• MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can produce 28 aluminium bicycle with motors for the emissions of ONE Citroen C1 or 163 such bicylces for ONE Land Rover Discovery. The numbers for steel framed without a motor is nearly twice as high. It really does not matter what kind of bicycle you buy, as long as it lowers car usage it is a really good idea enviromentally speaking. Perfect is the enemy of the good.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, but the point is that a ebike with a steel frame is more enjoyable to drive (important factor for wide adoption) and also more sustainable than aluminum frame regular bikes. And there is a reason why people are willing to pay extra for aluminum frames for regular bikes; the extra weight of a steel bike really makes a difference up hill.

      • sping@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        there is a reason why people are willing to pay extra for aluminum frames for regular bikes; the extra weight of a steel bike really makes a difference up hill.

        It really doesn’t. The extra weight is about 1kg, 1.5kg max, on a total weight of 70-120kg, so around 1% to 1.5% lighter weight to get up hills. E.g. my inexpensive, 30 year old rigid steel mountain bike frame & fork is 7.5lb / 3.4kg. Tire choice and aero are much more significant than weight, typically.

        People think the lighter bike is significantly faster, because it feels faster, because it has less momentum under you so surges forward when you pedal, but in reality it’s a tiny percentage. Also, bikes have been marketed on weight. That feeling is great, it’s enjoyable, so it’s not nothing, but it’s hugely exaggerated in people’s mind in terms of journey time or effort.