[lordofthemark]

@ShawnoftheDread 32550 wrote:

Good work. Yes, it’s not ideal, but at least it can be done.

While the route is not ideal, it was a great ride – first time I managed to get from Annandale to someplace I consider cool using my bike alone, the weather was great, and parts of the route are great (basically the entire part in the City of Alexandria).

[lordofthemark]

@chris_s 32567 wrote:

This trail?

Oops, now google maps will even show that as a bike route, I don’t think they did the last time I was playing around with routes, or maybe I didn’t pick the right OD pair. But yeah, that trail (on that MAP) is the one I was referring to.

[lordofthemark]

I can’t find anything like this on the Fairfax Police website. I assume I have to live in Arlington to register my bike with ACPD.

[lordofthemark]

I did Shawn’s route today. LRT service lanes (et al) to Evergreen to Alpine (which connects to Pinecrest via a short trail not shown on any map I know of – leads from the Alpine cul de sac to a stretch of Alpine by the school in Pinecrest) to the twisty Pinecrest sidepath on north sdoide of LRT (which had a bunch of pedestrians at 9AM) then crossed to the south side of LRT to take the dog’s breakfast of service lanes, parking lots, and sidewalks to Beauregard.

Then north on the Beauregard sidewalk to Holmes Run, down Holmes Run to Eisenhower, east (using the nice wide multiuse path, but the road looked quite usable too) to the Carlyle development and then to the Whole Foods on Duke where I locked up and had a latte in honor of National Coffee Day. Then the same route back, except for using Morgan to Chambliss to get from Holmes Run to LRT instead of Beauregard.

hard thing about this ride is that the return part is when I’m tired, its more uphill, and it involves going FROM Alexandria TO Annandale

[lordofthemark]

@ShawnoftheDread 32447 wrote:

Yes, it works for the length of Alpine, but there are “bad parts” of LRT that Alpine doesn’t cover. It will get you from Evergreen almost to Old Columbia, though.

and whither then?

Up Old Columbia to Lincolnia? or back to LRT and then east?

[lordofthemark]

@ShawnoftheDread 32197 wrote:

The CCT doesn’t connect to Holmes Run. You could take Annandale Rd to Holmes Run to Eisenhower. Or you could take a combination of LRT and Alpine Dr to Chambliss to pick up Holmes Run.

I was thinking of doing Alpine to bypass the bad parts of LRT – I take it you’ve done that and it works?

[lordofthemark]

On the other hand increasingly we are substituting Natural Gas for coal in electricity generation, and while NG is superior to coal in CO2 emissions per BTU, that is IIUC somewhat offset by leakage in NG transmission, methane itself being a significant green house gas. Thats also an issue for CNG fueled vehicles (where there is even more leakage, IIUC)

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 31696 wrote:

Once you assume that exercise is a fixed cost, you have assumed your answer. I’m sure that there are some folks out there who wouldn’t be exercising as much if they did not ride bicycles regularly.

IF those other folks are overweight, they may eat the same amount when cycling as when being sedentary – the extra exercise will lower their weight till they reach equilibrium with same calorie consumption and lower weight (their non exercise calorie burn will be lower at lower weights, which is why weight tends towards an equilibrium for a given diet/exercise regimen)

OTOH IF they are normal weight and sedentary, the extra calories burned MUST be offset by higher calorie intake (or they will lose weight regaining equilibrium only at a (unhealthy?) point below normal weight. So for that group they need to eat more calories (with accompanying GHG resulting from food production and delivery)

So,(to simplify) three cases – A. Exercising already and transportation cycling subs for other exercise – no net food cost (no improvement in health though) B. Sedentary, Overweight, and cycling results in lower weight for same diet regimen – no net food cost (and significant improvement in health) C. Sedentary and normal weight – Significant net food cost (some improvement in health, probably)

In case C the GHGs associated with food production, delivery, preparation, etc COULD offset the GHG’s saved by not using a motorized form of transport. I defer to the experts on wattage and MPGs for that discussion.

(note also – differences in GHGs associated with production of bikes vs motor vehicles, and production of infrastructure — Im not sure of those, but they also impact net GHG’s – this came up with cash for clunkers – subsidizing new more efficient vehicles isnt necessarily optimal from a GHG POV)

[lordofthemark]

“He cycled around Dublin…in his pin-striped suit with £10,000 on his head.”

“Life is like riding a bicycle, to keep your balance you must keep moving”

[lordofthemark]

@JorgeGortex 31080 wrote:

Yeah, I see the irony. I think my point was rather that CaBi survive or fail is irrelevant to my interest in people keeping their brains in one piece and not gooped on our shiny pavement.

Copenhagen.

[lordofthemark]

@JorgeGortex 30966 wrote:

From the looks of it, CaBi is doing quite well, so that is just fine. Should people using them wear helmets? yes. If they get hurt when they don’t? Well, they will deal with the long term consequences.

And by the same token, someone who refrains from riding because they often don’t have a helmet with them and gets diabetes or heart disease will also have to deal with the long term consequences. (I own and use a bike helmet, and cannot remember when I last rode without one, and am not yet a CaBi member, but I think the concern about focusing on the dangers of cycling to the point that we discourage it, is not entirely without merit)

[lordofthemark]

@bobco85 30860 wrote:

People wearing helmets will choose riskier routes and get in more accidents.

Pelzman’s Law.(or at least the bike helmet corollary)

Which of course does not mean its irrational behavior. If you CHOOSE to wear a helmet and take a more direct route, versus going helmet less and taking a longer route, it might be the best choice for you. I mean I could deliberately drive an unsafe car, but only at 3 MPH, but what would be the point?

Where Pelzman’s law is relevant is to show that a regulation that is based on valuing consumers live’s or safety more than they do, can have its impact offset by people optimizing based on their own preference functions. Within limits though. A driver can adjust to mandated safety features by going faster, but may not want to pay speeding fines. A cyclist forced to wear a helmet can pick a faster but more dangerous route – but often there ISN’T a faster route, I guess.

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 30837 wrote:

What I find interesting is that a vehicular cycling blog would wade so deeply into helmet advocacy/non-advocacy.

I always thought that vehicular cyclists (of which I consider myself) question the value of typical “segregated” bicycle facilities and advocate more of a “share the road” philosophy.

Helmet use seems pretty tangential to this. Although I wear one, I wouldn’t mandate them. I assume that there are marginal benefits to their use, but I don’t have a dog in the fight. That said, I am surprised by the emphasis that a “vehicular cyclist” blog would put on this issue.

I guess its part of their “stop thinking of biking as inherently dangerous” theme.

A theme I sympathize with, even though I both wear a helmet, and often like to utilize segregated facilities .

[lordofthemark]

@off2ride 30093 wrote:

Question…what are you trying to achieve? Faster lap times or go hard without feeling wiped out in the end. Just curious so I can try to give you good advice.

I feel like I’d like to go faster so I am not passed so much on the trails, and get places faster in general. And just get in general better shape, especially cardio vascular health (yes I know that I need more frequent exercise than once every few weeks for the latter – I also walk)

[lordofthemark]

@acc 30080 wrote:

Try exploring Annandale via Google Maps. When I clicked on the bike route suggestions, roads that are bike-friendly-ish popped up marked in hash marked green. That way you won’t waste time driving to a place to ride. And yeah, I do that all the time, but as the days shorten, daylight becomes more scarce. Even if you drove a mile to an area with many connecting residential streets, it will save you time. And if you have a cross bike or a mountain bike, or even a tough hybrid, you’re close to the CCT that picks up at Audrey Moore Recreation Center.

Have fun. Ride safe.
ann

We are car lite, (and bike rack free at the moment) so I don’t like to take the car out for my rides (though I have) – the nice thing about the W&OD is that its easily bus accessible for me – but the time that takes makes it hard to justify for less than a couple of hours of riding. I can bike to the CCT at Wakefield – but have to wrestle the MTB up the hills on Americana to do that. Also my wife and I often walk the CCT, so its not the most novel place for me.

I’ve looked on google maps and on the new FFX bike map, and asked here, wrt to routes around Annandale.

I may try Columbia Pike again – at least that might get me close to Holmes Run in Alexandria in not TOO long a time.

[Author]

Posts