280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars • Hacker News Board

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#421

Post by deepspace » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:43 PM UTC

PopAlongKid wrote: post #104

Another comment mentioned pros and cons for the user of the ebike. As a frequent pedestrian on the nearby heavily-used trails, I see a number of cons for everyone else: Despite a prohibition on motorized vehicles on these trails, they exploit a loophole for handicapped users, and the agency in charge refuses to do anything to fix it. Even if it makes sense to allow these motorized vehicles, the 15 MPH speed limit is…

In my home town we already had several pedestrians badly injured, and one killed by a "small" motorized vehicle driving on sidewalks, back in 2012.

The same driver was involved in all of the incidents, she was elderly and the vehicle in question was classified "mobility aid", though it looked just like a small car.

I am adamantly of the opinion that any vehicle that shares trails, sidewalks, etc. with pedestrians MUST be speed-limited to walking speed. That includes mobility chairs, scooters, and similar.

Unfortunately, the handicapped community vehemently opposes such speed limits.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#422

Post by Tade0 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:43 PM UTC

shortcake27 wrote: post #189

PopAlongKid wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if they suffer a serious injury they are going to drain hospital resources from people who did not cause their own disease/injury, possibly become a permanent disabled person on the public dole, and in general raise the cost of health care.

It’s not quite that simple. Helmets are deterrents - Melbourne is a fantastic example where cycling is less common than it should be and public bike schemes keep failing specifically because of the requirement to wear a helmet. Companies like Lime try to solve this by attaching a helmet to the scooter. 90% of the time the helmet is missing. Yeah I could spend 30 minutes walking to every scooter in the area trying to…

> The entirety of Europe gets by perfectly fine with public healthcare and no helmets.

Yes and no. The Netherlands is seeing some second-order effects of this:

https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2023/16/more-traffic-deaths-in...

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#423

Post by slothtrop » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

ska wrote: post #407

slothtrop wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Suburbs/Exurbs as practiced in US today aren't some kind of quality of life maximizing end game Notwithstanding that the middle-class overwhelmingly prefers living in the suburbs. "quiet", "safe", etc. > I think that it lacks imagination to think that we can't structure things differently and have equivalent or better quality of life overall. No one's saying that. I fully support zoning reform. If one's imagination…

> Notwithstanding that the middle-class overwhelmingly prefers living in the suburbs. "quiet", "safe", etc. Right, but they currently believe those things for reasons that are inexorably connected to those same policy choices. However, there is no reason to assume that if those policies change, peoples impressions and preferences won't change too. Quite the opposite, actually - that's just how incentives (and the rel…

> Right, but they currently believe those things for reasons that are inexorably connected to those same policy choices.

Only in the chicken-and-egg sense that policy choices make suburbia prioritized, but I don't think it's enough to say that special policies are what wholly render suburbia quiet and safe (to the extent that if you were to enact the policy change you want, suburbia will still be regarded as such).

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#424

Post by mdgrech23 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

willio58 wrote: post #178

uneekname wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree about the noise and health benefits, but to me it's more a matter of respect and safety. In the U.S., we see too many pedestrians die each year. Our roads are built for cars only, with everything else as an afterthought. When I cross the street, drivers act like it's my responsibility to stay out of their way. If some people need to use cars for mobility or business reasons, that is fine with me. But…

> If some people need to use cars for mobility or business reasons, that is fine with me. Definitely. For stuff like that, emergency services, delivery, trash collection, etc. larger vehicles on streets are totally fine and I think most would agree. I don't even necessarily think we should ban all cars, but we should definitely stop incentivizing them by heavily subsidizing car infrastructure with city budgets funded…

worth visiting an old city like Rome. I was shocked by how walkable it was. It was maybe the second night we were there, we causally strolled around after dinner and just happenstance managed to walk by all the major attractions. That's no mistake but honestly when you experience it's so magical. To create a tech analogy I remember the days before Google when search when would have 20 buttons and could take regex and what not. Most people had no idea how to use it and even pros questioned if they were correctly searching so to speak than Google came along and just gave us a box. All that complexity hidden away from us. That was kind of how I felt about Rome. Just wander, you'll get to where you want to go.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#425

Post by uneekname » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

mattlondon wrote: post #348

uneekname wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, is an EV really less expensive than living closer to work for most people? I live in a city where rent is fairly high, and I'm fortunate enough to afford a comfortable apartment with a roommate. To buy an EV though (if I wanted one...), would be completely out of my budget. If the math works out for some people, they should do what's best for them. But I don't really think that is the case most of th…

Are you serious? It's like hundreds of thousands more for every "zone" you get closer to the center of London. Surely in your city everyone would just live slap bang in the center if the price difference was less than that if an EV? Wow. In London a basic 3 or 4 bed house on the outskirts will be perhaps £700-1,000,000. Same thing half way in will be £1.5-2mil, anything within a short walk or bike ride of any central…

Well, alright so the cost of living in central London is astronomical. But as you say,

> there is no parking in central London anyway so driving to work is not viable.

By "closer to work", I didn't mean you need to buy the house closest to the center of London. I meant you can rent (or buy, if you have the capital) a flat near public transit, or bicycle-friendly infrastructure. Of course these options vary significantly, but even in my car-infested U.S. city there are decent options.

Also, I don't think it's honest to compare the sticker price of a car vs. a house. If you are in the market to buy a house, good for you. But my argument is more along these lines: put the monthly $$$ you would put into a car, into your rent instead. Get the best place you can, and you'll likely be happier than if you lived deep in a suburb. Of course not everyone will agree with this, but I don't think it's entirely unreasonable.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#426

Post by mdgrech23 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:46 PM UTC

houseatrielah wrote: post #229

dv_dt wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such an interesting comment to me because it gets so much right on how to motivate ditching cars. If you were funding a campaign to eliminate cars to reduce carbon emissions I think you would meet with widespread resistance. If you promote an idea of a higher quality life that is possible w/o cars and explore that - in the end I think you'd end up removing many more cars than the first approach.

I think the root cause is further up the chain of casuality. People need cars because they live in the suburbs, they live in the suburbs because they have children, they want to raise children in more square footage than the urban housing stock offers. Notable exception being Tokyo Ironically, if you look NYC in the 1910s, kids used to play baseball in the street because it wasn't yet overrun by cars, suddenly not en…

You're leaving how a key part, at least in America which is racism. Whites ran to the suburbs to escape particular groups and quite frankly still do albeit now it's more in the form of urban sprawl.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#427

Post by linuxftw » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:48 PM UTC

JAlexoid wrote: post #403

cornholio wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a little something that's missing from the analysis above: what people actually want. And what many people want, across many cultures once they reach a certain level of wealth, is the suburban home: low density living in isolated housing units set in a park like environment with ample greenery. Just look at almost any billionaire's mansion and you will see this pattern which becomes an aspiration for the mid…

Suburban sprawl is literally a result of policy, not just "what people want". Most people would love to live in a gigantic castle in the Loire valley with a helicopter taking them to the office - should we subsidize that as well? Enabling people's wants by subsidizing it from other people's pockets - makes for a very bad result. Start removing tax breaks for home ownership, rationally spreading the burden of maintain…

The 'we' subsidizing the middle class is the middle class. "We" are paying for it. What 'we' are also forced to subsidize is the everyone else on top of our choice of accommodations.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#428

Post by cedws » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:48 PM UTC

FredPret wrote: post #340

cedws wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't say anything about nobody being allowed cars.

Totally, it’s only the cars you don‘t like that are to be banned.

Explain to me why the average person needs a truck.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#429

Post by mdgrech23 » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:48 PM UTC

willio58 wrote: post #388

zardo wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And suburbs are not built around public transit anymore, those old enough to have been have mostly shut it down. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb

I live on a street that used to have a streetcar line on it! Now it's just a stroad and traffic monstrosity but I sometimes daydream of hopping on the streetcar and going to meet up with friends downtown.

I'm in the suburbs but like you an older one and more densely packed. I'm maybe a mile from a major highway that goes to the city center. It's dead straight and major thoroughfare. If they dedicated one line to rail, none of that mixed BS, and had stops say every mile into the city my god it would be amazing.

Re: 280M e-bikes and mopeds are cutting demand for oil far more than electric cars

#430

Post by tomjakubowski » Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 6:49 PM UTC

mnw21cam wrote: post #375

thelastgallon wrote: post #2

We don't need a 4000 lb vehicle to move a ~200 lb person. In order of efficiency: (1) Walk (2) Unicycle, roller skate, scooter (no battery, very little material) (2) Bike (3) Electric bike (and all forms of newfangled electric: escooters, segways) (4) Electric motorbike or scooter (5) Mass transit (can be public/private) transportation: Electric trains (6) Mass transit (can be public/private) transportation: Electric…

If you're defining efficiency as energy required to travel a distance, then an electric bike that doesn't require effort from the rider is going to be way more efficient than walking or cycling. That was one of the exercises I had when studying - calculate the energy intensity of various modes of transport. It turns out that if you calculate the whole energy requirements to get the extra food into someone's mouth tha…

Would you show your work? I am curious and a little bit skeptical.

A gallon of gasoline has about 31,000 kcal. In the US, a typical sedan gets about 30 miles per gallon.

Walking a mile at 150lb bodyweight burns about 100 kcal. (This is non linear though: walking longer distances will burn less per mile on average)

If we assume linearity, to walk an extra 30 miles in a day you'd need 3000 more kcal of food. What is the energy cost of growing and transporting 3000 kcal of food? Does it exceed 31,000 kcal?