Flutterby™! : Environmental Paradox of Cycling

Karl T. Ulrich: The Environmental Paradox of Bicycling (PDF), the abstract of which starts:

Substituting bicycling for driving is frequently promoted as a means of reducing energy consumption and the associated degradation of the environment. This analysis takes account of the first-order effects due to the dramatically lower energy requirements of transportation by bicycle relative to autombiles. The enviromnetal benefits of human power are, however, strongly coupled to the environmental costs of increased population, due to increased longevity of those who engage in physical activity. Paradoxically, increased use of human power for transportation is unlikely to reduce substantially the use of energy because of this second order effect.

If you're looking for more paradoxes, CNW Marketing Research looks at the energy cost per mile of popular automobiles... The results aren't what your first reaction might be.

Now to balance all of this off, it's worth looking at various lifestyles and their impacts on the environment in an evolutionary frame. Yesterday evening we were strolling in downtown San Anselmo, looking at some kitschy antiques in the window of one store, and Charlene commented that she'd never stand for furniture like that in our house, 'cause those baroque flowers on the chest were impossible to dust. I agreed, and expressed my appreciation of Shaker style furniture (which none of the top entries on a search appear to be, despite what they call themselves). She said she hadn't heard of it, I said "not surprising, 'cause they're extinct", but I open up Arts & Letters Daily this morning and, surprise: There are four Shakers left, and they're making plans for the impact on this world of their belongings should they fail to attract any new converts.