diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'saved_articles/Can_We_Make_Bicycles_Sustainable_Again.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | saved_articles/Can_We_Make_Bicycles_Sustainable_Again.txt | 627 |
1 files changed, 627 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/saved_articles/Can_We_Make_Bicycles_Sustainable_Again.txt b/saved_articles/Can_We_Make_Bicycles_Sustainable_Again.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..247391b --- /dev/null +++ b/saved_articles/Can_We_Make_Bicycles_Sustainable_Again.txt @@ -0,0 +1,627 @@ +Feed: Low-Tech Magazine +Title: Can We Make Bicycles Sustainable Again? +Author: kris de decker +Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 03:19:58 -0500 +Link: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2023/02/can-we-make-bicycles-sustainable-again.html + +Cycling is the most sustainable form of transportation, but the bicycle is +becoming increasingly damaging to the environment. The energy and material used +for its production go up while its life expectancy decreases. + +[image 1: Imagenweb (link #2)][1] + +Illustration: Diego Marmolejo[3]. + +Cycling is sustainable, but how sustainable is the bicycle? + +Cycling is one of the most sustainable modes of transportation. Increased +ridership reduces fossil fuel consumption and pollution, saves space, and +improves public health and safety. However, the bicycle itself has managed to +elude environmental critique. [1] [2] Studies that calculate the environmental +impact of cycling almost always compare it to driving, with predictable results: +the bicycle is more sustainable than the car. Such research may encourage people +to cycle more often but doesn't encourage manufacturers to make their bicycles +as sustainable as possible. + +For this article, I have consulted academic studies that compare different types +of bicycles against each other or focus on the manufacturing stage of a +particular two-wheeler. That kind of research was virtually non-existent until +three or four years ago. Using the available material, I compare different +generations of bicycles. Set in a historical context, it becomes clear that the +resource use of a bike's production increases while its lifetime is becoming +shorter. The result is a growing environmental footprint. That trend has a clear +beginning. The bicycle evolved very slowly until the early 1980s and then +suddenly underwent a fast succession of changes that continues up to this day. + + The bicycle evolved very slowly until the early 1980s and then suddenly + underwent a fast succession of changes that continues up to this day. + +There are no studies about bicycles built before the 1980s. Life cycle analyses, +which investigate the resource use of a product from “cradle” to “grave,” only +appeared in the 1990s. However, the benchmark for a sustainable bicycle stands +in the room where I write this. It’s my 1980 Gazelle Champion road bike – now 43 +years old. I bought it ten years ago in Barcelona from a tall German guy who was +leaving the city. He had tears in his eyes when I walked away with it. I have a +second road bike, a Mercier from 1978. That is my spare vehicle in case the +other one breaks down and I don't have the time for immediate repairs. I have +two more road bikes parked in Belgium, where I grew up and where I still travel +a few times a year (by train[4], not by bike). These are a Plume Vanqueur from +the late 1960s and a Ventura from the 1970s. + +The main reason why I have opted for old bicycles is that they are much better +than new bicycles. Most people don’t realize that, so they are also much +cheaper. My four bikes cost me just 500 euros in total. That would buy me only +one low-cost new road bike, and such a vehicle surely won’t last 40 to 50 years +– as we shall see. Of course, it’s not just old road bikes which are better. The +same goes for other types of bicycles built before the 1980s. I ride road +bicycles because I cover relatively long distances, usually between 35 and 50 km +round trip. + +[image 2: P2200841 (link #6)][5] + +Image: The bicycle I use most often, a Gazelle Champion from 1980. It has +covered at least 30,000 km since I bought it in 2013. + +What bicycles are made of + +The first significant change in the bicycle manufacturing industry was the +switch from steel to aluminium bicycles. Before the 1980s, virtually all bikes +were made from steel. They had a steel frame, wheels, components and parts. +Nowadays, most bicycle frames and wheels are built from aluminium. The same goes +for many other bike parts. More recently, an increasing number of cycles have +frames and wheels made from carbon fibre composites. Some bike frames are built +from titanium or stainless steel. All of these materials are more energy +intensive to produce than steel. Furthermore, while steel and aluminium can be +recycled and repaired, composite fibres can only be downcycled and have poor +repairability. [3] + +Several studies have compared the energy and carbon costs of bicycle frames and +other components made from these different materials – which all have different +strength-to-weight ratios. That research has some limitations. Scientists use +crude methods because they lack detailed energy data from bike manufacturing +processes, and some studies come from manufacturers who pay researchers to +review the sustainability of their products. Nevertheless, all put together, the +results are pretty consistent. For the sake of brevity, I focus on emissions +(CO2 = CO2-equivalents) and ignore other environmental impacts. + + Before the 1980s, virtually all bicycles were made from steel. + +Reynolds, a British manufacturer known for its bicycle tubing, found that making +a steel frame costs 17.5 kg CO2, while a titanium or stainless steel frame costs +around 55 kg CO2 per frame – three times as much. [4] Starling Cycles, a rare +producer of steel mountain bikes, concluded that a typical carbon frame uses 16 +times more energy than a steel frame. [5] (That would be 280 kg CO2). An +independent 2014 study – the first of its kind – calculated the footprint of an +aluminum road bike frame with carbon fork from the “Specialized” brand and found +the cost to be 2,380 kilowatt-hours of primary energy and over 250 kg of carbon +– roughly 14 times that of a steel frame (without fork) as calculated by +Reynolds. [2] + +A bicycle is more than a frame alone. Life cycle analyses of entire bikes show +that the carbon footprint of all the other components is at least as large as +that of a steel frame. [6] Scientists have calculated the lifetime carbon +emissions of a steel bike at 35 kg CO2, compared to 212 kg CO2 for an aluminum +bicycle. [7] [8] The most detailed life cycle analysis sets the carbon footprint +for an 18.4 kg aluminum bicycle at 200 kg CO2, including its spare parts, for a +lifetime of 15,000 km. The main impact phase is the preparation of materials +(74%; aluminum, stainless steel, rubber), followed by the maintenance phase +(15.5% for 3.5 new sets of tires, six brake pads, one chain, and one cassette) +and the assembly phase (4.96%). [9] + +Where & how bicycles are made + +My steel bicycles date from a time when most industrialized countries had +long-established domestic bicycle industries serving their national market. [3] +These industries collapsed in Europe and North America following neoliberal +globalization in the late 1970s. China opened to foreign investment and quickly +became the largest bicycle manufacturer in the world. During the last two +decades, China has made two-thirds of the world’s bicycles (60-70 million of 110 +million annually). Most of the rest come from other Asian countries. Europe is +back to producing ten million bikes annually, but the US only manufactures +60,000 bicycles per year. [3] + +Throughout the twentieth century, manufacturing bicycles required substantial +inputs of human labor. [3] According to the Routledge Companion to Cycling, +“wheels were spoked and trued manually; frames were built by hand; saddle making +was laborious; headsets, gear clusters (blocks), brake cables and gears were +physically bolted on.” Since the 2000s, automation has considerably reduced the +need for human labor. The largest Chinese bike manufacturer, which builds +one-fifth of the world’s bicycles, has 42 bicycle assembly lines making 55,000 +bicycles a day – almost as much as the US in a year. [3] + + Domestic bicycles industries in Europe and North America collapsed following + neoliberal globalization in the late 1970s. + +The globalization and automation of the bicycle industry make bikes less +sustainable. First, they introduce extra emissions for transportation (from raw +materials, components, and bicycles) and for producing and operating robots and +other machinery. Second, producing steel, aluminum, carbon fiber composites, and +electricity is more energy and carbon-intensive in China and other +bike-producing countries than in Europe and North America. [10] Most +importantly, however, is that large-scale automated production represents sunk +capital that needs to be working most of the time to spread overhead costs, +driving overproduction. [3] + +How long bicycles last + +How much energy and other resources it takes to build a bicycle and to deliver +it to a cyclist is just half the story. At least as importantly is how long the +bike lasts. The shorter its lifetime, the more vehicles need to be produced over +the lifetime of a cyclist, and the higher the resource use becomes. + +For a long life expectancy, some parts of a bicycle need replacement. These are +typically smaller parts such as shifters, chains, and brakes. [11] Until a few +decades ago, component compatibility was a hallmark of bicycle manufacturing. +[12] My bicycles are a perfect example of this. Most components – such as +wheels, gear set, and brakes – are interchangeable between the different frames, +even though every vehicle is from another brand and year of construction. +Component compatibility allows for easy maintenance and repairability, thereby +increasing the lifetime of a bicycle. Bike shops in even the smallest villages +can repair all types of bicycles using a limited set of tools and spare parts. +[12] Cyclists can do minor repairs at home. + +Unfortunately, compatibility is hardly a feature of bicycle manufacturing +anymore. Manufacturers have introduced an increasing number of proprietary parts +and keep changing standards, resulting in compatibility issues even for older +bicycles of the same brand. [1] [3] For example, if the shifter of a modern bike +breaks after some years of use, a replacement part will probably no longer be +available. You need to order a new set from a new generation, which will be +incompatible with your front and rear derailleur – which you also need to +replace. [12] For road bikes, the change from cassette bodies with ten sprockets +(around 2010) to cassette bodies with eleven, twelve, and most recently thirteen +sprockets have made many wheelsets obsolete, and the same goes for the rest of +the drivetrain including shifters and chains. [12] [1] + + Before the 1980s, most bicycle components were interchangeable between frames + of different brands and generations. + +Disc brakes, which are now on almost every new bicycle, all have different axle +designs, meaning that every vehicle now requires proprietary spare parts. [1] +Disc brakes also required new shifters, forks, framesets, cables, and wheels, +making such bicycles incompatible with earlier designs. [12] The rise of +proprietary parts makes it increasingly hard to keep a bike on the road through +maintenance, reuse, and refurbishment. As the number of incompatible components +grows, it becomes impossible for bike shops to have a complete stock of spare +parts. [12] If a manufacturer goes bankrupt, proprietary spare parts will no +longer be available. + +Component incompatibility is accompanied by decreasing component quality. An +example is the saddle, which hardly ever outlasts a frameset because it cracks +at the bottom of the shell. [12] A little extra material would make it last +forever – as proven by all saddles of my 40 to 50-year-old road bikes. Low +quality affects some parts of expensive bicycles but is especially problematic +for cheap bicycles made entirely of low-quality components. Cheap bicycles – +bike mechanics refer to them as “built-to-fail bikes” or “bike-shaped objects” – +often have plastic parts that break easily and cannot be replaced or upgraded. +These vehicles typically last only a few months. [13, 14] + +[image 3: Bike-manufacturing-factory-diego-marmolejo (link #8)][7] + +Illustration: Diego Marmolejo[3]. + +How bicycles are powered + +So far, we have only dealt with entirely human-powered bicycles, but bikes with +electric motors are becoming increasingly popular. The number of e-bikes sold +worldwide grew from 3.7 million in 2019 to 9.7 million in 2021 (10% of total +bike sales and up to 40% in some countries like Germany). Electric bikes +reinforce both trends that make bicycles less sustainable. On the one hand, +electric motors and batteries require additional resources such as lithium, +copper, and magnets, increasing the energy use and emissions of bike +manufacturing. Researchers have calculated the greenhouse gas emissions caused +by manufacturing an aluminum e-bike at 320 kg. [8] This compares to 212 kg for +the production of an unassisted aluminum bicycle and 35 kg for an unassisted +steel bicycle. + +On the other hand, the life expectancy of an electric bicycle is shorter than +that of an unassisted two-wheeler because it has more points of failure. The +breakdown of the extra components – motor, battery, electronics – leads to a +shorter lifecycle due to component incompatibility. An academic study on +circularity in the bike manufacturing industry observes a significant increase +in defective components compared to unassisted bicycles and concludes that “the +great dynamics of the market due to regular innovations, product renewals, and +the lack of spare parts for older models make the long-term use by customers +much more difficult than for conventional bicycles.” [15] + + Electric bikes reinforce both trends that make bicycles less sustainable. + +On top of this, electric bicycles require electricity for their operation, +further increasing resource use and emissions. This impact is small when +compared to the manufacturing phase. After all, humans provide part of the +power, and the electricity use of an electric bike (25 km/h) is only around 1 +kilowatt-hour per 100 km. The average greenhouse gas emission intensity of +electricity generation in Europe in 2019 was 275 gCO2/kWh. [16] If an e-bike +lasts 15,000 km, charging the battery only adds 41 kg of CO2, compared to 320 kg +for producing the (aluminum) bicycle. Even in the US and China, where the carbon +intensity of the power grid is 50-100% higher than the European value, electric +bicycle production dominates total emissions and energy use. + +Cargo cycles + +Combining energy-intensive materials, short lifetimes, and electric motor +assistance can increase lifecycle emissions to surprising levels, especially for +cargo cycles. These vehicles are larger and heavier than passenger bicycles and +need more powerful motors and batteries. There are very few life cycle analyses +of cargo cycles. However, a recent study calculated the lifecycle emissions of a +carbon fiber electric cargo cycle to be 80 gCO2 per kilometer – only half those +of an electric van (158 gCO2/km). [17] The researchers explain this by the +difference in lifetime mileage – 34,000 km compared to 240,000 km for the van – +and the carbon fiber composites in many components, including the chassis of the +vehicle. The lifecycle emissions of the cargo cycle, including the electricity +used to charge its battery, amount to 2,689 kg. That is almost 40 times the +lifecycle emissions of two steel bicycles (each with a 15,000 km lifecycle +mileage). + +Extending the useful life of electric bicycles has less impact on lifecycle +emissions when compared to unassisted bikes. That’s because the battery needs to +be replaced every 3 to 4 years and the motor every ten years, which adds to the +resource use of spare parts. [11] This is demonstrated by a life cycle analysis +of an electric steel cargo cycle with an assumed life expectancy of 20 years. +[18] During its lifetime, the vehicle uses five batteries (each weighing 8,5 +kg), two motors, and 3.5 sets of tires. Most lifecycle emissions are caused by +these spare parts, with the batteries alone accounting for 40% of the total +emissions. In comparison, the emissions for the steel frame are almost +insignificant. [18] This particular cargo cycle was built for African roads and +is not entirely representative of the average cargo cycle, mainly because of its +heavy tires. + +Cargo cycles have another disadvantage. Passenger bicycles and cars usually +carry only one person, meaning that one passenger kilometer on a bike roughly +equals one passenger kilometer in an automobile. However, for cargo, the +comparison of ton-kilometers is more complicated. If the load is relatively +light – usually up to 150 kg – the electric cargo cycle will be less +carbon-intensive than a van. However, heavier loads require several cargo cycles +to replace one van, which multiplies the embodied emissions. [18] Switching to +electric cargo cycles without significantly reducing the cargo volume is +unlikely to save emissions. Obviously, cargo cycles with steel frames and +without electric motors and batteries -- for now still the majority -- will have +much lower carbon emissions over their lifetimes. + +How bicycles are used + +In recent years, many cities have introduced shared bicycle services. In theory, +shared bicycles could lower the number of bikes produced and thus decrease the +environmental impact of bicycle production. However, building and operating +bike-sharing services adds significant energy use and emissions. Furthermore, +shared bicycles don’t last as long as privately owned bicycles. Consequently, +shared bike services further reinforce the trends that make bicycles less +sustainable. + +A 2021 study compares the environmental impact of shared and private bicycles +while including the infrastructure that each option requires. It concludes that +personal bikes are more sustainable than shared bicycles. [8] The research is +based on the Vélib system in Paris, France, which has 19,000 vehicles, roughly +half with an electric motor. Vehicle manufacturing and bike-sharing +infrastructure cause more than 90% of emissions and energy use. The remaining +emissions are due to the construction of cycle lanes (3.5%), the rebalancing of +the bicycles to keep all stations optimally supplied (2%), and the electricity +used for charging the batteries of the electric bikes (0.3%). Altogether, a +shared bicycle from the Vélib system has an emissions rate of 32g CO2/km, which +is three to ten times higher than the rate of a personal bike (between 3.5 +gCO2/km for a steel bicycle and 10.5 g CO2/km for an aluminum bicycle. [8] + + Building and operating bike-sharing services adds significant energy use and + emissions + +The scientists found that the bike-sharing service led to a 15% drop in bike +ownership. However, they also calculated that the average lifespan of a shared +bicycle is only 14.7 months, with an average lifetime mileage of 12,250 km. In +comparison, the average lifetime of a personal bike in France, based on a 2020 +survey, is around 20,000 km – almost 50% higher than for shared bicycles. The +Vélib system includes 14,000 bike-sharing stations with a total surface of +92,000 m2 and an estimated lifetime of ten years. Each of the 46,500 docks +consists of 23 kg steel and 0.5 kg plastic. The power consumption of each +bike-sharing station is around 6,000 kWh per year. Due to the high impact of the +infrastructure, the lifecycle emissions of shared electric bikes are only 24% +higher than those of shared non-electric vehicles. [8] + +The environmental footprint of bike-sharing systems can vary significantly +between cities. A life cycle analysis of bike-sharing services in the US found +carbon emissions of 65g CO2/km – twice as high as in Paris. [19] This is largely +because the US systems rebalance the bicycles using diesel vans, while the +French service employs electric tractors. The US study also looks at the newer +generation of “dockless” bike-sharing services, which score even worse. Dockless +shared bikes can be parked anywhere and located through a smartphone +application. Although this removes the need for stations, each bicycle requires +energy-intensive electronic components, and the system also generates emissions +through communication networks. [19] [10] Furthermore, dockless systems require +more bicycles and involve more rebalancing. + +A life cycle analysis of Chinese bike-sharing services, many dockless systems, +shows high damage rates and low maintenance rates for bicycles. The annual +damage rate is 10-20% for reinforced bicycles and 20-40% for lighter vehicles +which have become more common. In practice, a shared bicycle becomes scrap when +the bike part with the worst durability breaks down. Repair is virtually not +happening. [10] Finally, when the companies go bankrupt, bike sharing creates +mountains of waste – including bicycles in good condition. [10] [1] + +[image 4: Lifecycle-carbon-emissions-per-kilometre-of-riding-bicycle (link +#10)][9] + +Image: Lifecycle carbon emissions per kilometre of riding a bicycle. Data +sources: [8] [17] [19] [26] Graph: Marie Verdeil. + +Not every bicycle replaces a car + +None of this should discourage cycling. Even the most unsustainable bicycles are +significantly less unsustainable than cars. The carbon footprint for +manufacturing a gasoline or diesel-powered car is between 6 tonnes (Citroen C1) +and 35 tonnes (Land Rover Discovery). [20] Consequently, building one small +automobile such as the C1 produces as many emissions as making 171 steel +bicycles or 28 aluminum bicycles. Furthermore, cars also have a high carbon +footprint for fuel use, while bikes are entirely or partly human-powered. [21] +Electric cars have higher emissions for production but lower emissions for +operation (although that depends entirely on the carbon intensity of the power +grid). + +The bicycle even holds its advantage when its much shorter lifetime mileage is +taken into account. [22] Gasoline and diesel-powered cars now reach more than +300,000 km, double their lifetime in the 1960s and 1970s. [23] If a bicycle +lasts 20,000 km, it would take 15 bikes to cover 300,000 km. If those are steel +bicycles without an electric motor, the total carbon footprint for manufacturing +is still six times lower than for a small car: 1,050 kg of CO2. If the bikes are +made from aluminum and have electric motors, then emissions grow to 4,800 kg +CO2, still below the manufacturing carbon footprint of the small car. + +However, not every bicycle replaces a car. That is especially relevant for +shared and electric bikes: studies show that they mainly substitute for more +sustainable transport alternatives such as walking, using an unassisted or +private bicycle, or traveling on the subway. [19][24] In Paris, shared bikes +have three times higher emissions than electric public transportation. [8] In +addition, many carbon-intensive bicycles are bought for recreation and are not +meant to replace cars at all – they may even involve more car use as cyclists +drive out of town for a trip in nature. In all those cases, emissions go up, not +down. + +How to make bicycles sustainable again? + +In conclusion, there are several reasons why bicycles have become less +sustainable: the switch from steel to aluminum and other more energy-intensive +materials, the scaling up of the bicycle manufacturing industry, increasing +incompatibility and decreasing quality of components, the growing success of +electric bicycles, and the use of shared bike services. Most of these are not +problematic in themselves. Rather, it's the combination of trends that leads to +significant differences with bicycles from earlier generations. + +For example, based on data mentioned earlier, manufacturing an electric bicycle +made from steel would have a carbon footprint of 143 kg. Although that is four +times the emissions from an unassisted steel bicycle, it is below the carbon +footprint of an aluminum bicycle without an electric motor (212 kg). Especially +if the battery is charged with renewable energy, riding an electric bike can +thus be more sustainable than riding one without a motor. Likewise, an aluminum +bicycle with a long life expectancy – for example, through component +compatibility – could have a lower carbon footprint than a steel bicycle with a +more limited lifespan. + +Many researchers advocate switching back to producing bicycles from steel +instead of aluminium and other energy-intensive materials. That would bring +significant gains in sustainability for a relatively low cost – slightly heavier +bicycles. Steel frames would also make electric and shared bikes less carbon +intensive. Some researchers promote bamboo bike frames, but the benefit compared +to old-fashioned steel or even aluminium frames is unclear. [27] A “bamboo +bicycle” still requires wheels and many other parts made out of metal or carbon +fibre composites, and the frame tubes are usually held together by carbon fibre +or metal parts. [6] Furthermore, the bamboo is chemically treated against decay +and becomes non-biodegradable. [1] + + Reverting to domestic and less automated bike manufacturing is a requirement + for sustainable bicycles. + +Better component compatibility would increase the life expectancy of bicycles – +also electric ones – through repair and refurbishment. It would bring no +disadvantages for consumers, even on the contrary. However, unlike a switch to +steel frames, better component compatibility would hurt the sales of new +bicycles. A study concludes that “the abandonment of standardization is a +profitable business model because it ensures that bicycles can only be ridden +for so long.” [1] The decreasing sustainability of bikes is not a technological +problem, and it’s not unique to bicycles. We also see it in manufacturing other +products, such as computers[11]. One bike mechanic observes: “The problem here +is capitalism; it’s not the bikes.” [14] + +Reverting to domestic and less automated bike manufacturing is a requirement for +sustainable bicycles. The main reason is not the extra energy use generated by +transportation and machinery, which is relatively small. For example, shipping +from China adds around 0.7 to 1.2 gCO2/km for shared bicycles. [8] More +importantly, domestic and manual bike manufacturing is essential to make repair +and refurbishment the more economically attractive option. By definition, +repairing is local and manual, so it quickly becomes more expensive than +producing a new vehicle in a large-scale, automated factory. [10] Locally made +bicycles would increase the purchase price for consumers. However, better +repairability would allow for a longer life expectancy and a lower cost in the +long term. Addressing bike theft and parking problems is also essential because +they are often a reason for buying cheap, short-lasting bicycles. [25] + +Finally, shared bicycle services can have their place, and we will probably see +further improvements in their resource efficiency – the newest bike-sharing +stations in Paris have reduced their power consumption by a factor of six. [8] +However, shared bicycles are unlikely to become more sustainable than private +bicycles because they always require rebalancing and a high-tech infrastructure +to make the service work. Furthermore, getting attached to your bike can be a +strong incentive to take care of it well and thus increase its life expectancy, +as I can testify. + +Kris De Decker + + * Read Low-tech Magazine offline[12]. + * Subscribe to Low-tech Magazine's newsletter[13]. + * Support Low-tech Magazine via Paypal[14] or Patreon[15]. + +SOURCES + +[1] Szto, Courtney, and Brian Wilson. "Reduce, re-use, re-ride: Bike waste and +moving towards a circular economy for sporting goods." International Review for +the Sociology of Sport (2022): 10126902221138033. +https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10126902221138033[16] + +[2] Johnson, Rebecca, Alice Kodama, and Regina Willensky. "The complete impact +of bicycle use: analyzing the environmental impact and initiative of the bicycle +industry." (2014). https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/ +8483/Duke_MP_Published.pdf[17] + +[3] Norcliffe, Glen, et al., eds. Routledge Companion to Cycling. Taylor & +Francis, 2022. https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Companion-to-Cycling/Norcliff +e-Brogan-Cox-Gao-Hadland-Hanlon-Jones-Oddy-Vivanco/p/book/9781003142041[18] + +[4] Cole, Emma. “What’s the environmental impact of a steel bicycle frame?” +Cyclist, November 7, 2022. https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/11003/steel-bike-f +rame-environmental-impact[19] + +[5] Mercer, Liam. “Starling Cycles publishes environmental footprint assessment +and policy.” Off-road.cc, July 2022. https://off.road.cc/content/news/starling-c +ycles-publishes-environmental-footprint-assessment-and-policy-10513[20] + +[6] Chang, Ya-Ju, Erwin M. Schau, and Matthias Finkbeiner. "Application of life +cycle sustainability assessment to the bamboo and aluminum bicycle in surveying +social risks of developing countries." 2nd World Sustainability Forum, Web +Conference. 2012. https://sciforum.net/manuscripts/953/original.pdf[21] + +[7] Chen, Jingrui, et al. "Life cycle carbon dioxide emissions of bike sharing +in China: Production, operation, and recycling." Resources, Conservation and +Recycling 162 (2020): 105011. +https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344920303281[22] + +[8] De Bortoli, Anne. "Environmental performance of shared micromobility and +personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA." Transportation Research Part +D: Transport and Environment 93 (2021): 102743. +https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S136192092100047X[23] + +[9] Roy, Papon, Md Danesh Miah, and Md Tasneem Zafar. "Environmental impacts of +bicycle production in Bangladesh: a cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment +approach." SN Applied Sciences 1 (2019): 1-16. +https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42452-019-0721-z[24] + +[10] Mao, Guozhu, et al. "How can bicycle-sharing have a sustainable future? A +research based on life cycle assessment." Journal of Cleaner Production 282 +(2021): 125081. +https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620351258[25] + +[11] Leuenberger, Marianne, and Rolf Frischknecht. "Life cycle assessment of two +wheel vehicles." ESU-Services Ltd.: Uster, Switzerland (2010). https://treeze.ch +/fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/Publications/Case_Studies/Mobility/leuenberger- +2010-TwoWheelVehicles.pdf[26] + +[12] Erik Bronsvoort & Matthijs Gerrits. “From marginal gains to a circular +revolution”. Paperback (full-colour): 160 pages, ISBN: 978-94-92004-93-2, Warden +Press, Amsterdam. https://circularcycling.nl/product/from-marginal-gains-to-a-ci +rcular-revolution/[27] + +[13] US petition that calls for end o built to fail bikes gaining support in BC. +https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/u-s-petition-that-calls-for-end-of-buil +t-to-fail-bikes-gaining-support-in-b-c[28] + +[14] Aaron Gordon. “Mechanics Ask Walmart, Major Bike Manufacturers to Stop +Making and Selling ‘Built-to-Fail’ Bikes”, Vice, January 13, 2022. https://www.v +ice.com/en/article/wxdgq9/mechanics-ask-walmart-major-bike-manufacturers-to-stop +-making-and-selling-built-to-fail-bikes[29] + +[15] Koop, Carina, et al. "Circular business models for remanufacturing in the +electric bicycle industry." Frontiers in Sustainability 2 (2021): 785036. +https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsus.2021.785036/full[30] + +[16] https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/overview-of-the-electric +ity-production-3/assessment[31] + +[17] Temporelli, Andrea, et al. "Last mile logistics life cycle assessment: a +comparative analysis from diesel van to e-cargo bike." Energies 15.20 (2022): +7817.. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/20/7817[32] + +[18] Schünemann, Jaron, et al. "Life Cycle Assessment on Electric Cargo Bikes +for the Use-Case of Urban Freight Transportation in Ghana." Procedia CIRP 105 +(2022): 721-726. +https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827122001214[33] + +[19] Luo, Hao, et al. "Comparative life cycle assessment of station-based and +dock-less bike sharing systems." Resources, Conservation and Recycling 146 +(2019): 180-189. +https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344919301090[34] + +[20] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbo +n-footprint-new-car[35] + +[21] Bicycles are entirely or partly powered by food calories. Some people argue +that the life cycle energy requirements of bicycles are higher than other modes, +when one considers the impact of food require to provide additional calories +that are burned during the bicycle use. However, the majority of people in +car-centered societies take in more calories than their sedentary lifestyle +requires. Increased cycling would lead to lower obesity rates, not to higher +calorie intakes. + +[22] This a purely theoretical calculation, because cars encourage much longer +trips than bicycles. + +[23] Ford, Dexter. “As Cars Are Kept Longer, 200,000 Is New 100,000.” New York +Times, March 16, 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-ar +e-kept-longer-200000-is-new-100000.html?_r=2&ref=business&pagewanted=all&[36] + +[24] Zheng, Fanying, et al. "Is bicycle sharing an environmental practice? +Evidence from a life cycle assessment based on behavioral surveys." +Sustainability 11.6 (2019): 1550. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1550[37] + +[25] Larsen, Jonas, and Mathilde Dissing Christensen. "The unstable lives of +bicycles: the ‘unbecoming’of design objects." Environment and Planning A: +Economy and Space 47.4 (2015): 922-938. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/131 +212/1/M%20Christensen%202015%20the%20unstable%20lives%20of%20bicycles%20ver2%20p +ostprint.pdf[38] + +[26] Calão, Júlio, et al. "Life Cycle Thinking Approach Applied to a Novel +Micromobility Vehicle." Transportation Research Record 2676.8 (2022): 514-529. +https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03611981221084692[39] + +[27] A comparison of the life cycle emissions of a bamboo versus an aluminium +bicycle showed little difference (233 vs. 238 kg CO2). [6] + +Read Low-tech Magazine Offline + +Read Low-tech Magazine with no access to a computer, a power supply, or the +internet. The printed archives amount to four volumes with a total of 2,398 +pages and 709 images[12]. They can be ordered in our Lulu bookstore[40]. + +[image 5: NEWbook016 (link #42)][41] + +[43] + +Links: +[1]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b75197a7b7200c-pi (link) +[2]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b75197a7b7200c-800wi (image) +[3]: https://www.instagram.com/ddidak/ (link) +[4]: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2013/12/high-speed-trains-are-killing-the-european-railway-network.html (link) +[5]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b75197d1bc200c-pi (link) +[6]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b75197d1bc200c-800wi (image) +[7]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b6852a8ae5200d-pi (link) +[8]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b6852a8ae5200d-800wi (image) +[9]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b6852aacfa200d-pi (link) +[10]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b6852aacfa200d-800wi (image) +[11]: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2020/12/how-and-why-i-stopped-buying-new-laptops.html (link) +[12]: https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/low-tech-magazine-the-printed-website.html (link) +[13]: https://d69baa34.sibforms.com/serve/MUIEAJWIw9w82Dl4ua6FQArPaI-3Qb-zVTwPNabHQgFH51MiGF69Smy9LOC_HPoUmBj0emaXsXT87gcQXDPvtu-AZsJCHWhkkv21CdrcQu4GdnYAhZ-MrIPhwGDecagLzYxqfvkaqXg2ODcbJU4ByoDmzJK3ZTczDo2jcWtfn-En0MGKLVkgxx9TgdHqYoPabMJCMF-agLEclEwv (link) +[14]: https://www.paypal.me/lowtechmagazine (link) +[15]: https://www.patreon.com/lowtechmagazine (link) +[16]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10126902221138033 (link) +[17]: https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/8483/Duke_MP_Published.pdf (link) +[18]: https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Companion-to-Cycling/Norcliffe-Brogan-Cox-Gao-Hadland-Hanlon-Jones-Oddy-Vivanco/p/book/9781003142041 (link) +[19]: https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/11003/steel-bike-frame-environmental-impact (link) +[20]: https://off.road.cc/content/news/starling-cycles-publishes-environmental-footprint-assessment-and-policy-10513 (link) +[21]: https://sciforum.net/manuscripts/953/original.pdf (link) +[22]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344920303281 (link) +[23]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S136192092100047X (link) +[24]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42452-019-0721-z (link) +[25]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652620351258 (link) +[26]: https://treeze.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/Publications/Case_Studies/Mobility/leuenberger-2010-TwoWheelVehicles.pdf (link) +[27]: https://circularcycling.nl/product/from-marginal-gains-to-a-circular-revolution/ (link) +[28]: https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/u-s-petition-that-calls-for-end-of-built-to-fail-bikes-gaining-support-in-b-c (link) +[29]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxdgq9/mechanics-ask-walmart-major-bike-manufacturers-to-stop-making-and-selling-built-to-fail-bikes (link) +[30]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsus.2021.785036/full (link) +[31]: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/overview-of-the-electricity-production-3/assessment (link) +[32]: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/20/7817 (link) +[33]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212827122001214 (link) +[34]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344919301090 (link) +[35]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car (link) +[36]: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-are-kept-longer-200000-is-new-100000.html?_r=2&ref=business&pagewanted=all& (link) +[37]: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/6/1550 (link) +[38]: https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/131212/1/M%20Christensen%202015%20the%20unstable%20lives%20of%20bicycles%20ver2%20postprint.pdf (link) +[39]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03611981221084692 (link) +[40]: https://www.lulu.com/search?adult_audience_rating=00&contributor=Kris+De+Decker&page=1&pageSize=10&sortBy=PRODUCT_SALES_30_DAYS (link) +[41]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302788070a5b5200d-pi (link) +[42]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302788070a5b5200d-800wi (image) +[43]: https://krisdedecker.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099229e8883302b6852a8a55200d-pi (link) + |