So I see the IEA have a new chart out that shows SUVs are the second worst polluting form in the Wor

Andrewf20

I agree but in a car it feels like more protection with car seats etc. To incentivise people to use these bikes I think parents would need the bike lanes off the main roads or decent bike lane segregation at least. We are slowly moving in that direction thankfully but still miles off.

I have a trailer for 2 kids which I have put on my bike before. Its some workout on hills (battery needed!) with all the weight but it was the traffic I was most wary with. I was waiting for some eejit to clip me or worse, rear end the 3 of us.

creedp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119233847#Comment_119233847

I'm convinced

Popoutman

Wow. The hanky-wringers are out in force here.

The "Tire (sic) Extinguishers" should be publically whipped for their efforts. A bit pointless especially as quite a few of the cars they've decided to target have compressors onboard and can refill the tyre easily. But that takes energy that would not have otherwise been used, so their "agenda" defeats itself.

To those that think that biking without a helmet is a good thing, that may only be applicable for the sauntering pace of a suburban parent with kid on a balance bike. All other times on a bike a helmet is a good idea - you have a brain, protect it. Hitting a head against anything at 20kph without a helmet between is going to cause you problems. It's not only a vehicle you need to protect against, it's your own possibility of falling off at more than walking speed.

As for the OP's link, there's a world of difference between the emissions of a Cadillac Escalade and a RR Evoque, both of which would classify as SUV. A Mokka is not an SUV by any stretch of the imagination, nor is a Qashqai - but the report does not have example models to aid the reader.

As an aside - which would the Boards reader think is more environmentally friendly over 5 years: A) a large saloon electric (Say a Tesla Model S) bought new, driven daily for 100km; or B) a second hand RangeRover V8 petrol driven 200km total on a Saturday and Sunday each week. It always surprises the environmentalists to see that answer B) is the more environmentally friendly by far...

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119251388#Comment_119251388

If you think helmets are always a good idea for cyclists, wait till you find out that the vast majority of head injuries on the road happen in cars, not on bikes, even with seat belts and airbags and impact protection systems - so presumably it's always a good idea to wear a crash helmet in the car?

Any thoughts on shower helmets, climbing-the-stairs helmets, going-out-on-the-piss helmets, all activities that have higher head injury numbers than cycling?

AMKC

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119252112#Comment_119252112

Maybe the reason cycling has lower head injury numbers than them other activities you mentioned is because most people cycling bikes wear helmets these days.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119253662#Comment_119253662

Or maybe it’s because 10-20kg bikes doing 10-30kmph aren’t quite in the same league of danger as 1-5 tonne cars doing 20-150 kmph due to basic physics of momentum?

Though you are making a good case for compulsory crash helmets for motorists.

Gant21

I drive a suv to protect my helmet.

creedp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119253710#Comment_119253710

Hard to imagine how more anti-car some people can get. Next time I see parents and kids out cycling, all adorned in their helmets, I'm going to stop them and advise they do themselves a favour and remove their helmets on advice of Boards.ie cycling experts

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119254250#Comment_119254250

See if you can work out the difference between;

1) Not telling people what to wear, and

2) Telling people what not to wear.

It is a very big difference in fairness.

What is anti-car about expecting people to wear crash helmets? Are you suggesting that the poster banging on about bike helmets is anti-cycling?

ordinaryfella

This is normal sight in Amsterdam. People don't feel the need to wear helmets as they do not feel in danger, the infrastructure is designed that way. It's a fallacy that cycling inherently needs a helmet, but I get it as a 2 ton car 2 feet away from your head feels dangerous. Infrastructure is needed, which likely means removing cars from the road and giving space to cyclists.

And I like cars, I drive a stupid big engined German yoke.

LIGHTNING

"People don't feel the need to wear helmets as they do not feel in danger"

lol what? The helmet is to protect you if you fall off your bike. Fall off a bike at even slow speeds onto concrete and it can be lethal.

Thelonious Monk

Mad how motorists are so concerned about people on bikes wearing helmets, always baffled me, but I suppose it's just down to them seeing people on bikes as a nuisance and worrying they might hit one of them and get blamed for killing them.

Tyre Extinguishers are hilarious, I don't blame them for taking action, London has so many of these massive Range Rovers everywhere, no excuse for it with the excellent public transport here. I'd love to see people take similar action in Dublin, maybe there'll be a faction by the time I move back there.

creedp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256567#Comment_119256567

Maybe it's because motorists are like everybody else and consider that wearing a helmet provide protection against head injuries from falling off a bike and not just when a cyclist is creamed by a manic driver. But I suppose competent and experienced cyclists never fall off their bikes just like competent drivers never crash.

Obviously it's not a legal requirement so people are free to choose whether they or their kids wear one or not. Just like car drivers / passengers were free not to wear seat belts until it became mandatory to do so.

Thelonious Monk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256771#Comment_119256771

Lol no its because motorists hate cyclists and want high vis and helmets and more rules put upon them out of spite.

harmless

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256771#Comment_119256771

Since the vast majority of head injuries on the road happen in cars why are some people so fixiated on cycalists needing helmets when it would be even more beneficial for motorists to wear them?

creedp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256835#Comment_119256835

Ah well. Enough said.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256925#Comment_119256925

When I'm driving I couldn't care less whether the cyclists I meet wear helmets, it's their choice.

When I'm cycling I wear a helmet because it's my choice.

When I'm on a motorcycle I wear a helmet because it's illegal not to but even if it wasn't I'd chose to wear one.

ordinaryfella

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119256489#Comment_119256489

Why lol? By this logic should you not wear a helmet on a motorway while driving? What's the threshold for potential head injury equals helmet?

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257286#Comment_119257286

There is nothing to stop anyone from wearing a helmet while driving a car.

ordinaryfella

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257313#Comment_119257313

Cool, so we agree it's a choice.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257330#Comment_119257330

Absolutely but I can't say I've ever seen anyone exercise it.

Outside of motorsport (where they are mandatory) I'd imagine one would get some funny looks.

harmless

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257313#Comment_119257313

It should be a choice but if it is encouraged for cycalist why is it not for motorists? It would save far more lives if motorists were convinced to wear them.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257449#Comment_119257449

It's an individual choice for both.

If anyone wants to encourage either cyclists or motorists to wear helmets there is nothing to stop them.

harmless

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257490#Comment_119257490

Any idea why groups like the RSA would focus on cycalists for this when it would be more benifical for motorists?

It just strengthens the myths that a cycalist with no helmet is doing something unusually dangerous.

Helmets help but are very far down the list on what can be done to make cycling safer.

creedp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257449#Comment_119257449

So because motorists don't wear helmets, then bejaysus cyclists won't.. that would be discrimination like. Maybe instead cyclists should wear seatbelts.

I find it amusing that cyclists are so vocal about what motorists should and shouldn't do in order to protect cyclists but for some reason a subset are quite sensitive when it is suggested they do something that enhances their safety on the road. In any case it the cyclists choice so no problem either way.

From my own point of view Id prioritise the wearing of a helmet over wearing padded lycra shorts as my head is a little more vulnerable to injury than my backside. Maybe thats because I'm a hard ass though, who knows. However each to their own.

creedp

Actually I should really be posting the above in the cycling forum, after all this is a motors forum

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257539#Comment_119257539

No I have no idea why RSA recommend helmets for cyclists and not motorists.

If they decided to recommend helmets for motorists I wouldn't have a problem with that.

As long as they aren't made mandatory for either I'm ok.

harmless

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257578#Comment_119257578

As I said it should be a choice but public campaigns should focus on the group it would help the most. That's if they continue to promote helmet use, which they shouldn't as it does very little for safety.

Lycra is worn by people who cycle for fitness and competitive sport. It has nothing to do with safety. Look at the picture above from Amstrdam, that is what the average commuter cyclist looks like.

harmless

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257636#Comment_119257636

I think it is because it's all they have left to promote. They know Ireland has an extreme car culture and the car takes priority. The only thing that would make roads safer for vulnerable road users is better infrastructure however most the money will be used to accommodate larger cars. Which is fair in a way as it's motorist that are happy to pay insane tax rates for owning a car. However it does not make for nice public spaces. I can see the next step as Ireland going down the"Just one more lane and it will sort everything" route that the US has been trying for decades.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119257682#Comment_119257682

Maybe someone needs to set up a campaign to get the RSA to promote helmets for car users.

I don't see our "car culture" as extreme or indeed anywhere near that of the US.

I'm all in favour of improved cycling and pedestrian infrastruture.

Improved public transport is the one single policy decision that would make all our lives better.