Think Globally and Act Locally

In previous posts, here and here, I discussed how much oil is wasted on things like plastic bags - and straws. Sadly, I FAILED to adequately consider Khal and cafiend's suggestions about reducing the use of bags at the store. Reusing lightweight bags for produce and meat is indeed a viable option. It becomes more viable yet if a dog poop solution not involving bags can be found. I will address those observations in  a post to come soon.

Also, even more sadly, though my post was made nearly FIVE YEARS AGO, nowadays neither link take one to a place that is useful in discovering where to take a pesky plastic bag. The site that worked before, now provides no useful information at all. It shows a generic "Discover our New Home" page without any clear indication about where the new home is. THAT page is shown below:

Luckily, clicking through the various places that WERE listed provided a page that will identify the closest places that will recycle plastic bags. That site can be reached directly here and is a "dot org" site. As you may see, the closest locations are 25 to 50 miles away. I suspect few people are going to go to that amount of effort to recycle plastic bags. Still, at least both of the places identified were still in business, unlike the equivalent search five years ago.

Since that post, "bag bans" have been implemented in places like California and Washington State, and have been attempted in places like Laredo and Austin, Texas, though the courts ruled that such local bans were illegal. Perhaps Texas did the right thing for the wrong reasons. As it turns out, these bans have actually INCREASED the amount of plastic bags going in to landfills. The most recent LA Times story on bags may be found here. A related evaluation, summarizing the Times findings, is here.

Forget Global Warming, ACT NOW!

Plastic Bags Fill up our Landfills and Collect in our Oceans

There's been lots of news stories lately about global climate change and how humans are driving it. Well, perhaps that's so, and we can argue about details, but there's not really a huge amount most of us can do about it one way or the other in the short run. Mostly, people live wherever they live and they're locked into a relatively narrow carbon footprint. What's worse, is that all this focus on carbon emissions takes our attention off of stuff we CAN do to help our our planet at minimal cost and without global treaties. Hence, today's post title.

One example is the amount of oil we simply throw into landfills or dump in the ocean in the form of plastic bags, where it gets ingested by sea creatures or simply floats around in a giant garbage patch. A few localities have banned plastic bags. I'm not sure that is a good approach. I'd rather see a 25 cent charge per plastic bag imposed, with the revenues rebated to businesses based on their retail sales. In other words, places that sell a lot, but don't use plastic bags, would find a nice net revenue stream. I'm sure my loyal reader can think of lots of other revenue-neutral approaches, and anybody that really MUST use a plastic bag would still be able to do so, just as people can still smoke if they wish to do so.

Plastic Bags Not Welcome in Grays Harbor - What to Do?

The Gray's Harbor site that doesn't recycle plastic bags states:

"Plastic is a synthetic and highly malleable material made from a broad range of organic
polymers. Enough plastic is thrown away each year to completely circle the earth four
times. On average, an American throws away an estimated amount of 185 pounds of
plastic annually. Plastic is one of the types of waste that takes the longest to
decompose. On average, it takes plastic items up to 1000 years to break down fully.
Although certain plastics take less time, it still takes everyday plastic bags 10-20 years
to break down. A plastic bottle can take up to 450 years to finally decompose."

You might wonder why I bring this up now? Well, I've been doing a bit of investigation about plastic bags, and plastic bag recycling isn't a whole lot more realistic than the notion of "clean coal." Mostly, the hype about recycling plastic bags is a scam to make people not feel bad about supporting a form of pollution that could be stopped easily, and NOW. There isn't really a societal need for people to use large quantities of the things.

First off, most neighborhood recycling programs PROHIBIT plastic bags in that nice blue recycling container. It messes up their equipment. So, where DO put these plastic bags go? Well, thanks to the Internet, I went to the website that was printed right on a large plastic bag I was given that had junk newspapers inside. If you click on THIS LINK, it'll take you there. What's more, you can actually BUY the domain!

Golly, Plastic Bags are "Green" - if You Don't Actually Investigate

Further investigation through the Gray's Harbor site that tells me they don't accept plastic bags for recycling took me to another site that actually attempted to tell me where to take these bags. What's more, if you click on THIS LINK, it'll take you there. You can even put in your own zip or post code.

Well, at Least THIS Web Site has Information, Albeit Dated and Wrong Information

Unlike the first site, at least this one works. Unfortunately, it tells me that the nearest place to recycle my plastic bags is 25 miles away. However, that's not the worst of it. The Safeway really doesn't have a place to recycle plastic bags. Even worse, the JC Penney that's listed was closed over five years ago. I haven't checked at the Wally World, but I certainly don't recall seeing anything that looked like plastic bag collection. I also checked my zip in North Texas and it was similarly out of date, though at least the places that don't accept plastic bags are closer than their Washington State equivalents.

Still, we cyclists are not without our own resources. My bike bags are perfect for getting groceries and small hardware items. For bigger stuff, I bring my bike trailer or my back pack. What's more, since I still wind up getting plastic bags and plastic food wrap despite my best efforts, I save them to collect dog poop during daily dog walks. Sure, you can buy dedicated dog poop bags, but since they cost around 7 cents per bag, plastic store bags one gets without even trying are a better bet. After asking, I found that the local IGA gives a 7 cent rebate if you bring your own bag. Nowadays, the only time I get plastic bags there is when they forget to give me the rebate. In that case, I actually ask for them, noting they work for other purposes even if I don't need them for groceries. Many cashiers forget once. Few forget after I bring the subject up when they do. Ditto for the store manager who forgot - once. 

While it is fine to think globally about climate change, acting locally is something each of us can do each and every day. We actually have to act. In my Texas neighborhood, the local trash company has "leaf collection" days; they pledge the leaves will go to compost. Last weekend, there were hundreds, if not thousands of plastic bags with leaves in my neighborhood that wound up going to a landfill where the plastic will still remain after all of us have passed away. Sadly, kraft paper bags are easier to fill, but all that got picked up were my 20 bags, and 5 more from the neighbor across the street. One of the plastic bag neighbors actually caught up to the compost collection truck while they were collecting my leaf bags and leaves in order to complain they hadn't picked up his leaves which were in plastic bags. I stuck up for the garbage men, noting they could not dump his plastic into their truck since it would contaminate the compost. In my Ocean Shores neighborhood, there aren't even any "leaf collection" days and there's talk they will soon BAN plastic bags. Sheesh. It's why I'm composting as much as possible. Besides, the sandy soil in Ocean Shores needs all the help it can get.

With New Years coming up, it is an opportunity to resolve to simply stop using plastic wherever possible. Even for dog poop, I have found that my biodegradable compost bags will also work with dog poop, if there isn't anything better simply lying around.

Ashamed of Myself

I admit, I've been under more stress than usual lately. Still, that's no excuse for my behavior this morning. I was riding home from the espresso stand, on a narrow, two lane residential street with a posted 25MPH speed limit. I was riding near the middle of the right hand lane, a lane narrow enough that anybody passing would have to change lanes, regardless of my lane position.

I got passed by a silver Mercedes. The passenger felt it necessary to open HIS window and shout "right side bro" as though that might have made some difference coming from a willfully ignorant passenger already safely past another road user, on a bike. Who knows where the Mercedes was from, but it probably wasn't local. Certainly, I've never seen it before, nor its offensive passenger.

The shame came afterwards, as I shouted back "F)(* you." As if THAT would have made any difference. I guess I'm hoping my wonderful wife recovers shortly, and that things will settle down...

Earphone Bigotry?

Motorist with Earphones is Legal in Washington or Texas, Though the Whacked Hood Makes One Wonders About the Wisdom of Same

I’ve had a few posts here previously about earphones. Specifically, I was castigated in bike school for proudly admitting I wore them while riding. What’s more, in a later post, I was further castigated by a commenter claiming distraction was inherent in earphones. Googling “earphone accident,” I’m regaled with page AFTER page of stories about pedestrians and cyclists getting killed, with nary a word about the danger of distracted motorists wearing earphones. What then of today’s post pictures; taken while I was a passenger in a car travelling north on I-5 at 60MPH. We were passed by a motorist wearing earphones who was doing 75. More amazing, the same motorist then looked down for a while to text someone while hurtling down the freeway.



Motorist Texting on the Freeway is ILLEGAL in Washington, but LEGAL in Texas, though the Earphones Themselves are OK Either Place
Of Course, the NEWS Only Bemoans Pedestrians or Cyclists Doing This

Never mind that talking on a cell phone in Washington State while driving (or cycling) is ILLEGAL (unlike in Texas). It seems that looking DOWN while zooming down the road is a step beyond what is “not careless.” I don’t wear earphones when I’m riding up here in Ocean Shores, but neither do I claim that doing so is a “careless” or neglectful act in and of itself, though I think taking one’s eyes off the road while doing 75 in a 4000 pound vehicle is beyond anything I’ve ever seen someone do on a bicycle or walking along any road.

Considering that motorists kill tens of thousands yearly in the US, (and you see motorists talking with earphones on daily despite any and all laws), while those killed by cyclists and pedestrians can be counted on the fingers of one hand, I think this difference in coverage and attitude DOES count as bigotry. For another perspective on cycling and earphones, check out John Allen’s essay; here. One wonders why our society doesn’t including hearing checks as part of the qualification to get a driving license, or why it is acceptable for car companies; kept afloat with the help of billions of my and your taxpayer dollars to brag how QUIET their cabins are. Perhaps I'd be a little more gracious if Specialized and Trek together received pennies on the dollar.

PS: We were TWO lanes over, so the motorist would have had to really go WILD to hit us...

Spam Spam Spam

Trying to sneak on my blog today, "Helena" wrote:
"You should consider how a filing may affect your life, how not filing may affect your life and then decide which results are better for you..."

Is this kind of stuff increasing on blogs my loyal reader may write or read? Now you know one reason I moderate comments on all posts older than 14 days. It makes it tougher to sneak "bankruptcy" comments in such as the one above.

Red Rage

This isn’t the post I was planning to write today. I was planning to write a post, entitled “taking the second left.” I even took some photos to help illustrate the traffic situation. It is one not taught in Cycling Savvy, though I think any of their instructors would recognize it. Instead, I got mad. UNREASONABLY MAD. I yelled at someone. Someone who might be a nice person most of the time. I knew it wasn’t a teachable moment, but I yelled anyway. And then I got really mad. The RED RAGE is not pretty.

Sometimes it takes only a minor incident to trigger it. It is a close relative to what we call ROAD RAGE; an affliction we tend to associate with motorists doing offensive acts that endanger others. Well, I can tell you that cyclists are not immune. What's more, since we are not insulated from the world by steel and glass, it's a lot more upfront and personal when it happens to one of us. Today, it was me. And it really wasn't anything major that set it off. I think a lot of road rage starts with something minor.

Bellaire Elementary School While Road Construction was Ongoing

Northern Approach to Bellaire Elementary Four-Way Stop

Not long ago, I reported how traffic engineers messed up the street of Bellaire in Hurst, where it goes past Bellaire Elementary School. Well, this morning, I left for work a little later than usual, and at the four-way stop just north of the school, settled in to a stop for the crossing guards who had their signs out so kids could cross. So far, the situation was pretty normal. You stop and WAIT, just like the rest of traffic, when the crosswalks are occupied and kids are crossing. The concept is pretty simple, and it is a penalty that comes with leaving a skosh late for work. This morning, I had plenty of stop time to take a photo of the crossing guards. They are nice ladies that take good care of their kids and there were quite a few this morning. While we never actually talk, they have come to know the guy on the red and white bike that rides down the middle of the lane.

Crossing Guard at Bellaire Elementary School on September 20
The Same Car is Stopped in Both These Photos. HE Didn't Blow Through the Intersection

The OTHER Crossing Guard at Bellaire Elementary School on September 20
You Can See Lots of Kids Beyond on the Sidewalk

On my right, an adult on a bike pulled up to the stop sign. I have no idea where he came from because I don’t recall passing him earlier, but I'd been stopped for a while since I had time to take some pictures. Bike guy actually stopped. Well, he almost stopped. Then he started forward and, I, still waiting patiently for the intersection to clear, forgot about non-teachablemoments. I yelled “You’re at a stop sign and there are kids crossing.” For those that do not know me, my voice projects VERY WELL. Some say that Steve can actually be quite LOUD. Bike guy yelled something back, somewhat tentatively. I think perhaps he was disoriented by a cyclist yelling at him. Who knows. I couldn't tell exactly what he yelled. In truth, there was nothing he could have yelled that carried any meaning unless he was going to simply obey the law and WAIT. Instead, he continued forward. I yelled again; even louder: “THE CROSSING GUARD HAS HER SIGN UP! THAT MEANS STOP!” The guy continued past the crossing guard (and the kids) and then down Bellaire past the school, riding in the gutter pan of the street. I did feel a bit better when the crossing guard waved to me and yelled out “thanks!” Her feedback helped, dropping the anger down enough that I did not feel any temptation to yell further at the scofflaw when I was able to proceed legally, and I blew by him within a half block. In contrary to my usual practice, I did not make a full lane change when I passed him. In reality, the guy was no worse than many people I see every day on bikes. Arguably, he was better than the lady that simply flew through a four-way stop yesterday afternoon without looking either way, with a trailer in tow behind her. Still, he was the one that set off the RED RAGE.

I do feel better because no embarrassing profanities (John Romeo Alpha would call such an "inappropriate term") escaped my lips in front of all those elementary school kids. Practicing and training for friendly cycling really DOES pay off. It is possible that some, reading this blog, don’t get irritated when they see people on bikes simply blow through signs or lights. While a person on a bike does not present the same magnitude of danger to other road users that the operator of a 6000 lb SUV represents, bike can and DO hurt people. Read THIS or THIS. Closer to North Texas, you can read THIS or THIS. I’d not go as far as Mr Christopher and cite such as the reason I’d never carry a gun while cycling, but I certainly understand where he’s coming from.

Just as not everyone driving a car is one of MY MOTORISTS, a lot of people on bikes should stay away from roads, paths, bike lanes, and sidewalks. Thanks for listening. I feel better now. We can go back to something OTHER than the RED RAGE. Heck, if you're riding in Hurst, you can probably blow through a stop sign right in front of me and I won't say a thing other than to offer first aid help when you cream some little kid.

Traffic Engineers Distracting My Motorists

Mostly, I have a lot of respect for the various branches of engineering. Our lives have been enhanced greatly by the advances they've made. Just the very fact you can read this is due to engineers. Thank an engineer next time you fly and have landed safely. My respect is greatly tempered by engineering that attempts to mix psychology with science. A notable offender in this regard is traffic engineering. To a large degree, this is unavoidable, because keeping traffic from terminally clogging up and from crashing into each other requires understanding of what and why people do what they do while IN traffic.This is not just the idle observation of a structural engineer; the Arizona Department of Transportation, here, states: "Traffic Engineering applies engineering principles to help solve transportation problems, and brings into play a knowledge of psychology and habits of users of the transportation systems."

Bellaire Before the "Improvements"

The real problem is that traffic engineers tend to get a little wrapped up in the mechanical aspects of traffic. They start adding more signs and dots and other traffic gew gaws that promise to make traffic "flow" and "keep us safe." Pretty soon, the forest has been lost amongst the trees and we start getting zones where motorists can run off the road without damaging themselves and markings that are more distracting that helpful. What's more, they tend towards ever increasing "channelization" without regard to any useful purpose it serves and sometimes without remembering that creating traffic channels can create conflict between motorized traffic and the rest of the road-using traffic. Indeed, the same Arizona source linked above, forgetting that many road users are NOT motorized traffic, and getting tunnel vision, also states: "...chances of ...becoming involved in an accident are least when he/she is traveling at the average speed of traffic." Other than getting bikes and pedestrians OFF the road entirely, the document does not explain how this is to be accomplished other than also noting it is not a good idea to set speed limits too low. So we have an inherent conflict. A conflict, which, because most traffic engineers are mostly motorists and NOT cyclists, tends to get resolved in favor of a motoring-centric approach. This tendency is exacerbated because a lot of traffic engineers work for cities and their political masters want to go faster and with less delay from those poor and pesky pedestrians and idiotic people on bikes. Of course, being politicians, few would actually SAY something like this.

Protruding Dots Represent a Diversion Fall Risk for Cyclists
and are Worse in Front of an Elementary School Where Children Can Be Expected

I've posted about elements of this before. Traffic engineers created my nemesis road. They took a perfectly good and usable road and made it a stress creator for cyclists. They compounded the error by making something dangerous for cyclists under the cloak of "Safe Routes to School." What's more, any emergency response now finds itself unable to proceed due to traffic engineers not creating any way to pass at all. I offered special scorn for "the killer B's:" these are Bollards, Bott's Dots, and bricks. Especially offensive are situations where the traffic engineers ignore established guidelines and use an even number of bollards that create added collision risks. Or they use BIG dots as if they meant to create a fall hazard for cyclists.

Even Numbers of Bollards Lead to Head-On Collisions.
Bricks Make Things Worse

However, I really got a little hot this week (beyond the amount justified by our continuing heat), when I saw the local engineers get carried away with dots and stripes in a local school zone. Specifically, Bellaire Elementary in Hurst, Texas. Crimeny, this is NOT a freeway onramp. A couple of traffic calming devices would have done the trick admirably. Why, I might wonder, would anyone feel it necesary to put in left-turn only and two-way left turn lanes in front of an elementary school? Would you allow YOUR school child to ride down this street after the traffic engineers got done with it? I guess the traffic engineers think they have done their job. They got any bikes OFF the road and thus reduced speed differentials. I hope they're happy (he says very sarcastically). We really DO need to cut government waste! Better to have simply left bad enough alone than to spend a lot of money to make things worse.

Northern Approach to Bellaire Elementary, Looking Like it Did in the Olden Days. A Simple Four Lane Road with Sidewalks

Northern Approach to Bellaire, Where the Traffic Engineering Distractions Start. A Left Turn Lane at a Four Way Stop Onto a Local Residential Street?
You Gotta Be Kidding!

Another Shot of the Road Desert They've Created at Bellaire Elementary.
Would YOU Let Your Second Grader Cross This Gauntlet?

Temporary Traffic Cones - Ready for the Motorist Dropoff Rush. The New Road Features Makes the Rush Even Worse

Traffic Engineer Handiwork Across from Bellaire. Any Cyclist Hitting These Dots Will KNOW IT!
Before the Traffic Engineers, This Portion was Simply One Lane Each Direction with Wide Lanes

No Reflector in Front of this Fire Hydrant. Just a Splash of Blue Paint

Appropriate for April Fools

One feature of becoming a member of the bike league is that you get a complimentary subscription to a mass market cycling magazine. It just starts showing up. For some reason, this magazine misspells “Buycycling” on their cover, because this is a magazine that attempts to persuade the innocent reader that one simply MUST have items such as a carbon fiber floor pump and a carbon beam rack, that touts a $1500 bike as “entry level,” and talks about how many grams you can save with lightweight rim strips. This didn’t really bother me (actually, it DID bother me, but not enough to rant about it), until I took a look at their April 2011 issue. Yes, that’s April, as in the month in which April Fool’s Day occurs. The highlight of this issue was a so-called buying guide. I chuckled at some of the prose, and then put it away for a week or so. Then, mental fermentation set in.


FINDING THE APRIL FOOL JOKE
A while back, I thought it was silly of this magazine to glow about the Civia Hyland as a commuter bike. Certainly, the Civia is a nice enough bike, but it struck me as overpriced and overkill for most commuters, but lacking in performance for the rest. It seemed a bike for people that liked to talk about bike commuting without actually DOING it. However, I didn’t begin to dream what these guys would include in their 2011 April “Buyer’s Guide.” Perhaps they took the April Fool Day theme to heart. THIS issue featured, for a commuter bike, a custom frame and fork that listed for $4000. This wasn’t $4000 for a whole commuter bike. It was $4000 for a frame. This might make sense if your name is Bill Gates, Oprah Winfrey, or Warren Buffett and you want to start bike commuting, but it struck me as a joke to feature a $4000 frame as a bike commuter item in a magazine that doesn’t mention actually LOCKING a bike anywhere. I’m sure this is a very nice frame, but most commuter bikes get locked up, OUTSIDE, EVERY DAY. Most commuter bikes I see come from big box stores, and sport brand names such as “Roadmaster” or “Huffy.” The fancy ones say "Schwinn." Neither myself, nor my loyal reader are typical in our choice of a commuting bike. Quite honestly, more often than not, commuter bikes lead a harsh existence – until they get stolen. John Forester devotes quite a bit of space in EFFECTIVE CYCLING to characteristics needed in commuting bikes – functional and easy to keep running, but not flashy or particularly high end. My wife’s Nishiki fit that profile. Buddy was a little excessive, but so was the commute to Alliance, and I had a nice, warm, secure, office environment in which to keep the bike when I reached work. And I bought Buddy used.

GAPING HOLES
This magazine had dozens of categories of bikes. For example, instead of a category covering road bikes, they had “Entry level,” “Recreational,” “Enthusiast,” “Dream,” and “Plush,” They had other road categories as well, but you get the idea. Is there some reason I should either understand or CARE about the differences between these categories that all are subdivisions of the same kind of bike? I know more about bikes than the average person, but I confess I don’t understand all that blather.

So I instead looked for two of my favorite categories of bikes: cyclocross and touring. I found nothing. It occurred to me that maybe they had them under a less familiar category heading, so I looked at some of the various road and mountain bike categories. Not a single cross or touring bike to be found. I guess that if you are looking for one of these categories of bikes, you are simply expected to look elsewhere. Other categories of bikes were missing as well; tandems, recumbents, bikes to carry STUFF; all missing. I’m sad to report that there were no categories of roadster or dutch bike, either. Heck, they didn’t even glow about the Civia this year. I guess you don’t need a Civia when you’re dropping $4000 for a commuter frame. Chandra might simply be well advised to stay away from REI – Novara didn’t appear in the buyer’s guide in any category, though they did have a spendy Co Motion frame with S and S couplings to glow about.

EPIPHANY
After a while of furiously flipping through the magazine, looking for stuff that simply isn’t there, it struck me then that this magazine might not be so dumb. If you considered the target market as the advertisers rather than bicycle enthusiasts, it began to make sense. In a sense, the magazine is somewhat like the in-flight magazines that you find in the seat pockets of pretty much every airline, combined with the “gadget mall” catalog that usually accompanies them.

ONCE A FOOL
A few years ago, as I began to upgrade my bike technology, one of my daughters was selling magazine subscriptions as part of her school’s “raise money” campaign. Not knowing any better, I picked this magazine. Well, the first issue was pretty interesting, but after about the third one, the pattern had become pretty well established. Needless to say, I didn’t renew the subscription. You know, “fool me once; shame on…”

UPDATE - EVEN DOPIER THAN "BUYCYCLING!"
Perhaps $4000 isn't so crazy for a commuter bike as I imagined. Today, I saw that Audi (yes, the auto company) is putting its name on a WOODEN FRAMED bike, with the wood selected to match the wood trim on its cars. Here is the PR blurb: "A cafe/leisure bike, urban explorer and all-weather commuter; the most approachable bike for casual cyclists. Features include an upright position for short distances, comfort and traffic vigilance; wide puncture-resistant 32mm tires; LED lights; fenders; rack; and Shimano Nexus 8-speed gear train. Price: $6,530."

Somehow, I can't imagine many "casual cyclists" dropping that kind of money for a bike, even if it floated through the air on gossamer wings. More details here, along with many other places. I'd really like to hear who gets fired at Audi for such a brain-damaged notion. Crimeny, it doesn't even have an Alfine gear train for durn near $7k.

My D#$% French Fries

The Appeal of the Mavic Wintech

May Be Seen in its Sender/Quick Release

The French are renowned for their food. I don't think it was because of French Fries, which really have nothing at all to do with France, but the title WAS one of my favorite lines from "Breaking Away."

The French were once great in manufacturing bicycles and bicycle components. Mavic is still near the top when it comes to wheels and rims. My road bike has Mavic wheels and I'm looking for an affordable set of Ksyriums. I LOVE Mavic wheels. On the other hand, I don't think the French are real great at electronics, though Mavic tries real hard.

A case in point is their Wintech line of cycle computers. My Wintech is referred to by me as my "worthless French bike computer." I've got a low-end Cateye wireless computer on my commute bike, and it has never given me any trouble whatsoever. It has exactly one button for normal operation. The Wintech is a different story.

Here's why.

I purchased a Wintech several years ago. Actually, it was about five or six years ago. Wireless computers were not so common as they are nowadays. Wanting a clean installation, without having to zip tie a sensor to the fork, the Mavic Wintech computer appealed to me because its sensor is integrated into the quick release. Elegant solutions such as this appeal to the engineer in me. The computer was fairly high end for its day, including a cadence option, though I got mine for far less by virtue of it being "pre owned."

I installed it with no troubles and it even seemed to work right - most of the time. Occasionally, the sensor would get confused and I'd clip along at an indicated 0.0MPH, but it would then realize its error and indicate the speed again. The first sign that the French are not quite world class in electronics was the way that the clock would gain time over a period of weeks. Still, it isn't hard to subtract 15 minutes to the indicated time on a bike you ride every day. Even my Cateye has gained five minutes over the year I've had it.

The Wintech, however, had other tricks that have led to its current nickname of "worthless French bike computer." Last year, it started losing pairing between the sensor and the computer. Fortunately, I've kept the manual, so I didn't have too much trouble resetting things (it'd be tough without a manual since this is NOT intuitive). During the Hotter 'n Hell 100, it finally decided it didn't want me to go the distance, and I figured it needed a new battery. Well, it worked fine afterwards, for about a week. Fiddling with the sensor orientation would occasionally help, as did bending the little contact inside, but by this time, I was noticing a stark contrast between the Mavic and the Cateye. The Mavic was a high-maintenance French courtier, while the Cateye just worked - ALL the time.

I began to notice other things as I got to the point where I had the Wintech manual memorized. The manual is 102 pages long. Of course, only 12 of those pages are in English. The Cateye manual, on the other hand, is localized, and I don't happen upon the Finnish or Japanese version by accident.

Anyway, while I LOVE the idea of a wireless computer sensor integrated into the quick release, I wish someone good at electronics would do it. I imagine that such things could be sold as accessories to major wireless units. After my recent medical experiences, I've considered getting a new computer. Something with heart-rate and that I could use for who knows what. Interestingly, Mavic does have such a computer, but I think I recall what Scotty said on Star Trek - "Fool me once and shame on you. Fool me twice and shame on me!" With a Mavic heart rate monitor, I'd be worried about getting electorcuted.

Cateye and Garmin seem to be in the lead for such a high tech computer. I would, however, be reluctant to spend more money on a bike computer than I spent on the whole road bike, so I'll probably soldier on with "the worthless French bike computer" until tweaking no longer works. Now I bought a new sensor. Unfortunately, the Mavic manuals and website give no compatibility info, so we'll have to see if things work together.

Display of "the Worthless French Bike Computer"

PS: In an amusing bit of trivia, Mavic Wintech computer magnets do NOT work with Mavic wheels that use bladed spokes. They do offer a special magnet for those want to use their Mavic products together.

Looking Back Looking Forward

The Defense Attorney in Person

Looking Back

There's been a lot going on. It seems like an eternity ago that North Texas was covered in record snowfall, but it was just last Friday. That, however, is last week's news. This week, ChipSeal went to trial in the City of Ennis and was convicted on three counts of impeding traffic by a jury of his peers. The jury assessed fines as noted in the "High Noon" comments. The two hour trial was painful to watch, and I need to write notes in this brief period when the memory is fresh, but passion has abated. PM Summer was present, but as a witness, he mainly heard what went on in the hall outside the courtroom. Y'all can read comments from the previous post to pick up many of the considerations, but I would not advise any of my readers to take a bike case to a jury trial. I will publish a summary of the proceedings derived from my notes as soon as possible. I will attempt to distill the main facts and keep my personal opinions out of the account.

There are three points I will add here and now that have not been clearly noted noted in the comments.

First, this was a case in which the City of Ennis not only had the two arresting officers present, but also one of the supervisors AND the City Police Chief. I have not attended other Ennis traffic court cases, but I suspect that if you are picked up for speeding, you won't have the Chief present at your trial.

A second point to note is that none of the officers has ever cited cyclists in Ennis before, other than for things like shooting off a sidewalk and through a red light. You know, the usual bicycle dopey acts. As far as I could tell, none of the participants in the trial (other than Chip and his witness) were familiar with bicycle law, which should not be a surprise given it's a small part of the law enforcement picture in Ennis. ChipSeal might as well have been from Mars.

Third, while some might question Chip's wisdom to act as his own attorney, he was well versed on the applicable laws and attempted to argue them coherently. The court was not inclined to allow evidence from jurisdictions outside Texas. Even the excellent video from the kind folks at CommuteOrlando was accompanied by instructions to the jury that this was the way things were seen in another jurisdiction that they could consider and weigh as they saw fit.

Oldfool, perhaps said it best, though I think the "different" aspects are the biggest factors. Last night I felt pretty down. I drove to work today, even though the weather was fairly nice. Now, I'm at least past wanting to just sell Buddy.

Looking Forward - Plan for the Worst and Hope for the Best
First things first. ChipSeal's Ennis trial was crimped by his considerations. If you are unemployed and in modest circumstances, hiring an attorney is a difficult step to take. If your circumstances are modest enough that you can't afford a cell phone and you've lost your internet, that step gets more difficult. Being car free and getting ticketed while trying to do daily life slows things down even more. It's also tough to even know what others are up to that might be relevant. A measure of the man is that he is determined to carry forward with an appeal, even if he has to act as his own attorney again. I hope that PM Summer and I talked a little sense into the man. Our advice (I hope PM will comment if I misstate his view), was essentially "don't worry about cyclist rights and all that, the cyclists can figure that stuff out themselves and a lot of them are pretty smart. YOUR task is to obtain acquittals. Shut up and accept help graciously." He is now in contact with an attorney and has a disposable cell phone that we suggested he keep fairly private. I imagine added details will unfold as the story develops.

This is NOT just a simple lost case. Chip has at least one ADDITIONAL trial on the exact same subject. Different jurisdiction - Ellis County. This is the case where he was originally ticketed for "riding a bicycle on the road." And that will happen before any serious appeal action occurs on the Ennis City cases. Chip has the unique, if unenviable opportunity to get "do overs." We did advise him to take some added detours in the near term because everything was quite complicated enough already. I'm nearly as confused at all this as you are!

That being said, if anybody has tips on where Chip can find employment, suggestions would be VERY welcome and I'd be happy to pass suggestions on, but it might be better to cut out the non-value-added middleman. He is also able via public internet, to check his own blog and that'd be a good way to get word to him. If I were in a position to hire, I'd strongly consider someone with the dedication and drive this gentleman possesses.

I think there are AT LEAST a couple of people working on figuring out how people can contribute to this case if they wish. I'm not very savvy on Paypal and such (beyond how to buy stuff with it on eBay), so I'll leave the details to them. Since I live only a couple of counties away, I have the option of writing a check. In some ways I'm old fashioned. I have no idea how much a successful legal adventure such as this might cost, but I imagine it might not be trivial. Still, I can do without new bike stuff a lot easier than I can do with the thought that I might be tossed  into the hoosegow because someone doesn't think I should be riding somewhere I myself know from training and experience is safe.
 
Going a bit further, I read of thoughts of demonstrations and boycotts. Myself, I do not favor such things, and particularly not while the justice wheels are turning. Cyclist groups that interact with Ennis are more valuable as allies then as targets. They represent local contacts and knowledge which is badly needed. In a small town, knowing the players is important. Similarly, larger cycling organizations should be viewed in the same light. Up until now, and even at this point, this is a small, local case. Cycling groups, however, REGARDLESS of differences, have a common interest in not seeing legal cyclists become targets for law enforcement and further marginalized. I don't concern myself with credit, and I'd be thrilled to see these groups enter the fight productively in any way they can. Myself, I just want to be able to go, point-to-point, where I want to go in a safe and legal fashion. I know at least one gentleman who is working hard to build bridges within the cycling community instead of walls on this. We really DO have more in common than sometimes appears to be the case.
 
Brief Rant
While I'm concerned about cycling issues, I don't have to ride a bike, and I know how to ride on shoulders and sidewalks safer than most that ride bikes in any event. I can always drive to the gym, and if gas gets so expensive nobody can drive, I won't have to worry about those being cycling issues anymore. Personally, I don't even agree with all of Chip's theories on riding specifics. What really gets my goat is I don't like seeing someone get targeted by the government because he is "different" and maybe "menacing and dangerous somehow" because of that. THAT pisses me off. Maybe I took too many US History classes when I was growing up. Insert your own favorite "founding fathers" quote here.
 
I Haven't Forgotton
I still plan to do my post on the far, extreme fringe of cycling. A subject so obscure that I never knew of it until just a couple of weeks ago, though I have cycled for nearly 50 years. A subject so obscure that even John Forester left it out of his book. At the same time, this cycling cult is open to view by anyone Googling one simple word. It turns out there are even magazines (well, at least ezines) devoted to the subject. Discovered courtesy of "The Lowest Gear."

 

My Street Last Friday - Seems Like it Was YEARS Ago!

New Low in Cyclist Fear Mongering

While I was struggling to figure out how to gently tell y'all about a really deep, dark subculture of cycling subculture, I was rescued by an unusually tacky item in Google News today. You can read the full article here, if you want, but the picture below really says it all. Be afraid, be VERY afraid. Is my Texas Tech waterbottle that still works fine even after I ran it over at risk, due to a LOW QUALITY WATER BOTTLE CAGE? Maybe it explains why I have few bike accidents - I never used to bother with water bottles, much less LOW QUALITY WATER BOTTLE CAGES. Play ominous mood music here. Sheesh...

Raising the Flag of Cycling Controversy

Staying AWAY from helmet debates, but at the risk of causing ill feelings from some whose opinions I value, I raise the twin questions of "high visibility" clothing and earphones.

Certainly, one might consider that the first is an excellent idea with little downside, and the latter is a potential distraction. I won't argue otherwise. I tend to agree that high visibility clothing can be helpful in low light conditions when one is NOT using lights. HOWEVER, it's also true that litigation has attempted to argue that lack of bright clothing constitutes negligence on the part of a cyclist, and presence of the earphones is a cause of the cyclists' demise. News articles (and the ugly comments on same) make that precise implication, just as they often imply a cyclist would not have had that collision had she/he been wearing a helmet. I find this offensive - that a cyclist's failure to act in accord with peoples' notions of what is safe gives a negligent motorist a license to kill. The idea fosters a mindset in any "jury of peers," that the cyclist has duties in this regard. In effect, a cyclist not wearing high visibility, or wearing earphones deserves to die and is "asking for it." People stopped saying such things about rape and lynching a long time ago. We've got cyclists saying it for the benefit of those who don't know any better - some of whom don't much like cyclists in the road anyway. And they don't cite any hard evidence. Because there pretty much isn't any. It's just opinion.

I don't need a motorist to exercise a LOT of care. Reasonable care is good enough. I happen to agree with John Forester that high visibility clothing is not very effective. You need good lights and an effective rear reflector, and everything else is minor in comparison. I also agree with John Allen that earphones are not a legitimate safety issue. That didn't stop the Fort Worth policeman who told me earphones were illegal, despite there being no Texas or Fort Worth law on the subject. I'm reminded of the saying, "opinions are like armpits, everyone has two and they all stink."

It also raises the question - should I refrain from cycling altogether if my cycling jacket is black rather than high vis and I want to be responsible? I've got two lights on the bike. Soon, I'll also have a 3" amber SAE reflector. My wife tells me she sees that stuff from a full mile back. How much more do I gain with a lime vest? Am I only wearing the thing so if I DO have a collision, I take away one false defense? Is this true at noon as well as at night? Does ChipSeal need to stick reflectors on those Speedplay pedals just in case? Am I truly endangering my life by listening to talk radio and the weather report on my way to work? Heck, should Chandra be blamed because he didn't embroider his high visibility vest with blinking LED lights? The test should be "how much is needed to be REASONABLE," not how much is POSSIBLE." A cyclist can almost always find SOME way to add visibility.

In both cases, I contend that FACTS AND DATA fail to make a convincing case that added actions beyond those enshrined in Texas law are needed to meet the REASONABLE test. Actually, I'll go further; I think the evidence doesn't make any case at all. In the case of clothing, I think John Schubert said what needed to be said in "Chainguard" discussion:

"EASY to see a cyclist in a black jersey from 300 yards. That cyclist should NOT have his right of recovery abridged by the fluorescent fashion police."

It's even easier if that cyclist has two rear lights and a big ol reflector, and is riding down the middle of the lane. Beyond that, Wikipedia says most of what's to be said when they note: "Nonetheless, there seems to be even less research on the effectiveness of high-visibility clothing for the bicyclist than for the motorcyclist."
 
In the case of earphones, I would simply urge reading of John Allen's excellent discussion, here. It settled the issue in my mind.
 
We're not only blaming the victim, but we're creating a climate where anti-cycling laws based on groundless prejudice are more likely, rather than holding perpetrators to account. Remember, per my post, here, the reality is a motorist overtaking a cyclist with a closing speed of 30mph needs 3 Escalade lengths to slow down. Last time I checked, Escalades were a lot less than 100 yards long. Last time I checked, the cyclist's earphones were not connected to the Escalade braking system.

Little Lame Prince

Jessie W Smith Little Lame Prince Illustration 1920s

Once upon a time, when Steve hurt himself, he'd moan to his family, saying "I'm like the Little Lame Prince." Everyone rolled their eyes.

Then, he actually read the book (audio book file) (text)(read on screen). Now, I NEVER say that. Instead, I think of the Little Lame Prince when people decry cyclists getting hurt by big bad cars, or blaming the cyclist victims if they get hit while on the shoulder. I just say to myself, "I'm like the Little Lame Prince."

Some things are beyond our control, or the influence of any possible legislation, or anything other than chance. It's always been that way. We can either be crippled by the injustice, or live our lives, and enjoy our journey. It's a tough; sometimes unjust world out there. But it's also beautiful, and you can really EXPERIENCE it on a bike. Be a Little Lame Prince; ride as well as you can, using your bike as a magic travelling cloak, or go hide in your bed and don't complain to me. This blog really ISN'T about bicycle victimhood, or who's fault stuff is, or all that baggage. It's inspired by the example of the Little Lame Prince.

End of rant (no wick intended), y'all live happily ever after now, OK?

Steve Does Principles

This blog is not about the proper role of cycling in society, nor about whether we’d be better off with bike lanes or bike freeways, banning cars or whatever, nor about the finer points of cycling “culture.” If I write about Seattle, it’s when I GO there and ride. It isn’t about cycling law, except how it affects my riding in a given situation. There are lots of blogs that talk about these topics. This blog is here to talk about the practical and fun aspects of riding around, from point-to-point. At the risk of getting onto a slippery slope, I’m making a temporary exception today. Stay away or read on depending on your feelings on the subject.

People on bikes routinely get away with running traffic signs & signals, riding the wrong way, scaring pedestrians on sidewalks, and so on. It hurts me to see it. Motorists doing the same would be quickly brought to account. Motorists are keenly aware and resentful of this bike scofflawery. It fosters a mindset that even lawfully operated bikes don’t belong on the road as part of traffic, that statutory exceptions to “Far to the Right” law don’t count, that roads are "for cars," and that bikes are only for recreation, for play, and for children. Prosecutions for lawful bike operation are very serious when viewed from a cycling standpoint, but are often regarded as “more spandex whining” by the general public.

This is illustrated by an anonymous commenter on ChipSeal’s blog, I wasn’t in Ennis. I’ve never seen ChipSeal ride, I don’t have “Judge” in front of my name, but I HAVE had polite police invent imaginary laws to get me “out of the way,” so I’m not inclined to conclude Chip was actually doing anything wrong. I believe the police officer was acting in good faith, but he’s probably had little or no specialized training about bike law, safety, duties & rights. It’s doubly unlikely he ever had formal education on how to safely ride a bike on the road. Had Chip been riding at night without lights or running a stoplight, it’d be totally different – at least in my mind. Those don’t touch on fundamental cycling rights, the way a case like Chip’s might. Fred_dot_u had a similar situation he reported on CommuteOrlando. Fortunately, Fred won his case. Other cases appear from time to time. Cyclists do NOT win all of them. It’s why cycling is illegal on the road in Hunter’s Creek Village Texas.

I was brought up to believe one should oppose injustice, whether big or small, and that the accused are presumed innocent until found guilty. “Anonymous” might do well to remember those principles. They’re foundations that distinguish our country from a banana republic. It’s not “use the law against those that are irritating or inconvenient, even if you have to twist it around or ignore parts of it to do so.” It’s the RULE OF LAW. You don’t like the law, get it changed. With the proper steps, bicycles could be made more illegal in the US than Afghan heroin. Our State and Federal Constitutions govern those steps, and they’re not documents to be arbitrarily twisted either.

As a transportation cyclist, I prefer laws that don’t restrict me from traveling according to the rules of the road. All evidence is that's the safest way to ride. That biases me towards ChipSeal. I don’t need special protection. I need the RULE OF LAW. I’d prefer laws that don’t actively discriminate against me, but what we’ve got works. I don’t want motorists excused for running down cyclists after failing to exercise due care. I don’t want cyclists given a pass as if they were overgrown children. BEHAVE AS A VEHICLE AND GET TREATED LIKE A VEHICLE.

Now, back to our regular programming. Once in a rare while, all of us feel a need for a rant.

PS: You're right - I drove to work today so I'm moving towards "bike culture" instead of "Star Wars on bikes." This rain has got to let up. I've only ridden to work once this whole week...

Speed, Is It What We Need?

One thing about a long commute is there is lots of time to think about bike commuting blog posts. Thanks to Rantwick, you get THIS one tonight instead of a couple of others I was considering.

It's often been said that vehicular cycling requires speed. That's nonsense, but how to get the reasons across to people? I'd been struggling with that for months, even coming up with ways people can experimentally demonstrate it to themselves. I did five drafts of a post at Cycle*Dallas before deleting it for good. Rantwick's post today, gave me the basis for a simple logic trail. "You are as safe or more safe on a bike than you are in a car."

Well, why should a bike be safer than a car? You've got no airbags or seatbelts, you can't stop as well, and you're not gonna just fall over in a car. The reason for the safety is pretty simple, actually - you're going a lot slower on a bike.

Now throw vehicular cycling (and vehicular driving) into the mix. If you're going REALLY REALLY slow, at pedestrian speeds, VC or not doesn't matter very much. Ride down the sidewalk the wrong way at 4mph and you're not at a big risk, though you're still not as safe as a REAL pedestrian since you can't jump aside. Ditto if you drive around real slow - even if you're going down the street the wrong way. Either way, you're bog simple for faster traffic to avoid - and they'll probably get out and offer to help push if you're in your car. I don't, however, recommend you try to drive your car real slow on a sidewalk. The police will not understand.

Now, ramp it up to 12mph. Things are happening three times as fast, and any impact imparts NINE times the energy. Suddenly, not following rules makes it MUCH more likely that you're gonna collide with something and it'll hurt a lot more. That's true whether you're riding a bike or driving a car. Suddenly, following rules has a much bigger payoff. That payoff comes because you are less able to avoid hazards and you're now more difficult for faster traffic to avoid if you're NOT predictable.

Now, ramp it up to 40mph. You'd be INSANE to ride (probably with the help of a hill) or drive at these speeds without following predictable (vehicular) rules. Conclusion: it's not that you need to ride fast to ride vehicularly, but if you ARE going to ride fast, the consequences of NOT riding vehicularly get really ugly. The FASTER you go, the less viable any other approach becomes. Doubt it? Read the cycling accident reports - they're filled with people shooting across crosswalks and getting hit or shooting up to the right of trucks and getting hit or ---

Hence the basis for the nonsensical notion that VC requires speed. Really, it's speed that requires VC. If you're just going to stay perfectly still, VC is completely irrelevant. There I said it. Putting it another way, if operating vehicularly required speed, wouldn't all roads (not just a few freeways) have minimum posted speeds instead of maximum speeds?

PS: I LOVE that Rantwick salute picture!

WEDNESDAY UPDATE: The Force must be strong today. Go here or here to see a video of someone operating in a non vehicular fashion at 20mph, along with the guy's frame of mind. I kept waiting for the splat.

Go Read This GOOD Info

Not all of it applies to us here in Texas, but it's still excellent and very practical! go HERE.

If you live in Dallas, see info on 311 here. I couldn't find equivalent info about 311 in Fort Worth or Tarrant County generally. Maybe someone savvy about this (PM Summer?) will educate us all on this.

Bike Shoes for the Rest of Us

One of my engineers bought his first "real road bike" last fall. He went to a large bike store over in Dallas County. Never been there myself. They fixed him up, not even trying to talk him into a Exotimundi Carbone Speciale. They did, however, sell him stiff road shoes with external cleats, telling him that's what he needed for a road bike. Now, if he gets off his bike, he waddles around like a duck - like the other roadies. This is a guy who may never ride more than ten or twenty miles at a time, mainly along paths or on charity rides.

The bulk of my bike mileage is commuting. The distance is far enough that my main concern is whether I can afford the time. One thing about commuting is that you have to do a little walking when you get to work. If you stop somewhere, you have to do a little walking. My bikes all have either spd pedals or toe clips, even my road bike. I wouldn't argue if you claimed that Eggbeaters might have been a better choice, but the pedals are bought & paid for. Mainly, the recessed spd clips let me walk like a human being. I could wear the bike shoes all day if necessary, although the reflective features give "high visibility" a whole new meaning in an office environment.