Life and style

The purr of electronic gears sounds great – if you can get past the price

August 4, 2009

Shimano’s electronic gears are a radical departure from traditional mechanical gears, but I’m sticking with simplicity

The gears shift instantly and imperceptibly underneath me. For a second I can picture how wonderful it would be to have this newest of new-fangled electronic technology shifting gear with precision as I fly up the Alpe D’Huez in chase of a Tour de France yellow jersey. The image doesn’t last long, as I’m actually sitting on a turbo trainer, shoved in a corner behind a display cabinet, in a bike shop in Canary Wharf.

Evans Cycles’ London City branch is the place to try Shimano’s new Dura-Ace Di2 electronic gears for high-end road bikes – if you can prise the city boys in suits off the test machine (hooked to a resistance trainer, so no one can ride the precious technology out of the shop).

Shimano’s electronic gears are a radical departure from today’s mechanical gears. Instead of shifting gears because of a mechanical process – a rider pressing, pulling or twisting a gear shifter and sending tension down a cable – these new gears employ tiny servo-motors, triggered by buttons above the brake levers, which dance the chain across front and rear rings perfectly every time. There’s never any over or under-shifting where – respectively – your chain shifts off the chain ring or doesn’t shift far enough for the next gear. No tweaking when the gears go out of alignment: these gears automatically realign themselves. And the battery lasts at least 2,000 miles a charge, in all weather. This is state-of-the-art shifting perfection.

Best of all is the noise these gears make – halfway between a “feel my power” growl and a “vorsprung durch technik” whine of mechanical precision. It certainly helps sell these breathtakingly pricey gears, much like a perfectly smooth CD eject mechanism could sell a hi-fi in the 90s.

If you can get past the price – the whole Di2 package costs just under £3,000 – there’s another problem. Like a smooth CD eject mechanism, electronic gears aren’t really necessary. Bikes have traditionally kept only what’s necessary – extra weight, price or complexity are discarded for good reason.

Most regular cyclists are capable of changing an inner tube or adjusting their gears. And even if they aren’t, shops can’t charge too much for what is clearly a simple mechanical job. Electronic gearing is another step towards the pursed lips “ooh, that’s going to cost you” car mechanic approach, where servicing requires computers as much as spanners. Don’t expect a sleepy village cycle shop to stock spare parts, either.

With high-end mountain and road bikes embracing all sorts of fancy technology – carbon fibre components, titanium frames, air shocks with rebound damping –simplicity could be so last season, anyway. Even the humble commuter bicycle is getting belt-drives and built-in solar-powered lights this year.

I’m sticking with simplicity though, for the most part: gears I can fix in the rain, with a multitool and a bit of elbow grease; a bike I can wheel into any shop when it goes wrong; and that can sit outside a pub without becoming a high-tech target.

That said, in a lunatic, pre-parenthood cycling blow-out, it wasn’t that long ago I bought a carbon fibre mountain bike with fancy forks. And the purr of electronically shifting gears does sound great …

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Shoe brands get tough on leather suppliers to save Amazon rainforest

August 4, 2009

Crackdown against ‘environmental criminals’ follows Greenpeace report

Some of the world’s top footwear brands, including Clarks, Adidas, Nike and Timberland, have demanded an immediate moratorium on destruction of the Amazon rainforest from their leather suppliers in Brazil.

The move is the first major development since the Guardian revealed a three-year undercover investigation by Greenpeace in June. The investigation said leading Brazilian suppliers of leather and beef for products sold in Britain had obtained cattle from farms involved in illegal deforestation.

“The decision is good news,” said Carlos Minc, Brazil’s environment minister. “With government pressure on one side and with the pressure of the consumer on the other, we have started to close in on [environmental] criminals.”

“It’s great progress in a very short space of time,” said Greenpeace’s James Turner. “What this does now is really put pressure on the UK food companies. The shoe companies have realised there is a problem and taken action, now it’s up to the supermarkets to follow that lead.”

Clearing tropical forests for agriculture is estimated to produce 17% of the world’s carbon emissions – more than the global transport system. Cattle farming is now the biggest threat to the remaining Amazon rainforest, a fifth of which has been lost since 1970. “I’d say that 65-75% of deforestation is linked to the growth of ranching,” Minc said. “We are closing in on this, but it is still the sector that is most opposed to change and responsible for the most deforestation in the Amazon.”

Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary, who is in the Amazon on an unrelated diplomatic trip, said: “We can only get an agreement on climate change if it involves Brazil and it involves forestry. There is no solution to the question of climate change without forestry. The Amazon forest is such a beautiful place when it is untouched and then you see these scars on the landscape from the deforestation, bigger and bigger scars.”

In addition to the moratorium on leather from newly deforested areas, the footwear makers have also demanded that suppliers bring in a stringent traceability system within a year, which will “credibly” guarantee the source of all leather.

Last night, one large supplier agreed to ensure that the farms it takes cattle from are not responsible for deforestation. Bertin, one of Brazil’s – and the world’s – major suppliers of leather and beef also agreed to meet Greenpeace this month to negotiate how to prevent cattle ranching from driving deforestation.

The Greenpeace investigation compiled field work, government records, company documents and trade data from Brazil, China, Europe, Vietnam and the US to piece together the global movement of leather and meat from Brazilian cattle.

The organisation said cattle from hundreds of legal and illegal farms across the Amazon were mixed and processed on their way to export sites, making it currently impossible to trace the origins of products. “In effect, criminal or ‘dirty’ supplies of cattle are ‘laundered’ through the supply chain,” said the report. Greenpeace has asked companies to refuse to buy from such suppliers and for consumers to press supermarkets and high street brands to clean up the supply chains.

It said that some Brazilian processing companies exported products linked to Amazon destruction to dozens of blue-chip companies across the world, and named three major processors, Bertin, JBS and Marfrig, which together control a third of Brazilian beef exports.

“We all agree [preventing deforestation] is possible,” Leonardo Swirski, head of Bertin’s leather division, told the Guardian last night. But he warned against measures that would harm the livelihoods of the 20 million people in the Amazon region.

“If all [consumers] are not buying any products from the Amazon, they will surely create other sorts of problems.” He believes other supply companies will also take action: “We have an advantage if they don’t. I believe everyone will follow.”

JBS and Marfrig reiterated commitments to not sourcing cattle from illegally deforested land, and all three have agreed with the federal prosecutor to reject these cattle. Marcus O’Sullivan, a director in JBS’s London office, said: “We are very committed to the protection of the Amazon biome. We work closely with Ibama [the Brazilian ministry of defence's enforcement agency] and don’t purchase cattle from the blacklisted farms.”

Under the moratorium, the footwear companies will refuse to buy leather sourced from farms on both legally and illegally deforested land. It will be extended if the demand for credible traceability is not in place within a year.

Clarks, which is a major customer of Bertin, said in a statement: “Clarks will require suppliers of Brazilian leather to certify, in writing, that they are not supplying leather from recently deforested areas in the Amazon biome.”

Timberland said: “We are grateful for the work of NGOs such as Greenpeace in exposing problems deep within the Brazilian leather supply chain.”

Adidas said: “We believe that joining together with our industry partners in this effort ensures an ongoing and sustainable method to stop deforestation in the Amazon biome region.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Cyclist beware: don’t stray from the towpath

July 31, 2009

Stuart Jeffries learns a few things about cyclists and manners after a refreshing accidental dip in the canal on the way to work

Have you ever cycled into the canal while commuting to work? You really ought to try – it’s most refreshing. I did it earlier this week and, as I told the kind people who helped me out, I regret nothing. Or nothing very much.

This is what happened. I was cycling along the towpath of the Regent’s Canal near King’s Cross in London thinking happy thoughts. I’d just read a news story about how women are getting more and more beautiful while men remain as pathetically cavemanny as ever. How lovely to be a heterosexual man in this day and age, I thought. Then I saw ahead of me an oncoming cyclist, and between him and me a couple strolling towards him.

The woman stepped sharply to the left towards the canal to avoid the cyclist. I swerved sharply to the left to avoid her and suddenly my visual field was full of grey/brown water coming to me very fast.

Then time slowed down and a series of questions went through my mind. Could I fall in such a way that the bike stayed on the towpath? Could I get my watch out of my pocket and hurl it on to the path before I went under? Could I reach my mobile, film the event and produce a multimedia audiovisual package that would really show my bosses that I’m not just a dinosaur of print journalism? Disappointingly, the answer to all three questions was no.

I stood up in the canal, thinking that the water wasn’t as cold as I’d feared. I wondered how much swan poo was in the water and if it was toxic. I was quite pleased I hadn’t landed on a supermarket trolley or the remains of another cyclist. The water came up to my chest and I had quite a nice chat with Laura and Jamie as they leaned with concerned looks down on me from the towpath. They looked so well dressed and dry that I felt at a bit of a social disadvantage. We did that very British dance: They were incredibly apologetic and self-abasing, I poo-pooed their apologies, saying it was entirely my fault. I’m not sure what happened to the oncoming cyclist.

They helped me pull the bike out of the water. My saddlebag was soaked, but amazingly some of the contents wrapped in a plastic bag – including my book and sandwiches which I later ate and — were bone dry.

I climbed out of the canal smelling of my new fragrance, eau de Grand Union, and began wringing out my T-shirt when my colleague Hannah walked by pristine and stylish in a summer dress. In the circumstances, it was very kind of her to talk to me at all. She suggested I must be concussed and should walk the few yards to work and have a cup of tea. Instead I pulled on a reasonably dry cagoule (classy), cycled home, chucked my damp clothes in the washing machine, showered, dabbed my grazed shins with Dettol, and blow dried my Oyster Card, debit card, phone, and watch.

Then I cycled back to work: I had to get back on my saddle and face down my demons. I retraced my route along the towpath. There are tyre marks swerving across the grass verge of towpath at the point I went into the drink. I stood there for a few moments and whistled the guitar riff from the Good the Bad and the Ugly (where did that come from?).

The only downside of my accident was that my mobile phone doesn’t work any more. I’d wanted an upgrade anyway. My bike (fingers crossed) seems to be in good condition.

Of course it was all my fault. The British Waterways code of conduct gives priority to pedestrians over cyclists, which is something that some cyclists don’t take seriously enough. Hannah told me that a cyclist had shouted “Move!” at her the other day as they barrelled down the same towpath I cycle along every day. That sort of rudeness is contrary to the British Waterways cycling code which says: “considerate and courteous to all users. Carry a bell and use it, or say excuse me as you approach all other users.”

For the most part any friction between cyclists and pedestrians is the fault of a sizeable minority of the former. That said, for cyclists like me riding on the canal towpath is irresistible: it’s a rustic idyll away from the raging roads.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Compass bans 69 endangered fish species from its restaurants

July 30, 2009

The world’s largest contract caterer has added Atlantic cod to its banned list alongside bluefin tuna and swordfish

Sixty-nine species of fish have been banned from menus at thousands of restaurants across the UK and Ireland in a move hailed by campaigners fighting to protect threatened stocks.

The Compass Group, the world’s largest contract caterer, has decided to follow the advice of the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) on fish for consumers to avoid because of environmental concerns. These will not be used again in its canteens and restaurants, in its “grab-and-go” offerings or at hospitality events unless the society changes its advice.

The move covers 6,500 outlets from Chelsea football club to schools in Lewisham, London, Procter and Gamble sites, Oxford Brookes University and Bristol Zoo. The species are those the MCS considers most vulnerable to overfishing or fished using methods that are damaging to the environment or to non-target species. They include four varieties of skate, five tunas and two types of plaice.

Compass had already decided never to use bluefin tuna and swordfish among 13 vulnerable species, but its decision to bar all 69 on the MSC blacklist is a significant move. It comes as the government’s Food Standards Agency considers whether it should offer the first official advice to consumers on eating ethically as well as healthily, by encouraging them not to buy or eat endangered fish. If it goes ahead with the move, it will also probably point consumers towards organisations such as the MCS and the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) which already advise on sustainability of stocks.

The move will mean that Atlantic cod from all but a few fisheries will be off the menu while Pacific cod certified by the MSC will stay on it. Alaskan pollock, Pacific salmon, also from Alaska, and Dover sole from the Hastings fishery are options that remain.

Neil Pitcairn, fish and seafood buyer for Compass, said: “There are many wonderful and delicious fish that can be caught without risk of over-fishing.”

Simon Brockington, head of conservation at the Marine Conservation Society, said Compass was leading the catering sector in addressing fisheries’ sustainability and helping to reduce demand for over-exploited fish. “This is a crucial step in ensuring the long-term survival of vulnerable fisheries.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Organic food not healthier, says FSA

July 30, 2009

Report finds organic food provides no significant nutritional benefit compared with conventionally produced food

Organic food is no healthier and provides no significant nutritional benefit compared with conventionally produced food, according to a new, independent study funded by the Food Standards Agency. But its conclusions have been called into question by experts and organic food campaigners.

The report looked at evidence published over the past 50 years of the different nutrient levels found in crops and livestock from both types of farming and also at the health benefits of eating organic food. The findings, partly published today in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, contradict previous work that has found organically grown food to be nutritionally superior.

Dr Alan Dangour, who led the review by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: “Most studies were based on the hypothesis that eating organic food is beneficial to health. Looking at all of the studies published in the last 50 years, we have concluded that there’s no good evidence that consumption of organic food is beneficial to health based on the nutrient content.”

He said that while small differences in nutrient content were found between organic and conventionally produced food, they were “unlikely to be of any public health relevance”.

Organic food campaigners criticised the study for failing to consider fertiliser and pesticide residues in food. They expressed disappointment at its “limited” nature, saying that without long-term studies it did not provide a clear answer on whether eating organic food has health benefits. A leading food academic went further, saying he found the conclusions “selective in the extreme”.

Peter Melchett, policy director at the Soil Association, said: “We are disappointed in the conclusions the researchers have reached. It doesn’t say organic food is not healthier, just that, according to the criteria they have adopted, there’s no proof that it is.”

He criticised the methodology used by the team, which he said meant they rejected as “not important” some nutritional benefits they found in organic food, and led them to different conclusions from those reached by previous studies.

Melchett said: “The review rejected almost all of the existing studies of comparisons between organic and non-organic nutritional differences.”

Carlo Leifert, a professor of ecological agriculture at Newcastle University and the co-ordinator of a major EU-funded study which recently found nutrient levels were higher in organic foods, said the conclusions of the study were selective.

He said: “I’m worried about the conclusions. The ballpark figures they have come up with are similar to ours. I don’t understand why the FSA are not going away and saying, ‘Right, there’s something you can do on a farm to improve food.’ But they are so blocked by not wanting to say positive things about organic farming.”

The appendix of the FSA report shows that some nutrients, such as beta-carotene, are as much as 53% higher in organic food, but such differences are not reflected in its conclusions.

The farming of organic food, which is now worth £2bn in the UK alone, is governed by strict regulations that set it apart from conventional farming. Crops are not treated with artificial chemical fertilisers or pesticides, while antibiotics and drugs are not used routinely on livestock.

Gill Fine, the FSA director of consumer choice, defended the scope of the study. She said: “We are neither anti or pro organic food. We recognise there are many reasons why people choose to eat organic, such as animal welfare or environmental concerns. We specifically checked claims that organic food is better for you.

“This study does not mean people should not eat organic food. What it shows is that there is little, if any, nutritional difference between organic and conventionally produced food and there is not evidence of additional health benefits from eating organic food.”

When asked whether consumers had been misled over the benefits of organic food, she said: “If they are buying organic on the basis that it is healthier, then that is not the case.”

The EU study co-ordinated by Leifert, which ended in May this year, involved 31 research and university institutes. It found that levels of nutritionally desirable compounds, such as antioxidants and vitamins, were higher in organic crops, while levels of nutritionally undesirable compounds such as toxic chemicals, mycotoxins and metals such as cadmium and nickel, were lower in organic crops.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Cycling books for the summer holidays

July 30, 2009

Cycling beats commuting on many levels – except you can’t read a book while you’re doing it. So, here’s my summer-holiday cycling reading list

With the summer holidays upon us, it’s time to think about books to read en vacances. If you’re like me, it’s a chance to catch up on some novels, always better read with momentum than crawled through three pages at a time last thing after Newsnight. For cyclists, recent years have seen a renaissance of bike-writing, as well as bike-riding. So if you’re thinking of stowing a bit of bike-lit in your saddlebag, allow me to make a few recommendations – and list some cycling books still on my “must read” list.

Because the Tour de France has just come to an end, let’s start with sport. Richard Williams signed off his superb coverage of the event this year with this:

“With the end of the Tour de France,” the novelist Paul Fournel wrote, “the summer reaches its moment of sadness: long, hot afternoons and no longer anything to get your teeth into.”

More of Fournel in a moment, but there are plenty of books around to prolong the racing fan’s contentment. For starters, Mark Cavendish has produced an autobiography almost as quickly as he finished the stage on the Champs Elysées. I can’t tell you much about the quality of Boy Racer, other than to say I received an email from a former pro I know who was none too happy about Cav’s off-the-cuff comments about him in the book, but I have heard that, as these things go, it’s well-ghosted.

A better prospect might be Bradley Wiggins’s In Pursuit of Glory, famously frank about its author’s post-Olympic depression and fondness for a bevvy. Talking of pursuing glory, Michael Hutchinson’s account of his quixotic attempt on one of cycling’s great athletic challenges, The Hour, remains a cracking read.

The stars of yesteryear have reappeared too. For nostalgics, Cycling is My Life, the autobiography of erstwhile British hero Tommy Simpson, who died on Mont Ventoux in 1967 from the combined effects of dehydration, excessive effort, brandy and amphetamines, has been reissued. Of the competing accounts of the life of his great rival and five-times Tour winner of the 1960s, Jacques Anquetil, I would choose Fallen Angel by William Fotheringham (a Guardian cycling correspondent and author) over Paul Howard’s rather luridly titled Sex, Lies and Handlebar Tape.

Another by a Guardian and Observer scribe, Richard Moore’s In Search of Robert Millar, is well regarded and very much on my shopping list. Interestingly, his subject, the enigmatic Scottish climber Millar, whose feat of 4th place in the 1984 Tour de France as best-ever British finisher was only this year matched by Wiggins, has recently emerged from semi-recluse to write, rather brilliantly, about his racing experience in a recent issue of the upmarket cycling periodical Rouleur. Rouleur also interviewed and excerpted a book by Jean Bobet, brother and fellow professional of the great Breton champion Louison. The extracts read beautifully and left me wanting more of Tomorrow, We Ride: the pick of the bunch, possibly.

I’m not a big fan of travel writing generally, and of cycling travel writing especially, as it only makes me envious that I’m not out doing it myself. But I might bring myself to re-read Tim Moore’s French Revolutions, as he is such a funny and charming writer. More off the beaten track but a great companion would be Ken Worpole, in his quiet way one of our great public intellectuals and a beautiful writer; so try his Staying Close to the River, and you will not go far wrong. And there is always the indomitable Dervla Murphy to fall back on. Her Full Tilt: From Dunkirk to Delhi by Bicycle stayed with me for its account of sleeping with a pistol under her pillow each night as she pedalled her way through Turkey.

Another classic, making the transition from travelogue now to fiction, is HG Wells’s obscure novel The Wheels of Chance: A Bicycling Idyll. Admittedly, it’s more memorable for sociological reasons – its portrait of a “New Woman” – than for great literary merit. But I couldn’t end without two literary cycling favourites. Tim Krabbé might be better-known for his noirish thrillers, The Vanishing and The Cave, but in his native Netherlands, it is The Rider that has outsold the lot. A novella-cum-memoir, superlatively translated by Sam Garrett, The Rider is an account of a one-day race that takes its reader on an extraordinary existentialist journey.

Rather like Krabbé, who is also a chess expert, the French diplomat and author Paul Fournel delights in intellectual puzzles – hence his membership of the avant-garde writing group Oulipo, which has counted Raymond Queneau and Georges Perec among its number. But his short book of pensées, Need for the Bike, is not a test but a delight: a more articulate testament to the pleasures of cycling is hard to imagine.

I’ve barely got going, but please tell us what cycling read you’ll be packing in your pannier this year.

• Matt Seaton is the author of the book Two Wheels, a revised and updated collection of his Two Wheels column for the Guardian

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Are ghost bikes fitting reminders of motoring mistakes?

July 22, 2009

Do these spectral memorials raise awareness of cycling fatalities – or do they serve to put off those who are already cautious?

I first noticed the shiny white bike, chained to a black lamppost near Farringdon station in London, shortly before world leaders descended on the city for the G20 in April.

Was it, I wondered while pedalling past, some covert landmark to guide supporters from one of the myriad of protest groups gathering during the talks?

No it wasn’t. The G20 leaders came and went but the bike, painted white from saddle to tyre, remained tethered at the junction of St John Street and Clerkenwell Road.

A few days later I chanced across a site on ghost bikes, roadside memorials to cyclists, and the penny dropped. This was part, it was now clear, of a low-profile campaign to raise awareness of cycling fatalities, and it has been going on for a number of years.

The ghostbike website says:

They serve as reminders of the tragedy that took place on an otherwise anonymous street corner, and as quiet statements in support of cyclists’ right to safe travel.

The one I saw has been named the Ghost Bike of St John Street. A number of incidents have occurred at the junction, including the death of Harriet Tory in 2005. And there are many other ghost bikes around the country.

But not everyone agrees that they are a fitting tribute. A colleague pointed out that spectral memorials dotted round the roads were hardly likely to tempt those already cautious about cycling into the saddle.

And police recently removed, on grounds of road safety, a ghost bike near a Sussex beauty spot. The bike marked where James Danson-Hatcher died and his family supported its presence.

His sister, Alison Swann, told the BBC: “I think it is a very effective message because it is symbolic. Everyone can for a split second at least visualise what has happened.”

Likewise, they strike me as a canny way of moving cycling deaths from the realms of the statistical to showing the real consequences of motoring mistakes.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Read the full article →

Would you cover your tracks with roadside assistance for cyclists?

July 21, 2009

If the RAC or the AA offered a ‘breakdown’ service, would you sign up? What sort of policy details would you find attractive?

Every cyclist can probably recall a time when they’ve “caught a flat”, or slipped a chain on the way to work or an important meeting. Not all of us carry puncture repair kits at all times, or have the know-how or time to repair a bike on the spot and continue with our journey as if nothing’s happened. I suspect that many of us would like to have the reassurance that a bike mechanic, or lift to our destination, is only a phonecall away. If motorists can travel safe in the knowledge they are covered by roadside assistance, then why can’t cyclists?

Earlier this month, the American Automobile Association – better known as the AAA – started to offer roadside assistance to cyclists in Oregon and parts of Idaho. “We’re the first AAA chapter in the country to try this,” said Marie Dodds, spokeswoman for the AAA of Oregon and Idaho. “It only makes sense, since bicycling is such a popular transportation option in this part of the country.”

A survey of AAA members last year found that 37% of its members in Oregon and Idaho said they would like bicycles added to their cover. All of the AAA’s Plus, Plus RV and Premier members now receive the cover at no extra expense.

“In some ways, we are literally inventing the wheel, so we don’t know what the demand will be like,” said Dodds. “We may just get overwhelmed.”

At present, the cover doesn’t include an on-the-spot repair of the bike, just a lift to anywhere within a 25-mile radius of the breakdown. “There are a million sizes of tires and tubes,” explained Dodds. “Our people are not prepared to repair bikes.”

Still, it’s a start and this innovative move has been welcomed by biking bloggers in the US. However, it has left one AAA competitor fuming. Better World Club says that it has been offering nationwide breakdown cover to cyclists since 2003.

“Gee, I’m used to saying that Better World Club offers the nation’s only bicycle roadside assistance,” said Better World Club’s president Mitch Rofsky. “Since this service is only being offered in Oregon and southern Idaho, I guess I’ll have to change that to ‘Better World Club offers the nation’s only nationwide bicycle roadside assistance’. We look forward to AAA copying our mass transit discount as that would run counter to its decades long hostility to mass transit.”

Rofsky does make a valid point: should cyclists really welcome such a hand of friendship from long-time members of the motoring lobby? After all, the AAA and their ilk have been campaigning for years to reduce fuel taxation and increase road-building. Of course, the roadside assistance for cyclists is only being offered to car-owning AAA members, but that shouldn’t negate how useful such cover could be.

Would cyclists here in the UK welcome such a move by the companies offering nationwide breakdown assistance? I decided to call the AA, RAC and Green Flag to see if they had ever thought about it.

“We’re watching developments [in the US] with interest, but have no plans yet,” said an RAC spokesperson.

It was a similar message from the AA: “We constantly look to improve and develop the services we offer members, but we have no plans at present to offer roadside assistance to cyclists.”

Dan Robinson, head of Green Flag, said: “We have no plans at the moment to follow in the footsteps of recovery clubs in America. However, we pride ourselves on our innovation. If there was an appetite for bike recovery amongst our customers, we could include it in our personal cover product option.”

A Green Flag spokesperson did add, though, that the company would “be interested to hear if Guardian readers wanted this service and if you get any feedback we would love to know”.

I see that as a challenge, fellow cyclists. If you would be interested in being covered by a policy offering roadside assistance then please do express your opinions below. What sort of price and policy details would you find attractive? Better World Club’s “Bicycle Only” membership, for example, costs $39.95 (£24) a year ($17 for each household’s additional cyclist) and for this premium you are allowed two service calls and up to 30 miles of “coverage” a year. It also throws in a free enrolment to the League of American Bicyclists which normally costs $30 a year.

Is this the kind of package you would sign up to? Or is this something, say, a coalition of local bike shops could offer cyclists instead?

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds