Comments about ‘Bike commuting doesn't save money’

Great story. My solution is to telecommute.

Your 27 mile commute costs 54 cents driving a compact car with a CNG tank. The Compressed Natural Gas conversion also results in a much smaller "carbon footprint," hence, the income tax subsidy to help cover the cost of the tank and regulator for your car. Additionally, your engine will last about twice as long with the cleaner burning natural gas.

Commute time? You're right. Even CNG cars get stuck in traffic, but do you have to clean up and change clothes when you get to work?

Health Benefits? Your're right again about the health benefits and risks of accidents while biking.

Wouldn't it be great if you had a class one (separate) bike path to ride? Maintenence is small with no overloaded trucks breaking up the pavement, and you're able to appreciate the better world you're making instead of dodging cars.

The push to get us on bikes by al gore & huntsman the younger and cohorts was never about saving energy anyway. It's about control.

Nice try, bike tires and tubes are much cheaper to maintain on bikes than cars, bikes dont need oil changes, parking is zero, weight loss is a good thing. I guess if your in a rush to get home to watch american idol, a car IS more convienient though.

You ommited the taxes you do not have to pay when riding a bike.

I'd love a CNG, but if there was a dramatic increase in NG demand, wouldn't that just drive up the cost? Granted, NG appears much cheaper than other alternatives...but could everyone convert to this form transportation? That's probably not what you are asserting. Perhaps the key to any financially sustainable solution is energy diversification. I'd be interested to know what the market share is for various types of cars (gas, CNG, hybrid, bio, etc.).

New CNG cars aren't sold in Utah. You have to buy used, usually old government fleet vehicles. In California you can buy them new.

However, these vehicles are generally more expensive than their gasoline versions, and it takes a number of years for them to pay for the extra cost.

Yes bike tires and tubes are much cheaper, but you change them much more frequently. I haven's seen a bike tire with an 80,000 mile rating. Add up all the tires and tubes you would use over 80,000 miles and the cost would exceed that of car tires.

Engine repair on bikes is also much more expensive than anything you will ever see on a car.

you're also not counting the cost of a gym membership, which you now don't need, and the eventual health-care costs those 25 extra pounds would have caused you. Also, you don't need to buy that extra meal, you can pack a little more.

What's the purpose of this letter? Evidently to take a jab at those who would advocate commuting by bike instead of by car (the left). What ever the purpose, the letter is a crock. Extra calories provided by McDonals junk food? If your only interest is in what's cheaper, clearly it's less expensive to ride a bike than drive a car.

I think the equation being suggested is
cost per mile = (price per calorie) * (calories per mile).

There is an implied assumption that the price of calories is equal, no matter the source.

But if these numbers are true:
Human on a bike is 35 calories per mile.
Car is 1800 calories per mile.

Then the calorie price doesn't mean much.

The car costs 50 times the bike.

I now work nearly 30 miles away and it takes too long to ride in. Plus no shower when I get here. I miss biking to work and I've gained 10 pounds lately.

Not to mention the extra cost in processing the extra human waste caused by your extra eating.... Pedal one, pedal on!

Yeah, biking sure is a terrible deal. Maybe you should give it up and go back to driving everywhere. I bet you ride a Specialized S-Works or some other $5,000 bike - I'll buy it off you for $200. Do we have a deal?

By the way, you can get more than enough extra calories for your commute by eating Ramen noodles and it won't cost you more than a dollar.

Did I just say that out loud? Dang - now I bet you won't sell me that bike.

Calorie consumption causes global warming.

Yeah, why can't they design a car that runs on ramen noodles? Oh, that's right, ramen is basically made of oil.

Although this letter was toungue in cheek, it will probably be used to reenforce the belief systems of those who imagine that a car for everybody and everybody in a car is the best of all possible schemes for transportation and that transit, bicycles, and even sidewalks should all go away.
They dream of a world where there is no alternative to driving and call it "Freedom".

I'm sure that an extra helping or two of potatoes or rice would cover the increased calorie needs far more cheaply than a Big Mac combo.

riding a bike not cheaper than driving a car? the car insurance you would save in a year should pay for your bike and biking expenses several times over. bike vs car expenses should be a "no brainer".

You got to be kidding!!!

Uh, your car insurance does not go away just because you ride a bike. You still need to have insurance if you drive at all.

I found the writer's analysis fascinating. It was a determined attempt at personal transportation economics. But the transportation consumer has a difficult time evaluating alternatives intelligently because a true competitive market in transit does not exist - all government supported by a variety of taxes, so the writer could not included all of the costs he bears for transportation alternatives. Only when all costs are born out of pocket can an accurate analysis be made.

If there were three or four private toll road operators in business, each self-supporting, offering various pricing alternatives in competition, along with private transit competing for traffic like Bamberger of old, with all costs being born by the public out of pocket, then the transporation consumer could really make an intelligent choice. Anyway - to the writer - a pleasant and entertaining attempt!