• Anonymaus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Yeah but production of the battery causes alot of harm to the environment so a classic bike is still far better as it doesn’t damage the environment as much

    • fruitdealer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      A tesla model x battery has 7300 battery cells. My Bosch ebike battery has 8 cells.

      You can power ebikes for the entire world and do a fraction of the environmental damage compared to building these massive cars.

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 hours ago

      In practice, e-bikes open up cycling to more people and for more trips, likely making them far more net positive than regular bikes.

      And this is coming from someone who bikes like mad on non-ebikes

      • sudneo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I went biking in NL last summer (great vacation!) and I was completely amazed by the number of elders biking using ebikes. Ebikes absolutely make cycling available to a vast range of people who wouldn’t or couldn’t bike otherwise.

        I do have and use a traditional bike, but I will consider in the future a (cargo?)ebike.

        • HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          A good counter-example is Copenhagen. There, almost nobody uses ebikes in the city. (It would not be faster because there are so many bikes on the road. There is a bridge across the harbour where at rush hour times there pass more than two bikes per second, that’s over 5000 vehicles a hour.)

          What made the difference was good, safe bike infrastructure. And NL has this, too.

          • Mavytan@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 minutes ago

            I think it’s worth noting that Copenhagen doesn’t only have good cycling infrastructure, but also a relatively young and fit population, a population that has grown up cycling, a good public transport network leading to a completion of public transport vs ebike instead of car vs ebike, and it’s very flat. For many people, an ebike can be the difference between a workout vs a regular commute. It might be just what they need to leave their car at home (or not have a car at all)

          • sudneo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Nice, does it depend maybe on the terrain as well (NL is flat, but I was in southern towns and they were a bit hilly).

            Anyway, I 100% agree that safe infrastructure is a necessary condition for bike usage. But I look at Rome for example and I can’t imagine elder people biking (even if there was infrastructure) without ebikes, due to so many hills - let alone smaller towns in the inland.

    • arakhis_@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      i mean I dont blame the usage of cargo e-bikes for grocery travel by for example a 4 headed family.

      thats literally best possible option, isnt it?! Or are you saying you could always use a non motored one for for weekly groceries for a family in for example a hilly area too. I dont know, to me e-bikes are pretty essential in that sense and therefore the final solution for mobility. and you can always use a non motored one for other lighter travels but theyre build… so usage with ie self-hosted solar panel on your roofs, i dont see the issue… they use like 2% of total materials a e-car does.

      would love to hear your thoughts after that

    • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I’m having a hard time finding a source but I read an article claiming that unless you’re vegetarian, a traditional bicycle will have a higher carbon footprint (even taking into account the battery manufacturing) than an ebike, due to how inefficient it is to grow and transport food when compared to production of electrical power.

      Ebikes are way more efficient than electric cars, too. I calculated that my bike uses about 40 watt hours per mile, compared to about 250-350 for an electric car.

      • LemmeLurk@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        If you are having a hard time finding a source, it’s probably because there is none. Riding short distances burns very little calories and most calories the body needs are from idle consumption. Which the battery has to solve degree too

        • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          A watt hour is equal to 0.86 nutritional calories. My estimate of 40 watt hours per mile converts to about 35 kcal. Estimates of the energy taken to pedal a bike are about 30-40 kcal/mile. That checks out!

          1 kilowatt hour is equivalent to 860 kcal.

          1 kilowatt hour from a coal power plant generates about 1.0-1.1 kg of CO2.

          For a typical Western diet, studies suggest that the average emissions associated with food production and transportation can range from about 0.5 to 2.5 kg of CO2 per 1,000 kcal of food consumed. (0.4-2.1 kg of CO2 per 860 kcal)

          The ebike generally has a smaller environmental footprint than the analog bike, as most sources of power produce less CO2 than coal power plants and most people eat more meat than necessary, putting them in the higher range of the food CO2 production range.