MOTO-NZ finally come up with something for all our money

[mashman]

Where DO you get such unmitigated drivel, I can't believe one guy can simply make that much up all on his lonesome.

Those nasty cars you reckon should be abandoned in favour of public transport actually cost less fuel per pasenger mile than busses. Trains are much worse.

As for petrol being thieved because it's worth so much, it was far more of a problem in the '70s, when fuel costs were comparitively higher than they are now.

For shitsake ask someone who actually knows something, anything at all, before you mouth off about the evils of whatever this week's fantasy might be.

Oh there's much much much more, but I realise that simple human beings have difficulty grasping simple concepts and translate what is typed into anything they deem fit. I know this, coz i r one of um.

I never said that cars should be abandoned in favour of public transport fuel per passenger calcs... more I offered it as another excuse for tptb to get rid of motorcycles should they desire to do so. Keep up sunshine.

We woz talkin about the future... and as you have highlighted, it has happened before, imagine that we've peaked, how much worse do you think it'll become?

Try babelfish in future, or reading the posts in anything other than angry old man mode, before fappin, yes fappin, yer gums.

[mashman]

Which doesn't happen at peak (the most there has ever been) oil!

Yeh I'm still not seeing how that will crash it; have a think about how the production/useage balance is affected by hoarding, and how the supply and demand price balance is affected by the market panic; then have a think about those same things one month furthur down the track. Maybe look up some figures while you're at it eh!

Again, have a think about what proportion of production can be hoarded, and what do you mean by being priced out of the market? Out of the ground is on the market. Plastic has current alternative (bioplastic), so it's no different from the fuel, gradual changes will encourage new tech adoption.

I never said at peak... more once peak has been admitted and communicated to the world. I understand what you mean and to a degree we may, but only may, get lucky enough that the wonderful world of business will find a replacement for all of its oil based produced that will allow of the the oil reliant industry's to maintain their staff etc... What else can we produce in such quantity to replace oil? after all it's sucked out of the ground in huge quantities, so what's the replacement? Bioplastic? You're going to use the land that's currently used for food to produce bioplastics? You think that we'll be able to match current demand between oil and bioplastic? Sucking millions of barrels out of the ground per day v's generating the same amount of fuel from crops? Can you see why I might be a tad sceptical in regards to meeting supply? I highly doubt that I'm the only person that'll think along these lines, let alone when it comes down to the bean counters deciding whether or not they should pull their "investment" out of the oil industry.

People will be priced out of the market, as will business, when it fuel becomes prohibitively expensive. That may only be in small numbers to start with, but as the cost of living rises across the board via fuel shortage, how are you expecting that people and markets are going to react? It may take 10/20/30 years, but I can't see the market being able to regulate/settle itself where demand outstrips supply, which will happen given the quantity of fuel produced via different methods.

[mashman]

A lot are willing to risk scooters now and I don't see why that would change.

Getting rid of motorcycles may or may not lose votes (based on the sympathy expressed during the bikeoi it may well do). However, legislating people into car-pooling most likely will.

When there's only Scoots left as the bigger bikes have been legislated off the road, for arguments sake, how much is the resultant ACC levy gonna be?

I agree that car pooling may well fail and it'd be a logistical nightmare (I can think of ways) trying to implement a scheme that ensure car pooling... buuuuuut, how often would you not car pool if the fine is $1000 per missing passenger? Potentially car crushing? I agree that that's a tad extreme, but it all depends on what the goal is and it'd likely be a step that the Greens would back, likely Labours, in likely every political party would push for it to be law. Who ya gonna vote in then? Just sayin is all.

[bogan]

I never said at peak... more once peak has been admitted and communicated to the world. I understand what you mean and to a degree we may, but only may, get lucky enough that the wonderful world of business will find a replacement for all of its oil based produced that will allow of the the oil reliant industry's to maintain their staff etc... What else can we produce in such quantity to replace oil? after all it's sucked out of the ground in huge quantities, so what's the replacement? Bioplastic? You're going to use the land that's currently used for food to produce bioplastics? You think that we'll be able to match current demand between oil and bioplastic? Sucking millions of barrels out of the ground per day v's generating the same amount of fuel from crops? Can you see why I might be a tad sceptical in regards to meeting supply? I highly doubt that I'm the only person that'll think along these lines, let alone when it comes down to the bean counters deciding whether or not they should pull their "investment" out of the oil industry.

People will be priced out of the market, as will business, when it fuel becomes prohibitively expensive. That may only be in small numbers to start with, but as the cost of living rises across the board via fuel shortage, how are you expecting that people and markets are going to react? It may take 10/20/30 years, but I can't see the market being able to regulate/settle itself where demand outstrips supply, which will happen given the quantity of fuel produced via different methods.

You're getting your timeframes muddled up again. I've agreed that long term we're fucked if we continue to depend on oil. I don't agree that we're fucked once peak oil hits; you keep saying there will be a crash but only offer long term reasoning for it; or the panic theory which makes no sense due to market supply/demand regulation (not to mention TPTB price setting such as government and opec).

Once peak has been admitted and communicated is at peak oil, barring some dodgy book-keeping conspiracy theories of course.

[mashman]

You're getting your timeframes muddled up again. I've agreed that long term we're fucked if we continue to depend on oil. I don't agree that we're fucked once peak oil hits; you keep saying there will be a crash but only offer long term reasoning for it; or the panic theory which makes no sense due to market supply/demand regulation (not to mention TPTB price setting such as government and opec).

Once peak has been admitted and communicated is at peak oil, barring some dodgy book-keeping conspiracy theories of course.

Moi toimscales are foine ta... primarily because I don't have one. Although I reckon once announced and accepted as us never producing any more (which is where I'm coming from, not just that we're at peak oil) than we ever will, will cause the market to go doolally. I'm surprised that you think that long term reasoning won't have any affect. I'm sure the bean counters and risk managers will just say meh, we've got 10/20/30 years before it hits the fan, let's keep the price of fuel down. I can't see that happening. Such news will cause a shock on the market, I see the extent of that shock being really rather nasty in the short and long term, you don't... and as my crystal ball isn't working, I'll go with which I think will be more likely given the way we operate today and the available alternatives.

[Ocean1]

We woz talkin about the future... and as you have highlighted, it has happened before, imagine that we've peaked, how much worse do you think it'll become?

You should probably stop doing that, you're not good at it.

And as you said, it's happened before, fuckwits rabbiting on about running out of oil, DOOMED, WE"RE DOOOOOOOMED. So much so that when we eventually do reach the point where it's economically more beneficial to buy less fuel than we did last year nobody will bat an eyelid, they've heard the idiots calling wolif too many times already.

[mashman]

You should probably stop doing that, you're not good at it.

And as you said, it's happened before, fuckwits rabbiting on about running out of oil, DOOMED, WE"RE DOOOOOOOMED. So much so that when we eventually do reach the point where it's economically more beneficial to buy less fuel than we did last year nobody will bat an eyelid, they've heard the idiots calling wolif too many times already.

Yes I am.

I agree with you (although that's marketing for ya )... my we're doomed we're doomed is more, let's get the fuckin party started and not wait for the surprise. Oil is going to be nigh on impossible to replace SOMEDAY given the current usage. There's an obvious reason that we're slow out of the blocks and why we haven't, at the very least, started to produce new vehicles with alternative engines etc... you can call that a conspiracy if you like, but just because it may not happen in our lifetimes, doesn't mean that it won't happen. We are so far behind where we should be it's laughable.

[swbarnett]

When there's only Scoots left as the bigger bikes have been legislated off the road, for arguments sake, how much is the resultant ACC levy gonna be?

Sorry, can't see what your point is here?

how often would you not car pool if the fine is $1000 per missing passenger? Potentially car crushing?

Every fucken time and it'd be on my then illegal motorcycle. What you're talking about will only be accepted by those that grow up with it. There's a saying in Physics that new theories only get accepted once all the proponents of the old ones are dead.

I agree that that's a tad extreme, but it all depends on what the goal is and it'd likely be a step that the Greens would back, likely Labours, in likely every political party would push for it to be law. Who ya gonna vote in then? Just sayin is all.

In the industry I work in car pooling is just an impossible nightmare. No two individuals leave the office at the same time and noone leaves the office at a consistent time day to day. It all depends on what you're working on when it comes time to think about leaving (my own leaving time can vary by as much as three hours, and on more than one occasion I didn't leave til the next morning).

[mashman]

Sorry, can't see what your point is here?

ACC levels rise based on vehicle type * the all important risk calculation model etc... If scoots are the only "motorcycles" left on the road, their levy will be huge, which will eventually make them cost prohibitive.

Every fucken time and it'd be on my then illegal motorcycle. What you're talking about will only be accepted by those that grow up with it. There's a saying in Physics that new theories only get accepted once all the proponents of the old ones are dead.

yow much be filthy rich iffen you can buy a new bike every time one gets crushed. Whilst I agree with the Physics saying, I don't think it'll hold should the goal be getting them nasty motorcycles off of the road and at the same time enforcing car-pooling for what some may see as logical reasons. They may not be a majority, but if they're those who make the decisions you'll capitulate (maybe not you, coz you sound well 'ard). If you need your car, you will change your work habits along with your co car sharers if the alternative is having it crushed or receiving a $1000 fine. I know I would.

In the industry I work in car pooling is just an impossible nightmare. No two individuals leave the office at the same time and noone leaves the office at a consistent time day to day. It all depends on what you're working on when it comes time to think about leaving (my own leaving time can vary by as much as three hours, and on more than one occasion I didn't leave til the next morning).

Ooooooooo you drew the lucky straw. I'm aware of the reasons that car pooling is nigh on impossible, but as stated above, if the decision has been made and the consequences are harsh enough, we'll change our working behaviour. I usually do the long hours from home, would love to permanently work from home, but hey, I'm not to be trusted.

[swbarnett]

ACC levels rise based on vehicle type * the all important risk calculation model etc... If scoots are the only "motorcycles" left on the road, their levy will be huge, which will eventually make them cost prohibitive.

I see what you're getting at now but I'm not sure that the levy would rise. Scooters may have the same crash rate as the rest of us (perhaps even a little higher), but I suspect, with the speeds involved (even in t-shirt and shorts) the injuries sustained in those accidents may be less costly. Then again, you may be right. Can't say for certain as I don't know the actual crash rate for scooters (does anyone?). Maybe it's even lower. Afterall, all we ever hear about are crashes involving "proper" motorcycles.

yow much be filthy rich iffen you can buy a new bike every time one gets crushed.

Nah, just pissed off at everyone trying to save me from myself. Besides, if bikes are illegal, there won't be any bikes to buy. I'll admit this would only work until I got caught (which obviously wouldn't take long). With luck I won't be alone.

Whilst I agree with the Physics saying, I don't think it'll hold should the goal be getting them nasty motorcycles off of the road and at the same time enforcing car-pooling for what some may see as logical reasons. They may not be a majority, but if they're those who make the decisions you'll capitulate

The thing is, those making the decision to enforce car-pooling will be those most affected by it (and their mates) since when did a politician ever enact a law that was to their own immediate detriment?

(maybe not you, coz you sound well 'ard).

I won't capitulate. I'm not 'ard as you say. However, I've chosen my line in the sand I'll be sticking to it. It'll start with hi-vis if it becomes compulsary. Hopefully I'll have plenty of bikers joining me.

If you need your car, you will change your work habits along with your co car sharers if the alternative is having it crushed or receiving a $1000 fine. I know I would.

This is exactly the apathetic attitude that allows those that would control to have their way. If we as a population stand up and be counted they can't. remember "All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing"

Ooooooooo you drew the lucky straw.

I think so. But, believe me, with the pressure I'm under sonmetimes it doesn't feel like it.

I'm aware of the reasons that car pooling is nigh on impossible, but as stated above, if the decision has been made and the consequences are harsh enough, we'll change our working behaviour. I usually do the long hours from home, would love to permanently work from home, but hey, I'm not to be trusted.

I can't change my working behaviour. Yes, my standard day could change to some degree (I could work from home except for the team interaction and the physical things I have to do - can't telecommute a screwdriver). However, I'm also on-call for work one week in five. I can be called out at all hours of the day or night. who do I car-pool with then? And I'll say it again "All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing".


One further point that just popped in to my head. It'd be pretty hard to include electric bikes in a motorcycle ban based on emission levels and/or petrol consumption.


I might be persuaded to adapt to an electric bike if the exhaust note was reproduced accurately enough and it had equivelent range and torque. And it'd have to have a recharge time equal to that taken to fill my tank.

[Scuba_Steve]

Nah, just pissed off at everyone trying to save me from myself. Besides, if bikes are illegal, there won't be any bikes to buy. I'll admit this would only work until I got caught (which obviously wouldn't take long). With luck I won't be alone.

...

I won't capitulate. I'm not 'ard as you say. However, I've chosen my line in the sand I'll be sticking to it. It'll start with hi-vis if it becomes compulsary. Hopefully I'll have plenty of bikers joining me.

...

I might be persuaded to adapt to an electric bike if the exhaust note was reproduced accurately enough and it had equivelent range and torque. And it'd have to have a recharge time equal to that taken to fill my tank.

Don't worry you won't be alone in either case, I for one would be there too.
I'm sticking with my Henry T Ford colour scheme of "Any colour as long as it's black!" regardless of any moronic Hi-Vis laws that will* come about

As for electric bikes tho, I could only get one in the dirt variety at this stage. The charge time & range just isn't anywhere near enough to make it viable as my road bike. But as a dirt bike, done right, electric could be a good thing


* Educated speculation

[mashman]

I see what you're getting at now but I'm not sure that the levy would rise. Scooters may have the same crash rate as the rest of us (perhaps even a little higher), but I suspect, with the speeds involved (even in t-shirt and shorts) the injuries sustained in those accidents may be less costly. Then again, you may be right. Can't say for certain as I don't know the actual crash rate for scooters (does anyone?). Maybe it's even lower. Afterall, all we ever hear about are crashes involving "proper" motorcycles.

Dunno about the cost of injury for someone wearing a suit. 30kmh can still cause a serious injury though, especially when surrounded by other traffic. I guess that bit comes down to luck. Even if it is just cuts and scrapes etc... we must still be paying a small fortune for those incidents? I'd love to see how much those injuries cost, although I don't remember seeing the costs in any of ACC's breakdowns, although I think I saw some scoot stats somewhere, praps just less than 250cc stats (dead hard drive stopping play there).

Nah, just pissed off at everyone trying to save me from myself. Besides, if bikes are illegal, there won't be any bikes to buy. I'll admit this would only work until I got caught (which obviously wouldn't take long). With luck I won't be alone.

The thing is, those making the decision to enforce car-pooling will be those most affected by it (and their mates) since when did a politician ever enact a law that was to their own immediate detriment?

I won't capitulate. I'm not 'ard as you say. However, I've chosen my line in the sand I'll be sticking to it. It'll start with hi-vis if it becomes compulsary. Hopefully I'll have plenty of bikers joining me.

This is exactly the apathetic attitude that allows those that would control to have their way. If we as a population stand up and be counted they can't. remember "All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing"

with you all the way there. The downside is though, motorcyclists are persecuted with good reason, heh, and should such logical reasoning appeal to tptb that car pooling is needed, then arguing self-determination as a defence isn't going to win the day. Don't get me wrong, I'll be there to piss in the wind, I'm good at that, but there has to come a point where we have to cede some of our freedom for the greater good (the greater good, a la Hot Fuzz). Unfortunately choosing when to cede is not our decision any more and is done by the consensus of 121 people on our behalf... and where the mighty $ is concerned, it ain't our good that's at the core of the decision making.

I think so. But, believe me, with the pressure I'm under sonmetimes it doesn't feel like it.

I don't doubt it and if there had have been a sacrcasm icon available, it would have been used .

I can't change my working behaviour. Yes, my standard day could change to some degree (I could work from home except for the team interaction and the physical things I have to do - can't telecommute a screwdriver). However, I'm also on-call for work one week in five. I can be called out at all hours of the day or night. who do I car-pool with then? And I'll say it again "All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing".

That'll probably become your problem, not "theirs". Maybe you'll be licensed or permitted to do such things, dunno how it would be implemented and it probably is a ways off yet.

One further point that just popped in to my head. It'd be pretty hard to include electric bikes in a motorcycle ban based on emission levels and/or petrol consumption.

I might be persuaded to adapt to an electric bike if the exhaust note was reproduced accurately enough and it had equivelent range and torque. And it'd have to have a recharge time equal to that taken to fill my tank.

... good call. I'd never considered that. We're saved until the oil runs out . I'd be quite happy to have a wee electric bike for shunting in and out of town.

[bogan]

I might be persuaded to adapt to an electric bike if the exhaust note was reproduced accurately enough and it had equivelent range and torque. And it'd have to have a recharge time equal to that taken to fill my tank.

Have you had a go on one? The motors generally have a whine that is akin (albeit a lot quieter) to a turbine spooling up, I think people will easily get used to that and enjoy it once the more practical issues are sorted.

[Conquiztador]

Have you had a go on one? The motors generally have a whine that is akin (albeit a lot quieter) to a turbine spooling up, I think people will easily get used to that and enjoy it once the more practical issues are sorted.

If that is all there is then the new generation, that has no experience of a bike with a combustion engine, will easily accept them. For old farts like me it wont work.

[Zedder]

Have you had a go on one? The motors generally have a whine that is akin (albeit a lot quieter) to a turbine spooling up, I think people will easily get used to that and enjoy it once the more practical issues are sorted.

Turbine spooling up? I'm in, one of my favourite sounds. Great project you've done there too.