordinate some actual action instead of token gestures?

  62. #62
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    In theory, couldn't you just make hydrogen with a water source, and a power source?
    You should look into how much energy that takes...it basically makes no sense, it takes far too much energy to make hydrogen, energy that is better harnessed as a direct source. It's hugely inefficient and wasteful, and then you have all the storage and transportation issues.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    In theory, couldn't you just make hydrogen with a water source, and a power source?

    Plant a "gas station" on the interstate next to a big wind farm and a river, lake, reservoir.
    you put "1" electricity in the water, create hydrogen, put it in a fuel cell, and you get "0.7" electricity back. (just an example, I don't know the actual numbers). Its similar to any other battery, you have losses. Better (for now) to just directly fuel the vehicle.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeadGrandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    283
    If we eliminate fossil fuels tomorrow, I see society reverting to wood for cooking and heating, which would be suboptimal. If you really want to save the planet from humans, you might as well eliminate the humans.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeadGrandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    283
    Oh, just so there is no misunderstanding, give me carbon frame bikes until I can afford titanium bikes.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    576
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadGrandpa View Post
    Oh, just so there is no misunderstanding, give me carbon frame bikes until I can afford titanium bikes.
    Titanium is even worse for the environment. You're going to hell!


    (actually I don't know really If it is... I've always been told that but never looked into it)

  67. #67
    BOOM goes the dynamite!
    Reputation: noapathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,554
    This whole thread is a little too much for me. I wonder how many tires, chains, rings, etc we've collectively thrown away every year. At least a frame is meant to last a while.
    :nono: :thumbsup:

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    They've achieved 65% efficiency with (natural gas) gas-turbine powerplants, that's what's different. Again, it's also easily scale-able, easy to get another GT power unit and hook it up to the grid (relatively) or build a new plant. It's also far easier to control emissions and air quality. They operate with little maintenance and don't have a huge environmental impact compared to other sources. They work especially well supplementing diverse sources of energy. Good to not have your eggs all in one basket.

    Say what? Are you telling us that CO2 is not responsible for climate change,and the imminent extinction of the human race? They're still burning sh!t.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Directly from the article, they can be recycled:
    Yeah. They can be. But the vast majority aren't. What the future holds is another story though.
    I've had a little bit to do with the installation of wind turbines, and the word is that they take around 70 years to become carbon neutral. Not sure if that includes blade replacements though. Make of that as you wish. I'm personally neither for, or against them.
    Myself, I'd much rather see hydro being used. Sure, you have to build a dam, but after that.......... I think the negative aspects of hydro are way over exaggerated, and blown out of proportion. Having grown up in NZ, and seeing how well hydro and geothermal can work.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: plummet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,055
    I havent scrapped a carbon bike yet. They get sold to the next buyer or handed down to my kids to....

    My daughter rides to school on a 2012 blur ltc running xtr, ks dropper, enve carbon rims, easton carbon bars.....

  71. #71
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,647
    Quote Originally Posted by plummet View Post
    I havent scrapped a carbon bike yet. They get sold to the next buyer or handed down to my kids to....

    My daughter rides to school on a 2012 blur ltc running xtr, ks dropper, enve carbon rims, easton carbon bars.....
    Sounds like she goes to the middle school down the street from me.
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    26

    Best options for being “green”

    If one wants to lower your carbon footprint the best options are grim:
    1) suicide
    2) vasectomy

    Well, you can go darker, but let’s not go there.

    A bike frame every year or ten is likely nothing compared to the gas you burned dragging it to the trailhead every weekend over its life, regardless of the material. If you are worried about that go take up barefoot running in your local neighborhood or something.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DethWshBkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    2,407
    My bike doesn't have any morality about anything. It's an inanimate object.

    I'm not going to dump oil in the river or anything like that, but the last thing I'm worried about is my "footprint" or other ridiculous fake concern, or about why I should feel bad about my existence.

    No matter what someone does, it's allegedly going to be "bad" somehow. Guess what. Don't care.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeadGrandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    283
    Quote Originally Posted by DethWshBkr View Post
    My bike doesn't have any morality about anything. It's an inanimate object.

    I'm not going to dump oil in the river or anything like that, but the last thing I'm worried about is my "footprint" or other ridiculous fake concern, or about why I should feel bad about my existence.

    No matter what someone does, it's allegedly going to be "bad" somehow. Guess what. Don't care.
    Aaaaaaeeeee!!! I have to go hide in my "safe space"! Someone must gather the children!!! The sky is falling, and it's all because of carbon bikes!!!

  75. #75
    I'm SUCH a square....
    Reputation: bigpedaler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,953
    Opinions vary...and thats all your statement is.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    106
    Quote Originally Posted by Moof123 View Post
    If one wants to lower your carbon footprint the best options are grim:
    1) suicide
    2) vasectomy

    Well, you can go darker, but let’s not go there.

    A bike frame every year or ten is likely nothing compared to the gas you burned dragging it to the trailhead every weekend over its life, regardless of the material. If you are worried about that go take up barefoot running in your local neighborhood or something.
    This is the sad truth lol. Trying to avoid the 1st one, riding sick bikes helps. Avoiding children like the plauge.. so maybe I can justify a carbon bike


    Sent from my moto g(7) power using Tapatalk

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Quote Originally Posted by Moof123 View Post
    If one wants to lower your carbon footprint the best options are grim:
    1) suicide
    2) vasectomy


    What's so grim about the second option?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DeadGrandpa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    283
    Quote Originally Posted by bigpedaler View Post
    Opinions vary...and thats all your statement is.
    What? Do you mean that everyone else does not recognize the truth flowing from my mouth to their ears? My gracious, that cuts me to the quick. "Off with their heads!!!"

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,286
    I do think its irresponsible to look at any one factor alone, if you're trying to reduce waste. I drive only 4 cylinder high efficiency cars, with modern emissions equipment. I bought all my cars used and keep them for VERY long. I recycle as much as possible. I don't have any kids. I grow food at my home, sustainably and efficiently. I buy minimal things in general... I'm not going to sweat buying a carbon frame.

    If you're skipping carbon to save the planet, and commuting 100 miles in a 1980 F350 while leaving your corolla at home, you're being ridiculous.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: plummet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,055
    I guess I'm the antichrist as far as this thread is concerned.



    The morality of carbon bikes-95813240_135738654709243_799662312821620736_o.jpg

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by plummet View Post
    I guess I'm the antichrist as far as this thread is concerned.



    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	95813240_135738654709243_799662312821620736_o.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	317.2 KB 
ID:	1335695
    Could be worse. They could be all moto-x/dirt bikes

  82. #82
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    343
    Fantasy: Hi Guise, I practice strict morality in my personal consumption in the USA by only riding aluminum bicycles and driving a tiny gas sipping car as little as possible for the good of the envirunment!

    Reality: Majority of pollution comes from population centers on the other side of the world where >3 billion people give zero f's.


  83. #83
    cmg
    cmg is offline
    passed out in your garden
    Reputation: cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,468
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    Reality: Majority of pollution comes from population centers on the other side of the world where >3 billion people give zero f's.
    Good point, l give up, lma gonna give zero fs as well.
    always mad and usually drunk......

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: @Ride@'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    614
    To those who worry about such things:

    The bicycle can be made into dust rather easily. Fire and a hammer could make the carbon frame into nothing more than dust, which has a very small footprint, actually it would never be seen or known of again.

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    48
    Some good points made by all.

    I think riding the bike you have for as long as you can is the #1 enviro friendly thing you can do in this hobby. It is easy to get caught up in buying the latest and greatest stuff every year.

    Very true that just to make an aluminum frame takes a tremendous amount of energy and creates a lot of waste. It is way more than just the frame itself. Buy whatever frame you want and ride it like crazy!

    I lived in SE Asia for a couple of years and in any remote jungle, the local river is the dump. It was hard to watch that. They were throwing away tons of Western junk food wrappers and cans along with large amounts of styrofoam. Throw it into the river and it magically disappears from them. There is a lot of pollution over there but a certain % of it is pollution that the USA has outsourced (manufacturing in China).

    It is good that people are at least thinking about this stuff. Have to start somewhere.

    Like the guy above said, try to use what you have. Then fix it and use it more.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    My point, which I did not articulate very well, is that the very notion of aluminum being "less bad" is questionable, at best, and very likely incorrect.

    But, because it CAN be recycled, somehow that bauxite mine, the excavation and earth moving equipment, the processing facility, the 1000' freighter, the smelter, and the energy required to produce, forge and CNC it apparently don't exist.
    Smelter energy is huge with aluminum.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  87. #87
    No good in rock gardens..
    Reputation: Sideknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,299
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Why do you really want a carbon frame, especially if you're having moral difficulties with carbon frames? Buy steel or aluminum and go ride and be happy with yourself.
    And save money, to boot!
    Less isn't MOAR

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    It will be interesting to see where we go with hydrogen vehicles.

    Imagine a car whose only non-energy output is...water.

    Obvious there is inherent danger in the production and storage of hydrogen via electrolysis, particularly to lay people. But, with enough minds at work, I have to imagine someone will find a way to make it safe, cheap and convenient.
    Hydrogen is not a source of energy. It's a carrier of energy, much like electricity is. To power a car, you'd need to expend just as much (or more) energy breaking up the water into hydrogen and oxygen than you'd get in return when burned. There is no economically available hydrogen just sitting around for us to use for energy.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    You should look into how much energy that takes...it basically makes no sense, it takes far too much energy to make hydrogen, energy that is better harnessed as a direct source. It's hugely inefficient and wasteful, and then you have all the storage and transportation issues.
    Dang it! I need to read the whole thread before responding to posts. You stated the hydrogen problem better than I did.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Moof123 View Post
    If one wants to lower your carbon footprint the best options are grim:
    1) suicide
    2) vasectomy
    If one really wants to "save the planet", these are the best one can do (with #2 being "sterilization" to keep it gender neutral).

    By no longer breathing, drinking water, eating, excreting waste, buying and discarding products, etc, and having your offspring do the same, would probably contribute more to preserving the planet than lecturing everyone else about what they should or shouldn't do.

    While I agree with minimizing environmental impact, being preached to by people who continue to fly, use electricity/batteries, etc, is pretty annoying, and if they aren't willing to take the ultimate steps, let others decide how they'll live.

  91. #91
    thecentralscrutinizer
    Reputation: mopartodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,891
    I find it better to use a balance approach to my bicycle collection with regard to materials. I have 3.5 carbon bikes, 3.5 aluminium bikes and 2 steels bikes so my traditionally recyclable bikes are greater than my not-so-traditionally recyclable bikes....I feel pretty good about myself.
    2019 Giant Fastroad Advanced
    2019 Giant Anthem Advanced 1 29
    2020 Giant XTC Advanced 29
    2019 Surly Karate Monkey

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    Fantasy: Hi Guise, I practice strict morality in my personal consumption in the USA by only riding aluminum bicycles and driving a tiny gas sipping car as little as possible for the good of the envirunment!

    Reality: Majority of pollution comes from population centers on the other side of the world where >3 billion people give zero f's.
    So we should just do nothing?
    Ragley Big Wig, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), 91 Schwinn High Plain (single speed "gravel" bike), Nashbar CXSS (on trainer)

Similar Threads

  1. Trail Legality and Morality Question.
    By Drewpy in forum Riding Passion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-03-2004, 10:48 AM

Members who have read this thread: 223

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.