Remco Evenepoel bags Worlds ITT win and starts YouTube channel; 4/5 Bristol cyclists experience aggressive driving; More reaction to Millar's Ineos 4x4; Cyclist rides 500 miles backwards; All-City Cycles to be "retired" + more on the live blog

ktache wrote:

May I ask our resident Bristolians where that 20% of cyclists who don't suffer aggressive driving are riding?

Watopia?

Ouch!

The 11 broken ribs, snapped ulna, dislocated elbow, punctured lung, internal bleeding and 3 fractured vertebrae weren't a lot of fun either  .. and they are a lot harder to show in a image.

I needed CPR 6 times at the crash site ... It was not a fun time - nor was the 4 months of not being able to walk, and the further year off work ...

This is what my bike ended up looking like ... every weld is cracked, and the tubes are split.

Crikey! Well done getting back on a bike at all, I don't think I could have. All the best.

Thank you.

The 5 year anniversary was yesterday.

It wasn't easy, getting back on ... But that driver took 18 months and my mobility for the rest of my life ... I couldn't let them take my freedom and mental health too

Well said.

Paul J wrote:

He's also not wrong that eBikes provide far less in the way of exercise than a normal bike.

I recall seeing some stats on this site somewhere that e-bikes provide the same if not more exercise than an acoustic bike, as riders are more likely to tackle longer routes and hills. i.e. Someone with just an acoustic might drive twenty miles to work, whereas they might choose to cycle if they've got an electric option.

e-bikes provide the same if not more exercise than an acoustic bike

There are 'statistics' to prove anything you like, but the justification you're endorsing is obviously untrue for the great majority of the e-bikes I see. There aren't many bikes up here at all, and many fewer e-bikes- there are none at all in winter, because it's too cold for people out in the wind and not performing any physical work.

I think I remember seeing that on here before, indeed, and I don't disagree that someone on an eBike/pedelec/moped may well be getting more exercise than without one. Still, a bicycle would provide better exercise than a moped/pedelec/eBike - for the subset for whom this knowledge would help them move to a bicycle.

And this doesn't affect Hitchens' other point: the pedelec/moped requires more resources - some of which will not last that long.

Paul J wrote:

I think I remember seeing that on here before, indeed, and I don't disagree that someone on an eBike/pedelec/moped may well be getting more exercise than without one. Still, a bicycle would provide better exercise than a moped/pedelec/eBike - for the subset for whom this knowledge would help them move to a bicycle. And this doesn't affect Hitchens' other point: the pedelec/moped requires more resources - some of which will not last that long.

Yes, the ideal is someone using an acoustic bike to get their exercise.

However, I think the resource issue is more nuanced than just e-bikes being worse. If someone is replacing some car journeys with e-bikes, then it could be considered to be using less resources as there'll be less tyre/brake wear and less fuel used. With some accountancy to write off the resources used over the lifetime of the vehicle, then the extra journeys may end up "paying" for the extra resources used.

Also, if we compare someone who doesn't get any exercise with someone using an e-bike, you could consider the extra resources as a cost for the improved health of the person. In the extreme, that could mean that it would save the NHS money to give e-bikes to some people though you'd probably have to fudge some figures or cherry pick the recipients.

Paul J wrote:

I think I remember seeing that on here before, indeed, and I don't disagree that someone on an eBike/pedelec/moped may well be getting more exercise than without one. Still, a bicycle would provide better exercise than a moped/pedelec/eBike - for the subset for whom this knowledge would help them move to a bicycle. And this doesn't affect Hitchens' other point: the pedelec/moped requires more resources - some of which will not last that long.

E-bikes use very little additional resource compared to ordinary bikes. The main issue is the stuff in the batteries ... but there are moves to vastly improve the recyling of lithium batteries and all they contain. Alternative and less damaging battery technologies may also be on the horizon.

I began to ride e-bikes aged 73, after 3 years suffering on the ladywife's e-bike back wheel going up hills on my ordinary bike. (All our bikes, including the e-bikes, are racey or audax style). I still ride the ordinary bikes when out alone; and sometimes the e-bike without the (Fazua) motor & battery mounted (inserting an empty container instead albeit with a cake and a waterproof in it).

The ladywife got an e-bike to equalise our cycling abilities as my FTP is just under 200 whilst hers in only around 125 (although she does weigh 25 kilos less than me). Once I also got an e-bike, it made it much easier to improve that equalisation so we can always ride together, including up the many long hills without me having a bludpump-attack or blott i' the blud tubes.

In practice, I try just as hard (sometimes harder) on the e-bike as I do on the ordinary bike. I keep the assistance power as low as possible - generally zero for everything but the longer and steeper hills. But no route daunts us, since we know we can get 'round even if there's loadsa black arrows on the route map. In fact, the e-bikes give a large psychological boost as they're a failsafe in the event of fatigue or even a bad bonk far from home.

********

Those who have no experience of an e-bike are unwise to offer potted opinions based on their thoughts about it and nothing else. Their opinions are often flawed by many false assumptions. At bottom, e-bikes encourage and enable a lot of cyclists to become cyclists or to keep on cycling, often more than they would if (like me) age or other factors begin to weaken resolve or fitness.

Try one ... then report (to yourself and here too) what you actually discover about them.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Also, if we compare someone who doesn't get any exercise with someone using an e-bike, you could consider the extra resources as a cost for the improved health of the person. In the extreme, that could mean that it would save the NHS money to give e-bikes to some people though you'd probably have to fudge some figures or cherry pick the recipients.

Also, someone who rides and e-bike instead of driving their car has less chance of killing you on the road!

He is wrong as studies have been done and you ignore people who have a physical limitation due to injury, disability, cancer and I give you oldfatgit's photo above.

Also Rendel posted his stats on distance max HR and avg HR. Maybe he will repost.

Hirsute wrote:

Also Rendel posted his stats on distance max HR and avg HR. Maybe he will repost.

Happy to mention them again; on my 25km commute the same speed on my road bike and ebike showed my average power (4iii single crank power meter) on the ebike was 70% that of the road bike for the same speed. This may be somewhat skewed by the fact that I generally let the ebike pull me up to the 25kmh cutoff and then go on to ride it between 30-35kmh under my own power, it could be easier if I wanted. On a local 15% climb my max heart rate at the same speed was 172 on the road bike and 158 on the ebike, so indicative of getting some pretty good exercise.

End of the day, as I've said many times before, at 54 and still recovering from very serious illness I can't ride 25kms each way every day on my road bike and still have the energy to put in a good day's work. The ebike allows me to do that and still have energy left to ride the road bike occasionally on the commute and at the weekends for pleasure. It's also allowed self and better half to jettison the motor as we can use the ebikes to transport shopping etc to the aged parents and parents in law who live too far away to make heavily laden unpowered bike visits practical. If anyone wants to call me lazy or not a proper cyclist for that, the amount of fucks I could give is considerably less than one.

Thanks Rendel.
I'll add I couldn't do the weekly shop with a trailer without an ebike.

Hmm... on the one hand the majority of us don't "need" an ebike (or a modern plastic number for that matter) - all much more resource-intensive than unpowered steel bikes.  ("I need to drive / need a second car" though...)  Yes - for those who physically can't or struggle to cycle, they are indeed a wonderful thing of course.

OTOH people want "more" (see SUVs).  And companies love upselling stuff (see SUVs again).  Politicians are not above encouraging ever more resource use because "new" / "leading" / "growth" / "competitive" etc.

We all really need to drive a LOT less though *.

Perhaps ebikes fit in between "way too much" (cars) and "only for enthusiasts and the poor" (basic bikes)?  Could they help break out of the chicken-and-egg situation where "nobody cycles" so we don't cater to them?

* Unless you're a fatalist, or untroubled by the global trajectory or think it's just a scam etc.

chrisonatrike wrote:

We all really need to drive a LOT less though *.

Perhaps ebikes fit in between "way too much" (cars) and "only for enthusiasts and the poor" (basic bikes)?  Could they help break out of the chicken-and-egg situation where "nobody cycles" so we don't cater to them?

Exactly: we are where we are, with a large proportion of the population pumping pollution into the atmosphere (either at the tail pipe or the power station) for quite short journeys, and not being active enough to consider self-powered travel.

That same population has had the option of cycling as we know it since at least 1905 (introduction of safety bicycle) and by and large, hasn't taken it. Something else is needed, and I think e-bikes are probably it. We should promote them,. Not so sure about e-scooters - I think they are used instead of walking. But obv for those who find walking difficult, they may be a great way to stay out of a car.

There was some research a few months (?) back [update: it was 2020 - what does that say?] which found ebikes have a lower carbon cost than conventional bikes because their riders require less extra food per kilometre travelled. Both are very good compared to other modes though.
www.bikeradar.com/features/long-reads/cycling-environmental-impact

Dnnnnnn wrote:

There was some research a few months (?) back which found ebikes have a lower carbon cost than conventional bikes because their riders require less extra food per kilometre travelled

Most energy efficient (and lowest carbon emissions in *use*) human transport? Apparently electric unicycles or scooters followed closely by electric bikes. Most efficient *unpowered* vehicle? Velomobile.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_transport#Land_tran...

However the link in my last comment has studies covering the life cycle analysis. Because manufacturing makes a large contribution to the overall costs and the lifespan of an electric bike is estimated as shorter (because electric bits) that link has unpowered steel bikes producing *very slightly* less carbon over their lifetime than an electric version. However I'm not sure how many steel - rather than alloy - ebikes are made?

Still better than driving though! Or even the bus.

I agree. However, I think there's a problem in general parlance with the term "e-bike", there's a huge difference between a type-approved EAPC, and a battered old chopped up MTB with no chain and 900W motor on a throttle; it's the latter badly ridden that seem to attract the ire of the media, but they're all "e-bikes" tarred with the same brush. 

Unfortunately the police simply don't want to know when it comes to the illegal ones.  At the end of June I was taken out while cycling home by a guy on an e-scooter.  I now have a metal plate and screws holding my shoulder together and probably won't be cycling outside again for a good month or three yet.  The response from the police was to immediately close the case because e-scooter riders can't be identified (even though after the accident he immediately went into Tesco and bought something).  My local MP contacted the police and their response to him was that the government allows illegal e-scooters to be sold in shops, so they can do nothing when they are ridden and cause accidents.  I think they take a similar attitude with all "e" vehicles sadly.