Cyclists told to spread out while riding in groups to minimise effects of pollution from overtaking vehicles

Claire87 wrote:

There is always a flip side and the additional carbon emissions from speed changes- accelerating, braking etc- is a significant cause of both CO2 and local emissions (NOX). Im not convinced having a gaggle of cars idling, breaking and accelerating is helpful.  

It isn't which is why we need to get people out of cars and benefitting from active travel.

"Even worse I cannot really understand recreationist cyclists and runners, cycling or running next to high car volume avenues, filling their lungs with pure cancer, when they could go to places with less traffic volume." Did you even consider that some recreational cyclists/runners HAVE to be beside congested roads in order to get to less polluted areas before you typed that? Or do you expect them to buy an EV to get them there first, adding to the congestion? (Hang on, back to the old autonomous-EV solves everything argument...feels familiar).

I don't think that any recreational cyclist or runneris obliged to select a congested avenue.

When you travel for recreation you just chose any possible route that you like and if you are wise a route that has no risks for your health too. For commuting, things of course can be very different because you are de facto searching for the laziest/fastest route, but even so you can make choices at route planning. I mostly commute and sometimes I take longer rides to avoid congested roads with poor air quality

No such thing as no risks. And if you live in a busy city, you will by nature of where you live have to deal with congested routes at times...that's how urban life is. I live on the edge of a city, and for a recreational ride I will stay take the fastest route out of town...not the least congested.

I agree, there are never 100% no risks. But it is always good trying to minimize them.

Even when I worked at a heavily congested urban center, I sometimes chose a route that had extreme grades and slightly longer lenght to avoid not only the speeding cars, but their exhausts too.

I live in a city-centre location. Even to access my nearest open trail running space, I have to run at least 2-3km from where I live (so an unavoidable 15 minutes each way in urban, trafficked conditions). I'm afraid your rhetoric of 'recreational = able to choose where they travel, commuter = unable to choose doesn't really work.

I don't have the fantasy running on everywhere on green fields, but leaving everything to destiny is not wise.

For instanse, in my previously mentioned example about commuting to the city centre the two options were a 2-direction 4-lane avenue and a narrow, mostly oneway road with low traffic. Most often I would take the big avenue  on the way to work, as it was entirely slightly downhill, meaning I would have to ride with not great effort thus not breathing more polluted air than a pedestrian. But on return I would take the even hillier route (it had uphills and downhills parts) narrow road, unless I was in a real hurry to get home.

There are ways to protect your lungs, it really matters https://news.usc.edu/195662/air-pollution-outdoor-workouts/

I know, that's an extreme example. However, I maintain that the equality politics of being able to simply 'avoid pollution' are more complex than you say in your comments. I'm glad you're able to simply divert and take a relatively pollution-free route! However, I and probably many, many others don't really have the choice.

Of course they haven't. And I call nonsense on the pollution claim too. Numbers so tiny a fart in the breeze would upset the conclusions.

Sounds like a good case for a 'friendly toot' (©A.Neal).

Don't Teslas have a "smart warning" mode already?  It could come up behind you and e.g. inform you "Give you space?  I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that".

My thoughts exactly, it's like telling bar staff they shouldn't work indoors if they don't want the effect of passive smoking. If vehicles didn't pollute we'd all be better off.

Its going to be popular with motorists when we spread out all over the road for health reasons, also will race organisers have to use electric cars only in front of the peloton?

It's odd that no numbers are reported here. Might the the results have shown a significant increase from very little to still really not much?
I can't be bothered to find out.

Real life road conditions would make repeatability difficult to achieve. While the wind tunnel may not exactly duplicate the road it does make small changes easier to detect, changes which we might reasonably expect to also occur on the road.

Just ride like a race team - everyone takes a turn at the front.