I have. It sucks but it’s possible and because I live in a mountainous area I avoid that problem by using less assist so everything lasts longer.
The broader point I was trying to make is that If you’re trying to allocate the limited raw materials to the types of transport that benefit people the most then pushing e-bikes to lead acid makes a lot of sense. Yeah, the bikes could benefit from a more power dense battery, but they have backup pedals and ultimately their rider is the majority of the loaded bikes weight.
Electric cars and trucks weigh at least ten times what a person does and are generally used for longer distances than e-bikes so it makes more sense to use very energy dense batteries in them.
Again, I’m speaking from a position that recognizes the proliferation of electric vehicles in China and recognizes that the raw materials used to make lithium batteries are finite and in high demand, not from the position of trying to optimize the e-bike.
Just get rid of cars and fix proper biking and public transportation infrastructure. No need for that many cars, electric or not. Lithium is finite, the mines are horrible. But we’re getting nuclear diamond batteries soon, they are a massive upgrade.
China has very developed bicycle infrastructure and massive public transportation compared to almost anywhere else. There are fewer car owners per capita than other countries. It’s still a smart play to use the hand of state to take steps to allocate the more energy dense batteries to applications that require them.
As I said before: Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.
I have. It sucks but it’s possible and because I live in a mountainous area I avoid that problem by using less assist so everything lasts longer.
The broader point I was trying to make is that If you’re trying to allocate the limited raw materials to the types of transport that benefit people the most then pushing e-bikes to lead acid makes a lot of sense. Yeah, the bikes could benefit from a more power dense battery, but they have backup pedals and ultimately their rider is the majority of the loaded bikes weight.
Electric cars and trucks weigh at least ten times what a person does and are generally used for longer distances than e-bikes so it makes more sense to use very energy dense batteries in them.
Again, I’m speaking from a position that recognizes the proliferation of electric vehicles in China and recognizes that the raw materials used to make lithium batteries are finite and in high demand, not from the position of trying to optimize the e-bike.
Seems like cars don’t all need 300 mi range, but a 5 lb weight difference in a bike is huge.
Just get rid of cars and fix proper biking and public transportation infrastructure. No need for that many cars, electric or not. Lithium is finite, the mines are horrible. But we’re getting nuclear diamond batteries soon, they are a massive upgrade.
China has very developed bicycle infrastructure and massive public transportation compared to almost anywhere else. There are fewer car owners per capita than other countries. It’s still a smart play to use the hand of state to take steps to allocate the more energy dense batteries to applications that require them.
As I said before: Maybe these better chemistries that will replace lithium are just around the corner. I certainly don’t count unhatched chickens.