Are these things actually a net positive for the planet? Watch an extended cut of this video on Nebula: https://go.nebula.tv/simonclarkCheck out Electroheads...
It’s absolutely addressed in the video. Even if something like only 5% of Li-ion batteries are recycled currently, methods are slowly improving and the target for 2026 in Europe is to have 60% of lithium batteries by mass recycled.
Even if you assume that the whole e-bike is thrown in the trash once the battery wears down, the emissions per km and net benefit still work in the electric bike’s favour.
The video also goes further in that emissions related to meat and/or vegetable consumption being the main source of energy used to power a conventional also need to be calculated for in the calculation of operating emissions/km.
Even ignoring that, it just comes down to the fact that a person would put more kilometres on an ebike than a conventional one resulting in the largest net carbon reductions despite the little differences here and there.
The video also goes further in that emissions related to meat and/or vegetable consumption being the main source of energy used to power a conventional also need to be calculated for in the calculation of operating emissions/km.
Right but if you only burn 20 calories during your ride to work instead of 200, you still need to exercise and eat those calories somewhere else. Pushing the problem somewhere else to make your own look better is textbook propaganda. Buddy needs to account for the additional exercise and calories to make up for the saved calories of an e-bike for the same distances.
Hes having his cake an eating it by cherry picking different situations to make one look better than the other.
Ok maybe a personal anecdote might put things in perspective then?
One pleasant Sunday I biked from Vancouver to White Rock, a 100km round trip, on my ebike with a 450Wh battery. I ate Kraft dinner and a can of tuna that I brought with me, and picked up a scoop of ice cream. With a conventional bike the limits of how far I’d go on a day trip would be to Burnaby Lake, about a 25-30km round trip. I’d eat the same lunch and probably some equivalent snack. By the end of the trip I was exhausted and the battery was as well.
If I only had a normal bike and wanted to go to White Rock I’d take the bus instead.
Yes you’re right, I consume the same number of calories and food in the two scenarios. What to compare is the emissions to make my lunch and snack, divided by 25km vs. the emissions to make my lunch, snack and additionally generate and deliver 450Wh of power to recharge my bike (BC is 90% hydro power in my case but feel free to calculate the mix in your area) and divide that by 100km. See which one has lower emissions per km.
Now you need to go to the gym and burn off those calories the e-bike didn’t….
You’re missing the fact that you need to still stay fit and healthy, since you don’t get the same exercise on an e-bike…… or it takes longer with more distance so it’s less time to do other stuff. It’s all trade offs and putting in something else…
You aren’t the person I [edit: originally] replied to and you are missing the point entirely. This is not a comparison of how healthy it makes me overall, nor is it a comparison of the time it takes, which your assumptions are off. My exhaustion level or informal way to put the physical energy I expended for the day is held the same.
It’s a simple calculation of emissions over distance. Food emissions / distance by bike vs. Food plus electricity emissions / distance by ebike.
…. The fact that you need to include food at all to make it appear better is the issue… since you still need that food regardless in every other situation….
You realize the original video can be wrong or miss a point entirely yeah?
It seems you disagree about including or are just ignoring outright the part about distance travelled in the calculation. That’s fine with me. I won’t push the issue any further. Have a pleasant day.
I am attempting to point out the massively glaring flaw in doing so, since you must omit the rest of days calories from the calculation for it to be better, which is exactly what the video is doing……
Give the bike the same situation and calculation to remove the bias and propaganda and get back to us. Yes removing a key metric will of course make things look better… I’m sorry this is so hard for you to comprehend. The distances have to be the same to be able to compare them, or its apples and oranges. Yeah you can burn the same amount of calories, but it takes longer and more distance…… it’s not thebsamr thing at all dude. Use a specific situation, biking to work, now do the math and see which is better, include the food uses if you want (but account for additional calories for the rest of the day as well), but in the end the situation has to be identical… come on…
Why are they even bringing food into the equation? Maybe start there and you can see the flaw in doing so.
Uh huh, now, talk about how lousy the battery recycle process is.
BTW, I’m not anti-ebike. Just pointing out they’re not as environmentally friendly as a pedal bike.
It’s absolutely addressed in the video. Even if something like only 5% of Li-ion batteries are recycled currently, methods are slowly improving and the target for 2026 in Europe is to have 60% of lithium batteries by mass recycled.
Even if you assume that the whole e-bike is thrown in the trash once the battery wears down, the emissions per km and net benefit still work in the electric bike’s favour.
The video also goes further in that emissions related to meat and/or vegetable consumption being the main source of energy used to power a conventional also need to be calculated for in the calculation of operating emissions/km.
Even ignoring that, it just comes down to the fact that a person would put more kilometres on an ebike than a conventional one resulting in the largest net carbon reductions despite the little differences here and there.
Right but if you only burn 20 calories during your ride to work instead of 200, you still need to exercise and eat those calories somewhere else. Pushing the problem somewhere else to make your own look better is textbook propaganda. Buddy needs to account for the additional exercise and calories to make up for the saved calories of an e-bike for the same distances.
Hes having his cake an eating it by cherry picking different situations to make one look better than the other.
Ok maybe a personal anecdote might put things in perspective then?
One pleasant Sunday I biked from Vancouver to White Rock, a 100km round trip, on my ebike with a 450Wh battery. I ate Kraft dinner and a can of tuna that I brought with me, and picked up a scoop of ice cream. With a conventional bike the limits of how far I’d go on a day trip would be to Burnaby Lake, about a 25-30km round trip. I’d eat the same lunch and probably some equivalent snack. By the end of the trip I was exhausted and the battery was as well.
If I only had a normal bike and wanted to go to White Rock I’d take the bus instead.
Yes you’re right, I consume the same number of calories and food in the two scenarios. What to compare is the emissions to make my lunch and snack, divided by 25km vs. the emissions to make my lunch, snack and additionally generate and deliver 450Wh of power to recharge my bike (BC is 90% hydro power in my case but feel free to calculate the mix in your area) and divide that by 100km. See which one has lower emissions per km.
So you got a better workout on the regular bike….
Now you need to go to the gym and burn off those calories the e-bike didn’t….
You’re missing the fact that you need to still stay fit and healthy, since you don’t get the same exercise on an e-bike…… or it takes longer with more distance so it’s less time to do other stuff. It’s all trade offs and putting in something else…
You aren’t the person I [edit: originally] replied to and you are missing the point entirely. This is not a comparison of how healthy it makes me overall, nor is it a comparison of the time it takes, which your assumptions are off. My exhaustion level or informal way to put the physical energy I expended for the day is held the same.
It’s a simple calculation of emissions over distance. Food emissions / distance by bike vs. Food plus electricity emissions / distance by ebike.
…. The fact that you need to include food at all to make it appear better is the issue… since you still need that food regardless in every other situation….
You realize the original video can be wrong or miss a point entirely yeah?
It seems you disagree about including or are just ignoring outright the part about distance travelled in the calculation. That’s fine with me. I won’t push the issue any further. Have a pleasant day.
I am attempting to point out the massively glaring flaw in doing so, since you must omit the rest of days calories from the calculation for it to be better, which is exactly what the video is doing……
Give the bike the same situation and calculation to remove the bias and propaganda and get back to us. Yes removing a key metric will of course make things look better… I’m sorry this is so hard for you to comprehend. The distances have to be the same to be able to compare them, or its apples and oranges. Yeah you can burn the same amount of calories, but it takes longer and more distance…… it’s not thebsamr thing at all dude. Use a specific situation, biking to work, now do the math and see which is better, include the food uses if you want (but account for additional calories for the rest of the day as well), but in the end the situation has to be identical… come on…
Why are they even bringing food into the equation? Maybe start there and you can see the flaw in doing so.