Oh ok, I only read, I didn't watch the video. So basically, I don't think they have any facts, because according to what I've read, most motorcycles pollute more per km then then a car. Motorcycles also typically cost more to insure, and you end up having to buy a second vehicle if you also have a car or truck, so it sort of blows the cost argument out of the water. Granted they use less gas per km, so you do see some savings there, but if you look at the big picture I don't think you see it.
Here's a quote from a motorcycle instructor on another forum discussing why people ride motorcycles and the same conclusions as I had.
Quote:
So, Cheaper to operate? Probabaly not. Km for Km, I really doubt it. Compare a basic commuter car to your average motorcycle? The car lasts at least 2-4 times as long. (km-wise), it has tires that last 80,000km or more per set, it gets 60% of the fuel mileage (or better) and costs the same or less to insure. So for the 200,000km+ life span of a commuter car, you have to buy 2-4 bikes to last that many kms. And put 10-15 sets of tires on them. (Instead of 2 or 3 on the car) And buy riding gear and replace it at least once or twice. Etc, etc, etc. Cheaper? Nope.
More environmentally friendly? Nope. Bikes are not yet held to NEARLY the same level of emissions standards that cars are. Km for Km, new bikes emit far more pollutants than new cars do, even though they burn less fuel. (But they are getting better) Try comparing a bike to a ULEV. It's scary. Not to mention so many riders modify their bikes, changing fuel and exhaust systems for more power, better sound, and yep, likely even MORE pollutants as things like catalytic converters get removed, pair valves get removed, carbs get rejetted, etc.
|