Ebikes + renewable energy is more efficient even than a human riding a traditional bike! The energy has to come from somewhere.

  • aspseka
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    Why should regular bikes use more energy, given they’re only manufactured once (as are bikes), have no degenerating batteries and don’t need electricity are less efficient than ebikes?

    • jwlarocque@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s because fuelling humans with food (particularly with a typical western diet) and converting it to motion with digestion and muscle emits more carbon than generating electricity (with a typical grid mix) and running it through batteries and a motor.

      Of course, most humans could probably do with the exercise anyways; carbon intensity isn’t the only thing worth considering.

      • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        That furphy’s been disapproved so many times it’s weird it keeps getting brought up. It’s literaly not the case, you can expend the energy to cycle the 5km to work and don’t need to eat extra to fuel it. You’re not racing the TdF.

        As an asdie, I have an ebike and an escooter (better again IMO in cities then an ebike and less resource and maintence intensive) and a I use the escooter and non ebike by far the most

        • will stedden@slrpnk.netOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          I’d agree escooters are more efficient. The only disadvantage is that you can at least get a little bit of exercise for all that time you’re riding the ebike.

      • aspseka
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s time to build net positive gyms…

    • null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah, doesn’t quite make sense unless it’s implying that it’s within the average lifespan of the vehicle. Maybe then you can get further on an eBike than you can on an equivalent regular bike before it falls apart?

      • aspseka
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Doubtful, given that it is much more sustainable replacing cogs and chain wheels only than to also replace the motor…

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          But you also pedal way less on an eBike. Not sure if it’s enough to offset that though.

          • aspseka
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            You mean while putting more force on cogs and chain?

            • null@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Does it though?

              Edit: Yes it does:

              “Because of the added weight and torque, e-bike systems do produce more wear and tear on “consumable” parts. You’ll likely have to replace things like chains and brake pads more frequently, and you’ll want to keep an eye on tire wear and wheel parts like spokes, which are under more stress from the torque of the motor.”

              So yeah, no clue how they got to the conclusion that eBikes are more energy efficient than regular bikes.

      • aspseka
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for clarification! That fits what I presumed.

        (Does not take nutrition into account, though. So this leaves the question whether that indeed is the most significant contribution in manual transport…)

        • thisfro@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it is reasonable to ignore food, since it will be more or less equal to the energy you would spend exercising in other ways (jogging, gym, …). Especially when commiting in a city (<10km).

          But your link still shows a nice overview when taking that into account specifically!

    • will stedden@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      A person riding a bike has to consume extra food to burn energy in their muscles to propel them. The energy has to come from somewhere. There are CO2 emissions associated with producing food.

      • koorool@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thought so. Would love to see their calculations and bicycle be split into meat / no-meat categories :)

  • BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Ebike for short distance and electric train on long distance.

    The french TGV can do 312km while enjoying only 1kg of CO2

  • solariplex@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Interesting! I thought for sure ebikes would have higher emissions. Is this graph excluding manufacturing and/or average lifetime emissions?

    How does enclosed encumbent cycles stack up? They’re more efficient than regular bikes, so using them just increases the lead on other modes of transport?

    • will stedden@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      You can deep dive on the resources down in the footer. I’ve got to assume reducing the drag would make either ebike or bike more efficient by the same amount. Maybe even slightly better for the ebike since it goes a little faster.