Wow, five years since my last post and, judging from previous content, no compelling evidence in favor of more posts. Just the same, I'm going to give this another go and try to focus on bicycling (or try to exclude a bunch of other stuff).

No pedalling for me today unless we agree to cycle to the gym and leave the car parked. Apparently, not everyone agrees on the benefits of cycling. Apart from the regrettable conclusions about bike CO2 emissions (yes, really) and tax revenues from cyclists that Representative Orcutt arrives at, I can't help but wonder at his sense of scale. In the face of truly massive sources of pollution and the relative number (and potential taxable mileage) of cyclists, what environmental gains does he foresee in dis-incentivizing cyclists and what meaningful revenues does he calculate from this minority population? It's a puzzlement.