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

711–720 of 756 posts

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

#711

Post by rglullis »

Reason077 wrote: post #709
rglullis wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electric cars are loud as well. Most of the car noise is due to tire friction. Start at 11m10s mark on https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8

Not at city speeds they’re not. City streets with EVs are much, much quieter than ones filled with roaring combustion engines. There’s a reason why regulations require EVs to have noise emitters when moving at low speeds (but they’re still much quieter than combustion cars!) Not to mention the benefits of cleaner air, and far less waste heat being emitted.

Did you see the video I linked or are you just playing a game of repeating your beliefs?

Even electric cars at city speeds are above 75dbA, which may be of course less than a loud combustion motorcycle, but nonetheless already into "loud" territory.

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

#712

Post by svnt »

cornholio wrote: post #695
svnt wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting aside that your opinion is not data, this is how you mentally entrain the future of society in a terrible moment in an unsustainable industrialization ramp. What people want is incredibly malleable. To behave otherwise at a policy level is to enslave yourself to the lowest common denominator.

Nonsense. What people want is a hard reality compared to the 4 year political cycle which ultimately drives policy. You are, of course, free to devise strategies to win the public's hearts and minds. I will root for you in this endeavor. But what you aren't allowed to do (outside the comfort of your armchair) is to deny political reality. Your constituency simply won't stand for it, and will root you out like a bad t…

You seem to be arguing for my point. Just because you couldn’t deal with what people want as an elected representative doesn’t mean it can’t be changed, isn’t being changed right now.

I wasn’t encouraging anyone to run for office.

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

#713

Post by Reason077 »

rglullis wrote: post #711
Reason077 wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at city speeds they’re not. City streets with EVs are much, much quieter than ones filled with roaring combustion engines. There’s a reason why regulations require EVs to have noise emitters when moving at low speeds (but they’re still much quieter than combustion cars!) Not to mention the benefits of cleaner air, and far less waste heat being emitted.

Did you see the video I linked or are you just playing a game of repeating your beliefs? Even electric cars at city speeds are above 75dbA, which may be of course less than a loud combustion motorcycle, but nonetheless already into "loud" territory.

Let me rephrase: in a real-world city environment, electric cars are very quiet compared to combustion cars. For one thing, unlike combustion cars, they are absolutely silent when stopped at intersections or in traffic!

Of course they do still emit some noise when moving, and this noise increases with speed. But not enough to annoy you when you’re trying to sleep at night, or have a conversation with a friend. It is always combustion vehicles which do that!

This isn’t my “beliefs”, but actual real-world experience of living in a busy, noisy city where there are large numbers of EVs.

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

#714

Post by wrboyce »

gpm wrote: post #672
nordsieck wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the number will really depend on how fast people are biking. Over 20mph, efficiency starts to really take a hit. Unless you use some sort of crazy shell.

Cycling anywhere near 20mph is beyond most peoples physical capabilities... with the small exception of steep downhills where the energy is "free" (at least compared with walking where you capture none of it) anyways.

I used to aim for an average 20mph over my rides when I was in peak fitness, so putting it “beyond … physical capabilities” is nonsense.

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

#715

Post by up2isomorphism »

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…

Build efficient and affordable public transportation first, and without worrying about getting pushed onto the tracks. Japanese never banned cars, and people are predominantly using public transport. Switzerland never banned cars, and it pollutes far less than US. Also they accomplished that without letting >30mph e-bikers blasting through sidewalks.

It is sad a lot of western progressive totally forget about how western civilization was built. And resorting to “macro “ control strategies that never really worked.

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

#716

Post by gpm »

wrboyce wrote: post #714
gpm wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cycling anywhere near 20mph is beyond most peoples physical capabilities... with the small exception of steep downhills where the energy is "free" (at least compared with walking where you capture none of it) anyways.

I used to aim for an average 20mph over my rides when I was in peak fitness, so putting it “beyond … physical capabilities” is nonsense.

"Most people" aren't in peak fitness...

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

#717

Post by david-gpu »

frognumber wrote: post #710
david-gpu wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Death and pain. That's what e-bikes and mopeds bring to my city. Could you kindly share how many people have died at the hands of these dangerous e-bikes and mopeds? And how many have died due to crashes with cars? In my city cars drivers kill and injure people disproportionately, according to the official stats that are published every year [0]. [0] https://www.york.ca/media/76976/download

The statistic you cite show exactly what one would expect: Bicycles are less safe than cars. Mopeds and e-bikes are mixed in with bicycles, so it's impossible to tell how safe or unsafe those are. It's important to look at the statistics per trip or per mile traveled, rather than absolute numbers. Cars are around 20 injury/total collisions per 10,000,000 trips. Bicycles (which includes mopeds and e-bikes) are about 1…

> The statistic you cite show exactly what one would expect: Bicycles are less safe than cars

Let's place the blame on the people at fault of those injuries, not on the victims. Otherwise we would believe that schoolchildren are dangerous because of all those mass shootings.

So, who kills whom? Cars cause the vast majority of the injuries and deaths. Yes, pedestrians and cyclists are the ones dying, but only because car drivers are killing them. Replace cars with lighter vehicles and both pedestrian end cyclist deaths would plummet.

How many people are injured or killed by bikes or mopeds? You called them a "menace", but how many people have they killed in the past five years, and how does it compare to cars? Who is the actual menace, the schoolchildren or the shooters?

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

#718

Post by screye »

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…

I'm a big fan of the ride1up roadster v2.

It does not look electric (Hidden battery in frame). Is super cheap ($900). Has normal tires. (easy replacement) and is fairly light (small battery). The belt-drive eliminates all issues with a standard metal chain.

All the pros of an electric bike and none of the cons. (assuming we're talking about class 1 ebikes)

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

#719

Post by frognumber »

david-gpu wrote: post #717
frognumber wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statistic you cite show exactly what one would expect: Bicycles are less safe than cars. Mopeds and e-bikes are mixed in with bicycles, so it's impossible to tell how safe or unsafe those are. It's important to look at the statistics per trip or per mile traveled, rather than absolute numbers. Cars are around 20 injury/total collisions per 10,000,000 trips. Bicycles (which includes mopeds and e-bikes) are about 1…

> The statistic you cite show exactly what one would expect: Bicycles are less safe than cars Let's place the blame on the people at fault of those injuries, not on the victims. Otherwise we would believe that schoolchildren are dangerous because of all those mass shootings. So, who kills whom? Cars cause the vast majority of the injuries and deaths. Yes, pedestrians and cyclists are the ones dying, but only because…

The problem in my city is that the people at fault are generally:

- Idiots on new-age vehicles (especially those one-wheeled things)

- Idiots who park on the stop on the side of the road with emergency blinkers (hi, Amazon delivery drivers)

- Idiots who stop in the middle of an intersection

All of those cause unsafe driving, as other drivers are forced to maneuver around things the roads and traffic weren't designed for.

My goal isn't to assign blame, though. My goal is to make sure as few people die as possible. Personally, I'd also usually rather risk death than a crippling injury. If I die, that sucks. If I'm a quadriplegic for the rest of my life, that sounds a lot worse. I'm not sure why you're okay with cyclists dying.

As points of data:

- I once crashed a car on a highway. My only accident, in many years of driving. The car was totaled. No one was injured. It was pretty amazing.

- I've injured myself seriously on bicycles several times, despite far fewer miles commuted and being much more careful. Only one of those involved a car. One involved a pothole, and the most serious one, a hidden metal plate.

Having an engineered metal cage around you does wonders for safety.

I stopped seriously commuting on my bicycle when I had a child. The risk wasn't worth it. I'd start again if the city were designed for it, but I'd want dedicated bicycle arteries -- bikeways without cars, pedestrians, or idiots on one-wheels. I'd be okay with ebikes and scooters IF there were some ways to keep idiots off (traffic enforcement, licensing, or whatever). In the city I was born, somehow people seem able to handle ebikes, scooters, and mopeds safely. In the city I live in, they somehow can't.

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

#720

Post by david-gpu »

frognumber wrote: post #719
david-gpu wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The statistic you cite show exactly what one would expect: Bicycles are less safe than cars Let's place the blame on the people at fault of those injuries, not on the victims. Otherwise we would believe that schoolchildren are dangerous because of all those mass shootings. So, who kills whom? Cars cause the vast majority of the injuries and deaths. Yes, pedestrians and cyclists are the ones dying, but only because…

The problem in my city is that the people at fault are generally: - Idiots on new-age vehicles (especially those one-wheeled things) - Idiots who park on the stop on the side of the road with emergency blinkers (hi, Amazon delivery drivers) - Idiots who stop in the middle of an intersection All of those cause unsafe driving, as other drivers are forced to maneuver around things the roads and traffic weren't designed…

> My city doesn't release similar statistics

> The problem in my city is that the people at fault are generally

How do you know? My city does publish statistics and theirs do not match your opinion.

> My goal isn't to assign blame, though. My goal is to make sure as few people die as possible

If you want fewer people killed, finding out who is killing them is an important first step. My city's statistics show that cars are at fault 70% to 80% of the time when they collide with a pedestrian or a cyclist. Not to mention the obvious fact that the car is the one physically doing the killing, as collisions between pedestrians are resolved with a "sorry" rather than a visit to the ER.

> I'm not sure why you're okay with cyclists dying

And here is where I stop this conversation, as you are obviously not acting in good faith. For the record, I am a cyclist and have not driven a car in my life. Just to underline how assissine your accusation is.

Post reply on HN