>Figuring out lifetime impact (or life cycle assessment, as it's
>called in the trade) is quite hard.  How do you compare the impact
>of twenty years of GHG emissions against the future problems
>disposing of hybrid car batteries?  Two quite different kinds of
>environmental problems.  How do you trade off the emissions caused
>by running an old polluting vehicle like a Vanagon for three decades
>against the energy consumed (and GHGs emitted) by manufacturing a
>new car and replacing the old one?
>
>There's all kinds of arguments one can come up with for why almost
>any vehicle is preferable to any other (okay, maybe not SUVs!), but
>it's much harder to really tally up all the different possible
>impacts.

Indeed. people are emotional over these issues... not at all rational.

>Except that biking is definitely better for health and the
>environment.  Unfortunately you can't live in a bike!  And it's a
>bit slow for many purposes.

Depemde on the size of your bike's engine...
--
Andrew Grebneff
Dunedin
New Zealand
Fossil preparator
<andrew.grebneff@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
Seashell, Macintosh, VW/Toyota van nut

HUMANITY: THE ULTIMATE VON NEUMANN MACHINE

DEMOCRACY: RULE BY THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR