re: #72 erik_t

It’s stupid and trivial to the point of inanity in the context of the broader discussion, but it’s technically true. The bicyclist needs to eat more than if he had driven, and food production in this country has a non-zero carbon footprint.

Nothing is zero impact. We live in a world of grays.

This is what he said:

Also, you claim that is is environmentally friendly to ride a bike. But if I am not mistaken a cyclists [sic] has an increased heart rate and respiration. That means the act of riding a bike results in greater emissions of carbon dioxide from the rider. Since CO2 is deemed a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclists are actually polluting when they ride.

The CO2 we produce comes from what we ingest. In the end, that comes from photosynthesis, which involves pulling CO2 out of the atmosphere. Breathing is as carbon-neutral as you can get. His science is wrong.