A great read+great magazine.

TL;DR: Old bikes last way longer than new bikes. From a production standpoint, steel bikes have a smaller carbon footprint than aluminum or carbon frame bikes. Conventional bikes use fewer consumables over their usable life than electric bikes. Among electric bikes, cargo bikes use the most resources to run and maintain.

  • guero@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    i found the AI generated tldr that you originally posted to be a bit confusing, but the article itself was very interesting. Here is my summary of the major points:

    1. from a production standpoint, steel bikes have a smaller carbon footprint than aluminum or carbon frame bikes.
    2. conventional bikes use fewer consumables over their usable life than electric bikes.
    3. among electric bikes, cargo bikes use the most resources to run and maintain.

    to simplify this from a long-time bicycle commuters perspective: steel is real 😁

      • ericjmorey@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        So the least efficient bicycle is about half that of the average car. I’ll take that. Since the lifetime miles traveled on any bike is going to be at least an order of magnitude less than the average car miles traveled, infrastructure and lifestyle changes to replace car reliance with bike reliance are hugely beneficial from the perspective of reducing carbon emissions.