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

The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

ebikes.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–46 of 46 posts

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#41

Post by effie »

hannasanarion wrote: post #38
effie wrote: post #32

They want to sell electric bikes, so they found an obscure point of view from which they may be preferable to the ordinary one. Ignoring the obvious points of view from which they are not - health disservice to the rider, battery tech non-monetary costs, increased electricity consumption of the owner. Electric bike has its legitimate target group - elderly or ill or handicapped people. If you're fine, get that ordina…

>health disservice The point of transportation is to take you places, not to make you healthy. >increased electricity consumption The biggest ebike battery you're likely to find is 500 Watt-hours. That's about 6¢ for the average American to fill from zero to full, and that'll carry you 50 miles.

I agree with the cheap energy part, electric bike is a very efficient mode of transportation, better than car. However, when you compare impacts to health of the rider and the environment, the ordinary bike wins as the better choice.

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#42

Post by hannasanarion »

effie wrote: post #41
hannasanarion wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>health disservice The point of transportation is to take you places, not to make you healthy. >increased electricity consumption The biggest ebike battery you're likely to find is 500 Watt-hours. That's about 6¢ for the average American to fill from zero to full, and that'll carry you 50 miles.

I agree with the cheap energy part, electric bike is a very efficient mode of transportation, better than car. However, when you compare impacts to health of the rider and the environment, the ordinary bike wins as the better choice.

No, it doesn't, see the article you're commenting on. Regular bikes are more expensive and produce more carbon because of the extra calories the rider has to eat.

The purpose of vehicles is transportation, not exercise.

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#43

Post by effie »

hannasanarion wrote: post #42
effie wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the cheap energy part, electric bike is a very efficient mode of transportation, better than car. However, when you compare impacts to health of the rider and the environment, the ordinary bike wins as the better choice.

No, it doesn't, see the article you're commenting on. Regular bikes are more expensive and produce more carbon because of the extra calories the rider has to eat. The purpose of vehicles is transportation, not exercise.

The purpose of ordinary bicycle is both transportation and exercise. You can't just dismiss benefits of the other choice because your choice does not have them. We are comparing ordinary vs. electrical bike, with all benefits and drawbacks.

The analysis in the paper is flawed right from the start. For regular overweight people, which is the majority of people in U.S. and some other countries, unless getting to high speeds and high heart bpms, a little increase in energy expenditure in moving the bicycle does not increase food consumption in the linear way the paper assumes. The food is gonna be consumed anyway.

And even disregarding that, there are more important considerations here than alleged increase CO2 production, which is laughably negligible in comparison to car, plane and ship transportation. Ordinary bicycle has lower price, better health effects, lower environmental cost of manufacturing/disposing of batteries.

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#44

Post by JetSpiegel »

seanwilson wrote: post #28
mc32 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that’s an ideal case. People eat a lot and exercise to lose weight. They don’t eat to only replenish expended energy. They over consume then often compensate with exercise. So a particular rider might eat more or might eat the same regardless of whether they pedaled or they used electric power.

> People eat a lot and exercise to lose weight. They don’t eat to only replenish expended energy. They over consume then often compensate with exercise. So a particular rider might eat more or might eat the same regardless of whether they pedaled or they used electric power. Some diets aren't as efficient as others though. Feeding corn to cows then eating the cow meat is going to be vastly less efficient than eating…

Well, a steak has more energy density than corn. Plus, it has nutrients that simple corn doesn't have.

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#45

Post by hannasanarion »

effie wrote: post #43
hannasanarion wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn't, see the article you're commenting on. Regular bikes are more expensive and produce more carbon because of the extra calories the rider has to eat. The purpose of vehicles is transportation, not exercise.

The purpose of ordinary bicycle is both transportation and exercise. You can't just dismiss benefits of the other choice because your choice does not have them. We are comparing ordinary vs. electrical bike, with all benefits and drawbacks. The analysis in the paper is flawed right from the start. For regular overweight people, which is the majority of people in U.S. and some other countries, unless getting to high s…

People don't buy ebikes for exercise.

Re: The Energy Cost of Electric and Human-Powered Bicycles (2004) [pdf]

#46

Post by effie »

hannasanarion wrote: post #45
effie wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of ordinary bicycle is both transportation and exercise. You can't just dismiss benefits of the other choice because your choice does not have them. We are comparing ordinary vs. electrical bike, with all benefits and drawbacks. The analysis in the paper is flawed right from the start. For regular overweight people, which is the majority of people in U.S. and some other countries, unless getting to high s…

People don't buy ebikes for exercise.

They shouldn't buy them because of bogus CO2 efficiency reasons either.
Post reply on HN