Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRep. Ed Orcutt responds, apologizes for 'confusing' email about bicyclists and CO2
http://bikeportland.org/2013/03/04/rep-ed-orcutt-responds-apologizes-for-email-confusion-83716As you probably know by now, Washington State Representative Ed Orcutt has gained national notoriety for his comments that bicycling pollutes the environment. Before running our story on Saturday, I contacted Rep. Orcutt for a clarification about his comments. This morning I heard back. In an email Orcutt admits his comments were "over the top." Read the full email below:
... First of all, let me apologize for the carbon emissions line of an e-mail which has caused so much concern within the bicycle community. It was over the top and I admit is not one which should enter into the conversation regarding bicycles.
Although I have always recognized that bicycling emits less carbon than cars, I see I did a poor job of indicating that within my e-mail. My point was that by not driving a car, a cyclist was not necessarily having a zero-carbon footprint. In looking back, it was not a point worthy of even mentioning so, again, I apologize both for bringing it up and for the wording of the e-mail.
... Again, I do apologize for the carbon line in the e-mail and any confusion it has created. I look forward to working on reasonable solutions to the problems cyclists are having with infrastructure.
Although I have always recognized that bicycling emits less carbon than cars, I see I did a poor job of indicating that within my e-mail. My point was that by not driving a car, a cyclist was not necessarily having a zero-carbon footprint. In looking back, it was not a point worthy of even mentioning so, again, I apologize both for bringing it up and for the wording of the e-mail.
... Again, I do apologize for the carbon line in the e-mail and any confusion it has created. I look forward to working on reasonable solutions to the problems cyclists are having with infrastructure.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 1347 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rep. Ed Orcutt responds, apologizes for 'confusing' email about bicyclists and CO2 (Original Post)
Newsjock
Mar 2013
OP
htuttle
(23,738 posts)1. I think he means 'confused', not confusing
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)2. IOW, "I got my ass handed to me".
rurallib
(62,387 posts)4. could have saved a lot of words by saying "I Lied"
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)5. That would indicate actual knowledge of the facts.
GodlessBiker
(6,314 posts)3. Idiot.
bmbmd
(3,088 posts)6. On the bright side,
he learned a little something. That's unusual for a congress critter.
rustydog
(9,186 posts)7. This "backpedaling" brought to you by Big Oil PAC of Washington
exboyfil
(17,862 posts)8. Yes I am sure they did not like
the analysis that showed it was 10 to 20 times more CO2 efficient to bike than drive. Folks were proposing a comparable tax structure based on carbon emissions. It would be worth the tax on bikes to get a comparable tax on automobiles based on carbon emissions.