Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 756 posts

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

#441

Post by bluGill »

ackfoobar wrote: post #400
bluGill wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life is a compromise. I'd love to own 100 square miles of land, with my front door on New Yorks Time's square. That isn't physically possible, but it is what I want in the ideal world. (I don't live near New York so I don't know if times square is really where in New York I'd want to live, but it is an iconic place that at least gives the sense of what I mean - you could pick downtown of most large cities). Cars enab…

> That isn't physically possible, but it is what I want in the ideal world. I think the same can be said (to a lesser degree maybe) about cars, which are very space inefficient. With enough sprawl and a certain density, e.g. in Toronto, it's just gonna be traffic for every one.

Not exactly. Sprawl means you can't reasonably reach the entire city, but low density sprawl and cars mean you can reach enough of a city to consider it all the advantages of a city. Toronto loses out because they have a dense city center, downtowns have to be torn down for the sprawl model to work - people who get a new job may have to move elsewhere in the city since the new job isn't close to the old (unlike when all jobs were downtown) However since you are still "close" you can visit old friends and family on weekends - it will be a long drive but you don't make that trip often so it is reasonable.

Cars don't enable many people to own 100 square miles - but I can get pretty close if I settle for 5 acres in an exurb. Many find that a single family house gives them close enough (they get a small garden - most likely grass they mow weekly - which is all they really want). But again it is a compromise. If we had science fiction technology (terraform Mars and Venus; teleporters) that 100 square miles might be reasonable.

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

#442

Post by Rebelgecko »

zimpenfish wrote: post #329
simmanian wrote: post #48

I bought an ebike to complement my aging 2007 Toyota instead of replacing it outright with another car. I use the bike for most light use cases within the 10 mile radius and still lean into using my car when needed. Here are my takes on ebikes. Pros: - Ebikes help people punch above their weight class, allowing them to bike farther and faster - Going uphill is much easier - Ebikes encourage people to be more adventur…

> They tend to be rather heavy That's my problem - I need an e-bike because my knee is shattered but there's nowhere to store one safely outside and we live on the 3rd floor. Even my previous 10kg normal bike (with working knees!) was a faff getting up the stairs. A 20-25kg e-bike is an absolute no-no.

Not sure if it's an option for you, but some people in my complex put little sheds in their parking spots that can fit a bike

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

#443

Post by KennyBlanken »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #331
camgunz wrote: post #83

I've said it before and I'll say it again: building the future around cars of any kind is completely unsustainable. We cannot reproduce the rates of rich world car ownership in the developing world without mass catastrophe (raw materials/labor needed for construction and maintenance, raw materials/labor/space needed for roads and parking lots, literal tons of waste--batteries, tires, steel, plastic, foam--, energy ne…

If you live in a suburban house, with a yard, and drive a car, its likely poster is part of the problem. Its easy to externalize blame and point fingers to something/someone else, when the reality is that people need to look inward. The uncomfortable truth is these macro policy desires, are very much a case of "Do as I say, not as I do" I speak this as someone that does not own a car, or have a yard, and drive a mope…

I have a suburban/rural house, with a yard, and drive a car.

I also put over 2000 miles a year on an ebike, which equates to about 30kWhr of electricity. That e-bike is designed to take a substantial amount of cargo, or two kids.

I can get to the post office, polling place, local deli, library, and a bar in about 5 minutes. The supermarket, pharmacy, pizza shops, restaurant, bank, hardware store etc in 15 minutes. A friend I visit regularly is 15 miles away which I consistently do in under 40 minutes versus about 25-30 in the car, even though the route I take to avoid a single-lane undivided highway is longer.

Yes, a lot of rural/suburban neighborhoods are isolated by wildly unsafe roads between them and services. But in many, it's very easy to get to many of the places you need to go, via bicycle.

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

#444

Post by bluGill »

herbstein wrote: post #315
bluGill wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most ebikes you have to pedal to make them go. Some just push the throttle, but most are motor assist but if you don't pedal you don't go. As such most ebikes give the same fitness benefit but let you go faster (read farther). My ebike almost forces me to work harder than the regular bike as because it is heavy it feels like it doesn't coast as nice as the regular bike, and so I'm pedaling more. (part of this is prob…

> As such most ebikes give the same fitness benefit but let you go faster This is simply not true. A pedal-assist bike will go faster with the same amount of W put into the pedals, yes. But will people put in the same amount of W if 60 % will get you to your "target speed"? I doubt it. And then you get less health benefits for the same distance traveled. On my 8 kilometer commute I average 150 W. Not because I use it…

I can only state for myself that I'm putting more effort in (since I can feel the bike slow down more when I don't). Plus the ebike allows trips that because of distance I wouldn't use the regular bike for.

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

#445

Post by obscurette »

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…

Eastern Europe. My sister works at ER and they are calling cyclists without helmets "organ donor wannabes". The point is that unlike bikers, many of these cyclists don't end up as organ donors and/or "fatality" in statistics. They only manage to cause permanent damage to their head/brain.

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

#446

Post by at_a_remove »

willio58 wrote: post #117
camgunz wrote: post #83

I've said it before and I'll say it again: building the future around cars of any kind is completely unsustainable. We cannot reproduce the rates of rich world car ownership in the developing world without mass catastrophe (raw materials/labor needed for construction and maintenance, raw materials/labor/space needed for roads and parking lots, literal tons of waste--batteries, tires, steel, plastic, foam--, energy ne…

Fully agreed. And while everything you said is super important and true, one piece that really makes me pumped about this movement to ditch cars is more around quality of life. If you have to get in a car and drive to a parking lot somewhere to get groceries, commute to work, go out with friends, get healthcare, etc. You will obviously live a less healthy life both physically but also mentally because of it. Walking…

And for those handi-capable folks, what do we do?

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

#447

Post by jdironman »

jordanbeiber wrote: post #269
School-Cotton wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not, OP was wildly exaggerating.

I can emphasize “feels”, but if you’ve ever parked a moderately expensive bike in a dense city center for a few hours you know the feeling. Especially if you’ve had a few stolen. If not the bike, the saddle. If not the saddle a wheel. If not the wheel the battery. Etc etc. It’s all really annoying trying to get home not matter the insurance. I had two strollers stolen from my backyard while at home last year… it’s ki…

Sounds like a secure storage infrastructure problem.

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

#448

Post by FredPret »

estebank wrote: post #392
FredPret wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but the bus in SF isn't a place where the people in those cars would like to be. For anyone who has ever been on a bus, and who has the money to never get on a bus again, buses are a non-starter.

> For anyone who has ever been on a bus, and who has the money to never get on a bus again, buses are a non-starter. Feel free to elaborate, because that's not a universal position.

You ever been on a bus with a raving lunatic?

Wiled away the hours as the bus chugs along circuitously to a point that is not quite at your destination?

Tried to carry heavy shopping on a bus?

Walked to a bus stop through bad weather?

Taken one mode of transport that was delayed, making you miss the next leg?

Waited forever for a bus that never comes?

Public transport sucks balls. In the world's densest, biggest cities, you can make it kind-of-tolerable by throwing a ton of tax money at it, but it will never hold a candle to the most basic of cars / bikes / mopeds.

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

#449

Post by bluGill »

avar wrote: post #355
bluGill wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In North America, the farther north you go - and thus the colder the winters - the more people bike year round. It is a small minority for sure, but cold is not a problem on a bike as they prove. (I haven't got the guts to bike when it is -20, but that is something some do)

Winters tend to be colder the further inland you go, e.g. daytime temperatures in Germany in the coldest parts of winter are typically lower than in Iceland.

Minneapolis is an inland climate colder than Germany in winter, yet Minneapolis is (for the US) a place known for the number of people who bike year round.

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

#450

Post by ska »

slothtrop wrote: post #423
ska wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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).

Quiet I think is somewhat intrinsic, although the desirability of that is socially constructed, and changes over time. I also think people care about "quiet house" (which is to some degree a choice during construction) more than "quiet neighbourhood". The latter, after all, can be construed negatively or positively.

"Safety" perception though seems to largely be a social construction. By this I mean it seems pretty clear (US context) that a) most people have opinions, often strong ones, about safety that b) don't seem much related to any data or real science [1] and c) are quite often affected by softer things like political messaging and PR.

If I'm right about the above, there would be no reason to assume it would not change also. Of course it also implies that change could not be driven by reality either :)

[1] real science in this area seems inherently difficult, and available data of poor quality

Post reply on HN