Diesel polution-is it worse for cyclists?

[classic33]

For city commuters is there any kind of pollution mask they can wear?

Not ideal in hotter weather, but given the potential health risks I know what I would prefer.

Short answer, no.

 

[Johnno260]

You've really fallen for the clickbait article, haven't you?

Cycling is still healthier than driving: it's the motorists who should be wearing the masks.

I hadn't read the article to be honest.

If you have the windows closed in the car, would the filters for air con or the heater system filter out the pollutants?

 

[classic33]

I hadn't read the article to be honest.

If you have the windows closed in the car, would the filters for air con or the heater system filter out the pollutants?

Not fine enough. Something like this, a closed system, good for around 15-20 minutes. Then the bottle requires refilling. Does get you noticed when you're riding your bike though, I'll give it that. Maybe it's the colour!

 

[raleighnut]

One of these should just about suffice if you're worried about particulates,

 

[Shut Up Legs]

I hadn't read the article to be honest.

If you have the windows closed in the car, would the filters for air con or the heater system filter out the pollutants?

There are various articles out there, just Google "cyclist diesel particulates" (like I did a minute ago, to check my facts) and you'll find plenty. The problem inside cars is that you may not be breathing in the coarse particles, but instead some finer ones, and it is (apparently) the latter which can do more damage. Although one of those articles did say that newer cars are better at filtering out the bad stuff.

 

[classic33]

As if to prove there's nothing new here
Mask maker slams Sunday Times' coverage of 'cycling is bad for the heart' story
by
Wednesday, August 24th 2005 at 2:41PM BST
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/ma...imes-coverage-of-cycling-is-bad-for-the/01731

 

[Lozz360]

CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas, it does not affect ozone. Chlorofluorocarbons damage the ozone layer.

Yes, CO2 has little effect on the ozone layer. But it is a considerable greenhouse gas.

 

[Sixmile]

There's a particular part of my commute where I cross a bridge above 6 lanes of motorway, with half going up a relativity steep climb for buses and lorries. The stench of diesel as I pass over that bridge is very obvious. I'd love the know how the air quality over this section differs from other parts of my commute in the countryside. I feel for the houses and those that live nearby this road.

 

[night cycler]

It could be a lot worse-like Delhi. They have coal fired power stations and other miscellaneous contributors as well as vehicle pollution. It`s so bad they are planning on using jet engines to blast the contaminated air upwards.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-38285567

 

[Drago]

Yes, CO2 has little effect on the ozone layer. But it is a considerable greenhouse gas.

'Considerable' only by virtue of its volume. In comparative terms it is actually a quite poor greenhouse gas. In terms of thermal effect Methane is several hundred times more efficient, and looks set the be the next big thing in global warming, just in the news today in fact.

 

[Sixmile]

Oh yea, I'm so thankful that I don't have to live with Delhi or even London levels of pollution. The time I was in Beijing, I was picking black bogies out of my snout for a few days afterwards. Goodness knows what that smog does to your lungs over a number of years.

 

[night cycler]

Ironically Maggie Thatcher proabably did us all a favour when she closed the mines, but we didn`t see it that way at the time.

 

[classic33]

Ironically Maggie Thatcher proabably did us all a favour when she closed the mines, but we didn`t see it that way at the time.

More dust from the cheaper coal. Burnt & unburnt.

 

[raleighnut]

More dust from the cheaper coal. Burnt & unburnt.

Too right the imported coal is generally much lower quality, maybe that's why it got shipped here.

 

[User482]

'Considerable' only by virtue of its volume. In comparative terms it is actually a quite poor greenhouse gas. In terms of thermal effect Methane is several hundred times more efficient, and looks set the be the next big thing in global warming, just in the news today in fact.

No, methane is about 23 times more intense.