The Davis Square Community

Oh, good point. I am relatively new to LJ but I posted here because we are offering delivery to Somerville.
As a Somerville resident myself, even though I love Harvest, its not often convenient for me to go by there. So I thought a delivery service might interest Somerville residents with similar situations.

From:

I think it's probably very useful to post about the delivery option in all of the active comms that are part of your delivery area (rather than just in the comm that's located nearest the store).

What is your delivery area for this service, as Ron asked below?

From:

ron_newman

Does your delivery area include all of Somerville and Cambridge?

From:

Yes.
The first mile radius or so is $7.50, most of Somerville is $10.00.
I will try to post a map as soon as I can.

From:

an-art-worker.livejournal.com

Alas, it seemed like Harvest was even more expensive than Whole Foods the last time I was in so shopping there is not an option for me even without a delivery charge.

From:

My experience is that Harvest is generally less expensive than Whole Foods.

And frequent shoppers would probably be members as well, so that would save them more money.

From:

Yeah, some stuff is alot cheaper. I just had some really good locally grown sweet corn from Harvest - 3 for $0.99 cents. Tasty!

From:

makoshark.livejournal.com

Buy bulk foods and such. It's super cheap and great. Honestly, that's most of what I use Harvest for on a regular basis but it sure it a good deal. When I lived near Central, I used Harvest for basically everything.

From:

chaiya.livejournal.com

Hey, that's awesome! Thanks for the info.

From:

that's pretty awesome...

but a zero carbon footprint? hmmm, not really :) reduced? i'd guess that was true though.

#

From:

What's the carbon footprint of riding a bike?

From:

Or are you counting in the carbon footprint of manufacturing the bike and the trailer? Which, I suppose, is legit.

From:

oh yes. actually, more so now...

from:
http://newamsterdamproject.com/blog/

'''Our electric-assist tricycles can carry up to 800 pounds of cargo, so don’t worry about buying too much. Its a great way to get your groceries home without a carbon footprint or back strain.'''

they also say they have fossil-fuel free vehicles. once again, i'll go with "vasty reduced", but if they are using plastics, or other synthetics, they PROBABLY are from fossil sources; yes, they could be pure non fossil synthetics, but they'd have to be SUPER vigilant about parts and supplies... grease and lubrication for bearings and motors?

electricty still has a large footprint, be it fossil, solar, hydro, or ... food. looks like the trike pilots won't be eating quite as much as i figured they might.

from:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0403/p13s03-sten.html
'''Research led him to a British company, Cycles Maximus, that makes commercial trikes'''
...'''sells cycle vans from Cycles Maximus, including five sold to Brown for around $12,000 each.'''....

mmm, shipped from mother England. expensive.

and i still think it's a great idea.

#

From:

ellf.livejournal.com

Construction of the bike. Carbon dioxide from the human powering it. Food required to fuel the human.

From:

http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/

Yes, this is true.

I think it's a nice idea for people without vehicles, but the carbon footprint isn't zero. It's just really small and greatly reduced.

From:

after reading the article below, for a single rider on a bike with no cargo, assuming i read it right, it's claiming that the overall efficiency is less than twice (5/3).

i wonder how that will change with a "trailer" hauling larger loads. more wind resistance to be sure, and the difference between 10 to 12 mph is significant apparently for a bicycle.

a friend claims it's about "one food bar" per 25 miles, or perhaps a box of pasta. figure between 1 to 3 dollars depending on the bar and what they're drinking. figure more for "real quality food".

it also occurs to me that the delivery people are perhaps less safe than being in a "cage". as well, they'll have to totally obey the traffic laws, which means stopping, which means more energy.

said below too, i suggest "e-shopping" as a way to avoid going to the store. if people are actualy going to the store (required), but not walking away with their purchases, it would seem they might be doing something odd wrt footprints. if they were using a car, it would seem to be better to bring their stuff home. if they walked, well, cycling claims to be 2x more efficient (for just the cyclist, not a load), but now someone else is doing that round trip the other way. tricky. if they cycled themselves in, well... then there's the T... still a carbon cost, but i'm going to guess maybe less than the cycling service.

#

From:

http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/

Okay, here are the numbers I came up with for my personal situation:

I live 2.2 miles from the Harvest Co-op. A round trip would be 4.4 miles.
My car averages 37mpg (it's a hybrid, so I can feel good about myself..lol)
Off hours, a round trip drive would require about 30min time
I imagine a cyclist would average 5mi/h on such an apparatus

Also, values I came up with on the Internet are:

The CO content of gasoline = 25lb CO/gal
A human burns 600cal/h when doing moderately strenuous cycling
A human burns 100cal/h when driving
A human, on average, produces 7.92 x 10^-4 lb CO/cal. This is a very rough average and doesn't factor in the energy cost of producing the food.

To drive from my residence to the Harvest Co-Op and back over 30min, I would create roughly 3.02lb CO, the bulk of which would come from my vehicle (2.97lb CO)

[( 25lb CO/gal ) * ( 4.4mi ) / ( 37 mi/gal )] + (7.92 x 10^-4 lb CO/cal ) * ( 100cal/h) * ( 30min ) * ( 1h/60min )] = 3.02lb CO

However, the cyclist would produce 0.418lb CO.

( 4.4mi ) * ( 1h / 5mi ) * ( 600cal/h ) * ( 7.29 x 10^-4 lb CO/cal ) = 0.418lb CO

Such a value from cycling is 1/7th, which is a big savings over driving by my numbers. But it also certainly isn't zero by any means.

Moreover, I am being very generous with the carbon dixoide emissions from cycling. The food we eat, the water we drink, and the waste we produce* has a huge carbon dioxide footprint in and of itself.

I am not saying this isn't a virtuous idea. I am just disagreeing with the claim that such an activity has a zero carbon footprint.

And sadly, the biggest downside in my opinion would be the cost. At $7.50 for the first mile, assuming 2 miles driving distance round-trip, gasoline would have to cost me $138.75/gal before such an option breaks even.

Edited Date: 2008-08-25 01:07 pm (UTC)

From:

cruiser-moves.livejournal.com

I like your numbers but your conclusion of the cost of gas being $138.75 is assuming you're driving a car you got for free, that's unregistered and uninsured and also assuming that your time is not worth anything, right?

From:

i've been googling that since i posted, can't find numbers.

carbon footprint is emissions + costs to produce/fuel. the human engine puts out CO2 and water vapor to be sure. plus other things. has to eat food. has to have various clothing (winter should be interesting).

the bike itself has a footprint. to make, to transport (initially), to maintain, etc.

even tap water has a footprint.

the delivery process, intuitively should be lower than a car, but i'm not sure how much lower.

intuition is tricky. good quality food to fuel the cyclist might end up costing a pretty penny too. i hope the employer is paying for that.

good url: http://www.lafn.org/~dave/trans/energy/bicycle-energy.html

interesting URL: covers the cost of fueling a cyclist among other points... http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/beef.html

also, even better way to reduce the overall footprints: ordering groceries online. no needs to visit the store at all.

#

From:

Cool. I realized after I posted that I didn't understand much about how carbon footprint equations worked. Thanks!

From: