Does a bicycle have a larger carbon foot print than a LEV?

[auraslip]

I have some very strict environmentalist friends. They think my electric bike is a sort of blasphemy. Well maybe not that far, but still their zealotry gets annoying.

We will assume the carbon footprint of both a bicycle and a lithium powered electric bicycle traveling 25 km in one hour at 25 Kph

Carbon foot print of electric bikes:

Industrial coal creates 0.313 kg per kWh
According to ebikes.ca, after all inefficiencies in power deliver, charging, and motors are calculated ebikes are %25 efficient.
According to various calculators, 25kph would take at the most 200 watts to sustain.

So 200w / %25 = .8 kWh / .313 kg is 2.5 kg of CO2e per 25 km

Carbon foot print of bicycles:

"It takes 13 Kcal of fossil fuel inputs to produce everyone 1 Kcal of food we eat, and 25 Kcar per Kcal of meat." Also you should note from the pdf that CO2e from live stock accounts for %18 of all green house gases. Since many of my friends are vegetarians let us go with the ration of 13 Kcal to 1 Kcal, but remember that this doesn't include CO2e from livestock, the release of trapped carbon from agriculture, and other sources; Just from fossil fuel inputs.

Calculating the CO2e of those 13 Kcal is beyond the scope of this exercise, so lets just use diesel's 1kg of CO2e per 0.253 kWh.

According to various calculators, it should take 120w to sustain 25 kph.

A cyclist is around %22 efficient.

So 120w / %22 = .545 kWh / %.076 (1/13) = 7.17 kWh / .253 = 28.3 kg CO2e per kph


Can someone check the math here for me, and try to find some better sources? These results seem..... INSANE


A comprehensive breakdown of the manufacturing costs of bicycles and electric bicycles is out of the scope of this article. While it is true the additional components of the electric bicycle does increase their carbon footprint, in the end it is only a fraction of the amount required to operate them.

 

[neptronix]

Depends entirely on where you get your food from ( food from your backyard = basically no carbon emissions.. from a modern industrial agricultural farm = notable emissions, but how do you measure them? )

Just like electricity on eBikes. You could power it from a solar array or a Chinese coal plant..
Good question... a lot of variables though!

But look at something like an eBike.. we need about 1 hp to go 25mph. Imagine what a car needs.. 10-50hp?

 

[auraslip]

Yeah.....there are really to many variables to *accurately* calculate the carbon foot print of a bicycle......

But I think we can at least get a good estimate to throw around to e-bike haters..... "did you know the food supplying you the calories to ride that bike emit X times more carbon than the coal plant that charges my bike?"

Something like that....I still don't believe it's true though! It seems to crazy!

 

[John in CR]

The electric bike kicks the pedal bike's ass both in carbon footprint and economy. Food is far more costly and far less efficient with a bigger footprint than even electricity coming out of a Chinese coal plant. The only thing that they could attempt to fall back on with the pedalist attitude is the manufacture of our batteries, but aluminum and lithium are both recyclable. Put a few people in a gas car then I doubt a few pedal bikes is even all that much better than the car. Tell your buddies to get an organic farm with no machinery if they want that pedal bike argument to fly. They should stick to the health argument. If any of them have a car and a bike rack, then tell them I said they're hypocrites on top of being wrong.

 

[x88x]

While you're at it, why not add in the efficiency of the human digestive and muscular systems? I don't know the numbers, but I know it's not 100%.

their zealotry gets annoying.

Sorry, I just found it amusing to see this on this forum, talking about someone else.

 

[neptronix]

That's the kind of question/challenge that doesn't deserve any intellectual thought / number grinding... just tell 'em to ( expletive expletive expletive!! )

It's totally splitting hairs. But the fact of the matter is that electric energy can produce NO carbon ( solar, wind, etc ) whereas the food you're eating MOST LIKELY involves some black smoke belching thing to transport it around, some no emissions controls piece of crap engine agricultural machinery to harvest it, a bunch of energy to keep it cool at the grocery store, a bunch of energy to then warm it up, etc )

Yeah, most of the energy for our eBikes comes from coal, but we use so little of it that's it's trivial ( well, unless you're doctorbass/methods/etc )

Man, most of those guys just hop in their car or take public transit when they don't have the strength to defeat some hill anyway, so f em!

 

[neptronix]

The electric bike kicks the pedal bike's ass both in carbon footprint and economy. Food is far more costly and far less efficient with a bigger footprint than even electricity coming out of a Chinese coal plant. The only thing that they could attempt to fall back on with the pedalist attitude is the manufacture of our batteries, but aluminum and lithium are both recyclable. Put a few people in a gas car then I doubt a few pedal bikes is even all that much better than the car. Tell your buddies to get an organic farm with no machinery if they want that pedal bike argument to fly. They should stick to the health argument. If any of them have a car and a bike rack, then tell them I said they're hypocrites on top of being wrong.

Dude, you are so right.
For a 20 mile trip, you can either replenish some ~500 calories by pedaling ( ~$3-$10 ) or use less than 1/2 a kilowatt-hour on an average eBike. ( $0.10 at most )

Our batteries are recyclable and last a long time!
We also eliminate car-miles because... why drive when you have a bike now that's perfectly capable of doing the same job 80% of the time?

Our side of the fence is pretty clean!

 

[Lock]

And ask yer strict environmentalist friends watt they do with the food waste after it's "burned" as bike energy. `Round here EVerybuddy flushes their food waste into our drinking water
`Round here some of the food packaging goes into a big hole in the ground too. Neither solution seems as enviro as recycling batteries...
All these concerns about footprint, overpopulation, food shortages, waste... all silly when the solution is so obvious. Leave nature alone and just genetically modify humans to be much, much smaller...
:lol:
locK

 

[dogman dan]

Can't ask people to think straight about thier religion. Takes an open minded freethinker to do that.

 

[spinningmagnets]

Even calculating in the carbon used in making tires and brake pads, the paint on the frame, etc...its still a huge benefit to use a bike over a car. I'm constantly amazed at how desperately someone will try to make everyone else seem worse than the victim/saint who is formulating some twisted formula that tries to prove their point of view...

For example...I've recently been seeing more of this "food is bicycle fuel" questions. That can only be relevant IF...those using an E-bike or car DO NOT eat any food.

By that I mean...I'm going to eat food whether I ride a pedal-bike, an E-bike or a gasoline-burning car, therefore...to my way of thinking....food cannot be any part of the calculation of "is THIS better than THAT?"

There are meat-eating bicyclists, and vegetarian car-drivers...food is a completely separate issue. I know I eat slightly more when I'm biking more, but its not a big difference.

There may be some validity to the idea that the beef industry contributes a disproportionate amount of carbon to the environment (methane belches from bovine stomach cud, fuel for interstate meat transport). If thats a concern, perhaps eat less beef (more chicken?), and buy/grow more local vegetarian fare.

Calculate the mining it takes to make a 20-aH lithium Ping battery pack, plus the coal burned to make a years worth of battery charging (assuming your electricity is 100% coal)...and the result will STILL be way ahead of a years worth of gasoline refinement, transport, and consuming.

Concerning an LEV? perhaps an LEV carrying one person compared to the E-bike (lighter), the bike would come out better. If comparing an LEV carrying two people compared to two people on two E-bikes, I'm going to guess it would be about even or possibly slightly better for the LEV (along with the weather protection of an LEV). The difference in food consumption of two people in an LEV compared to two people on two E-bikes is very small.

edit: to post below this, YES its funny that bikes on top of a car create much more drag, bikes mounted on the rear are MUCH more aerodynamic (less drag, less fuel burned?), also I see a facepalm/D'OH! post once in a while where someone on a long trip forgot the expensive bikes on top...and tried to pull into a garage.

 

[vanilla ice]

Dang, but beef tastes so damn good... mmmm

Lets not get lost in the math and forget about the 20 miles cyclists drive their Explorer with the roof rack down to the "riding spot" to meet up and get their ride on.. not that there is anything wrong with that. Just sayin.

 

[John in CR]

For example...I've recently been seeing more of this "food is bicycle fuel" questions. That can only be relevant IF...those using an E-bike or car DO NOT eat any food.

By that I mean...I'm going to eat food whether I ride a pedal-bike, an E-bike or a gasoline-burning car, therefore...to my way of thinking....food cannot be any part of the calculation of "is THIS better than THAT?"

SpinningMags- You can't avoid the simple fact that the energy used to produce the motive force must come from somewhere, and for the pedalist it comes from food. There's just no way to get around the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Except to the extent riding ebikes our body is cooled more by the wind and must replace that heat loss to maintain body temperature. This cooling does make the previous efficiency comparisons invalid because it doesn't consider that an ebike with no pedaling must burn some extra food fuel to maintain body temp, while the pedalist's temp is maintained by waste heat from muscle action. Food costs far more than electricity (or gas for that matter) as an energy source, and most food comes with a significant carbon footprint itself. Don't forget the methane which has 10X the effect of CO2...Not much methane created by the ebike or a car.

Oil is pretty much a finite resource, so it will run out. Cars are wasteful in terms of the resources used to create them and the roadways needed to drive them on. Smaller lighter vehicles require less energy to move, take up less space, use less resources to make. They also require less infrastructure in already congested urban areas. Plus it's healthier to bike. This is where pedalists and ebikers should find common ground and band together, because the carbon argument has lots of holes and has questionable validity as a goal anyway. Change is needed whether CO2 is a problem or not, so that debate is only a distraction and waste of time.

John

 

[gogo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency_in_transportation

Electric bicycles ridden at 20 MPH or less are more efficient than ANY other form of transportation and that includes the carbon footprint measurement.

 

[Lock]

...more efficient than ANY other form of transportation

Efficient yes, but it's a dirty fuel laden with hydrocarbons. From the natural gas used to make fertilizers, to diseasal transportation over long distances to retail shelves, energy costs to process and store as cold or frozen, energy to cook, energy costs to package and promote, hydrocarbons used in packaging inks etc. Meat is particularly resource-inefficient.

Far easier to clean up our sources for electricity, and when we have to travel, minimize our Wh/km in a fun way (ebikes!)

Lock

 

[x88x]

...more efficient than ANY other form of transportation

Efficient yes, but it's a dirty fuel laden with hydrocarbons. From the natural gas used to make fertilizers, to diseasal transportation over long distances to retail shelves, energy costs to process and store as cold or frozen, energy to cook, energy costs to package and promote, hydrocarbons used in packaging inks etc. Meat is particularly resource-inefficient.

Far easier to clean up our sources for electricity, and when we have to travel, minimize our Wh/km in a fun way (ebikes!)

Lock

Check the rest of gogo's post again, Lock. He said electric bicycles, not pedal.

 

[dogman dan]

Gotta eat anyway is what we always say. We say that trying to justify the much higher cost of food when on a vacation vs cooking ourselves at home. But we know damn well we could eat more cheap at home.

Same thing with the hard core pedalers. They just might eat just as much and get fat riding a car, or ebike, or whatever since us yanks are notorious food hogs. So in a way, the food might not count. For me it's different, I work hard in a blue collar job. My challenge is to digest all the calories it takes in one night. Add a 30 mile ride on a pedal bike to my day, and I'm just gonna eat more for sure! Can't call that efficient for me. A 15 cent charge of the battery is much cheaper than a second helping of steak, or even potatoes.

How much you want to bet those guys harping their low carbon footprint live in a 1,500-2,500 square foot house with every single room in it heated or cooled?

There's a carbon footprint for ya, that blows away most peoples transportation footprint. You want to lower your footprint, buy insulation and new windows.

 

[wineboyrider]

Efficiency pretty much answers the question. Reduction of your carbon footprint (if you believe in this) is automatically reduced anytime you use an efficient machine and a bicycle is already one of the most efficient machines in the world! So just by using two wheels you are already twice as efficient as anyone who walks!

 

[liveforphysics]

Justin Le wrote an extremely good paper on this very topic. It includes everything from the fuel used shipping the batteries, to various types/sources of food effects on the numbers.

 

[grindz145]

http://www.ebikes.ca/sustainability/Ebike_Energy.pdf

 

[auraslip]

Yeah, I got most of my info from that. I linked to it in the first post.

I wish is discussed the actual carbon footprints of both. Alas, it's ridiculously variable when it comes to food. I'm working on using a corn syrup as the supply of calories. My logic is that calories from corn syrup are about the cheapest (as far as green house gases) that you can get. Even if we use the calories from the lowest source of CO2e, ebikes should still be better for the environment by some order of magnitude.

 

[andri.brugger]

It might be hairsplitting what is done here, but still valuable lessons can be learned. Just some hitting information:

If you would only eat MEAT you would produce 6000 times more greenhouse gas emission than if you would drive with an LEV!!

There is a PDF attached to this post with a research finished today. I translated it into English so you can read all the arguments and understand why the result is so crazy! I also attached a picture with all the accumulated results for an overview.

View attachment 1

Questions and comments are kindly requested!

 

[etard]

Andri,
I can barely read that graph, but I CAN see the huge amount of energy required to eat steak! WOW!

I'm guessing that Auraslip's friends are some good-hearted earthy people and probably grow most of thier food and buy as much as possible from local sources. If this is true, I'm going to have to agree with them. Riding a non-motored bicycle, living off the land, and never stepping foot in any petrol powered vehicle will always have a much smaller footprint than any ebike powered form of transportation. That my friends, is truly a self-sustaining existence! However, the reality is that most of us could never live a "simple" existence like that. That would require me to give up my Iphone, this forum, any and all electronic devices, and yes my 2 stroke petrol burning dirtbike, as well as my China made ebike. 99.9999% of us are not willing to make that leap. Society looks at people like that in much the same regard as cults or street people, there is something wrong with that person; why don't they want to consume? That's a fact.

 

[vanilla ice]

Read the acrobat file.. you can see everything clearly there!

 

[andri.brugger]

Thanks for the interest in my post and in my work. I was happy to see people discussing the topic I work on so I decided to publish it quickly. As you know, discussions like this one here dont last that long. I am very sorry for my bad English but it had to be translated quickly. Original language is German, if anyone can read that, I can supply him.

So what you read is not the final paper. I am right now calculating the battery and the electric motor an I am taking into account the weights of the bikes. If you can wait a few more days, I will supply you with the final paper as a Christmas present.

Regards,
Andri

 

[jonescg]

It is hard to beat a bicycle for it's sheer simplicity and efficiency (especially in terms of energy expended per kilometer per hour).

One could argue that the most environmentally responsible thing we can do is to stop spending money. Food - yeah, well ya gotta eat. But to you really need that iPhone? Laptop? GPS for the car? The car? We fill our life with all sorts of material crap that may or may not make life easier/better/more fulfilling, but the planet is only going to run out of resources quicker and the recycling is only going to get harder and require more energy/special resources if we keep spending money on this stuff. Including e-bikes and e-motos

For the record I don't own a car, television or surround-sound Hi-Fi system. But I do have a half-built e-moto...