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

741–750 of 756 posts

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

#741

Post by fulafel »

hedora wrote: post #630
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…

I think you need to check your math. There are 14 times more of these electric mopeds, etc than cars, but they only have 4x more impact than the EVs. So one EV displaces about 3.5x more carbon emissions than the mopeds. To make the 2030 halve our emissions deadline, and 2050 net zero deadline with just little city vehicles, we’ll need to abandon the suburbs, exurbs and rural buildings and infrastructure that we alrea…

> I think you need to check your math. There are 14 times more of these electric mopeds, etc than cars, but they only have 4x more impact than the EVs. So one EV displaces about 3.5x more carbon emissions than the mopeds.

This is not the case. The cited 4x in oil demand is just a part of the main problem (CO2 emissions). E-car carbon emissions over the lifecycle are still ~50% of fossil fuel cars, due to their large manufacturing co2 footprint and impact of the 10-100x higher electricity usage to power them. The battery sizes body masses are O(100x) bigger than e-bikes and energy usage per km O(10x) bigger.

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

#742

Post by [deleted] »

marssaxman wrote: post #262
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…

If that were true, you'd expect suburban houses to be more expensive than those in the city, but in reality it is generally the opposite. Here in Seattle, we watch the urban population grow in lockstep with the availability of new housing, year after year, while the cost of that housing continues to rise - much faster than the general rate of inflation. Simple economics suggests that city life must be very desirable,…

[deleted]

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

#743

Post by fulafel »

simmanian wrote: post #227
sgu999 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Good ebikes cost as much as my 2007 toyota Car manufacturers are operating on razor thin margins and intend to recoup some of it elsewhere... or at least I've been told. I agree that the price of ebikes really doesn't seem to match their value. They are in the same price range as electric mopeds, which have a much bigger battery, need more material to build and have to abide by more regulations. Is it because the…

My initial thought after reading this comment is, it probably requires a lot more "tech" and design work to allow bikers to have that seamless biking experience while giving them the desired boost. I remember seeing a lot of discussions around how certain motors "feel" on ebike forums.

A good test for this theory could be the price and availability of the less finely tuned e-bikes, eg based on the 8-fun swxk front hub motor manufactured since the 00's and the low tech pedal assist sensor (as opposed to torque sensor).

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

#745

Post by camgunz »

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 don't think you're wrong per se, but I hesitate to say that the problems we have are that everyone individually but also en masse decided to move to the suburbs and also drive big honkin' cars everywhere, all the time. I think it's more likely there were systems and incentives (both economic and cultural) that led to this. I think this is actually good news, because it means we can fix this with some (slow) cultural shifts and (less slow, hopefully) policy changes. If we really had to directly convince 10,000,000s of people to move into townhomes we'd have no hope.

(FWIW I've lived in lots of places, tiny apartments, townhomes, big apartments, single rooms, mcmansions, old houses. I've been lucky enough to more or less choose them--most people live wherever they can--and for the last ~10 years have chosen tiny apartment. I like the idea of living small, they're a lot more maintainable, cheaper, and I used to move a lot so having a ceiling on the amount of stuff I could have was real attractive)

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

#746

Post by CrispyKerosene »

tfrutuoso wrote: post #172
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…

That's very elitist. Not everyone lives in large cities with whole mass transit systems or works the usual 9-5. Even in large urban areas it's tricky to get around past a certain time. I remember working unexpected shifts and later staring at closed metro stations, having to walk in the rain to get home. No thanks. Also, some people like cars. Deal with it, i'm not ditching for an e-bike or whatever. An electric moto…

It sucks, but it doesn't have to be that way. Even small towns can be sufficiently served by viable public transit options.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg

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

#747

Post by seec »

Yeah, and you could get much better results if we would agree on taxing the boomers for their irresponsible car overuse. My rich boomer parent bought a new car right before going into retirement, and now she burns even more petrol than she used to burn irresponsibly before retirement. Previously there were a lot of excuses around needing it for work related stuff, which was complete bullshit of course but now she will burn petrol to go on holidays for 3-4 days with in general at least 1000km roundtrip.

The worst part is that she has the time/flexibility and also money to take the train (there even is a serious reduction card for seniors). But she doesn't. Because she can. Because the car doesn't look expensive enough.

Seriously it's really needed to tax the boomer to death on that front at least, they already own all the valuable real estate we can't let them get away with burning more of our future. It won't happen because they hold all the political power thanks to their numerical majority (especially among voters).

Cars, like many current problems, are a boomer related/created problem. If you want to fix the wound, you need to extract the thing that created the wound in the first place.

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

#748

Post by baryphonic »

adrianN wrote: post #417
baryphonic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Energy efficiency is not the only variable that matters. Walking to my grocery store would take almost two hours each way. Biking would take 30 minutes each direction. Driving is 14 minutes each way, and is the only feasible way I can get groceries when I have my kids in tow (which sometimes is a necessity).

I’d never even consider living anywhere where it‘d take me 15 minutes to the grocery store no matter what mode of transport. How long is your commute? I have like ten grocery stores in fifteen minute cycling distance, the closest is two minutes away.

I work from home, so my commute is 0 minutes XD

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

#749

Post by frognumber »

david-gpu wrote: post #720
frognumber wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ca…

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

How do you know the sun shines during the day? Because I live here. I see what causes unsafe conditions on roads.

And yes, although cities are different, by-and-large, the statistics published by your city DO match my opinion.

> 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.

Not so for bicycles, and even less so for new-age electric devices going 20-30MPH depending on jurisdiction.

My city has a 25MPH speed limit for cars (although most cars break it). For new-age electric vehicles, the speed (and injuries) are similar. However, drivers are licensed. Most one-wheels, mopeds, ebikes, and similar are driven by idiots without licenses or clear law enforcement.

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

#750

Post by parl_match »

hot_gril wrote: post #570
parl_match wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not everyone lives in large cities with whole mass transit systems or works the usual 9-5. Have you been to the suburbs of Japan? Or France? Towns created before cars were invented. Lots of single family homes, and a smattering of small vehicles used for work. It can work, but we've built huge car-required cities and towns and lifestyles and it's a sunk cost fallacy. And it feels "normal" to us, but it's not. It's…

Right, I'm not sure exactly what it is, but car ownership in the US seems to have been subsidized. You should be allowed to have a car if you want and not be taxed unfairly for it, but it shouldn't be that almost every job basically requires one. And to get there, I don't think we have to ban things or restrict people's lives, just build new cities less around cars and let people choose that life if they want.

> just build new cities less around cars and let people choose that life if they want

We should modify existing cities with better transit and make them hostile to cars, and then offer excellent car transfer points. If you want to use the city, use the train.

Post reply on HN