The study isn’t saying that they arent. Its saying that the users of shared e-bikes and e-scooters were previously:
walking
using a non-motorized bike
or not making the trip at all.
They werent using public transportation, rideshares or cars to begin with, so it isnt reducing them. Thats the full extent of the study and it quantified that.
I kinda believe that. Indeed if I think of my escooter usage it always occurred to save me from walking or taking public transport. It hardly if ever replaced my car usage.
Super anecdotal, so keep your grains of salt handy, but for me and at least 1 other person I know, they've replaced a short drive to the office almost completely.
For me, they replaced getting a second car when my partner started working a bit further away. I've even found myself walking the full hour+ to the office I'm in these days if I leave early enough, depending on my mood as I get to the scooter.
I also worked at a place, and I think this is common, where such rides are reimbursable. Car ownership costs are not.
Better transportation option than what? And very environmentally friendly compared to what? You're replying to someone who's comparing it to _walking_ among other things. Scooters certainly are not more environmentally friendly than walking. Is it a better option than walking? I guess it might be when comparing the ease of range. Though its range is certainly worse than something like say biking.
How many people are moved by shared scooters over its lifetime and how much energy went into its production and maintenance? Depending on the answers to these questions, shared scooters could certainly be worse in general. These seem to be the sort of questions the original study is trying to address.
There's a concept of environmental justice, where those most responsible for climate change should have to take the most drastic actions to respond to it. And then there's those who advocate for (or at least strongly insinuate that we should) deny folks access to shared e-bikes because then they'll be forced to walk.
I agree. Mobility pretty much directly correlates with QoL. It's a trip to the bar, to see grandma, to the supermarket that doesn't screw you on price, to the job you don't hate.
But people are gonna get some ideological whiplash because they're so used to slinging around tropes about induced demand being bad.
They werent using public transportation, rideshares or cars to begin with, so it isnt reducing them
That seems counter-intuitive. If I had to get somewhere not served by public transport, I would simply drive there. Having a conveinient way to get an e-bike once I get to the closest transit stop is the thing that would make me consider not taking the car.
The study has percentages of what people did what, multiple cities, multiple sample sizes, multiple breakdowns of population. Some were using cars and public transportation. More weren't.
Then study is doing a bogus comparison then. All forms of transportation are bad for environment when the alternative is people are forced to stay home.
Comments
The study isn’t saying that they arent. Its saying that the users of shared e-bikes and e-scooters were previously:
walking
using a non-motorized bike
or not making the trip at all.
They werent using public transportation, rideshares or cars to begin with, so it isnt reducing them. Thats the full extent of the study and it quantified that.
So therefore, worse.
I kinda believe that. Indeed if I think of my escooter usage it always occurred to save me from walking or taking public transport. It hardly if ever replaced my car usage.
Super anecdotal, so keep your grains of salt handy, but for me and at least 1 other person I know, they've replaced a short drive to the office almost completely.
For me, they replaced getting a second car when my partner started working a bit further away. I've even found myself walking the full hour+ to the office I'm in these days if I leave early enough, depending on my mood as I get to the scooter.
I also worked at a place, and I think this is common, where such rides are reimbursable. Car ownership costs are not.
Improving people's mobility isn't "worse". Giving someone a better transportation option that is also very environmentally friendly is a good thing
Better transportation option than what? And very environmentally friendly compared to what? You're replying to someone who's comparing it to _walking_ among other things. Scooters certainly are not more environmentally friendly than walking. Is it a better option than walking? I guess it might be when comparing the ease of range. Though its range is certainly worse than something like say biking.
How many people are moved by shared scooters over its lifetime and how much energy went into its production and maintenance? Depending on the answers to these questions, shared scooters could certainly be worse in general. These seem to be the sort of questions the original study is trying to address.
There's a concept of environmental justice, where those most responsible for climate change should have to take the most drastic actions to respond to it. And then there's those who advocate for (or at least strongly insinuate that we should) deny folks access to shared e-bikes because then they'll be forced to walk.
I don't understand your point.
I agree. Mobility pretty much directly correlates with QoL. It's a trip to the bar, to see grandma, to the supermarket that doesn't screw you on price, to the job you don't hate.
But people are gonna get some ideological whiplash because they're so used to slinging around tropes about induced demand being bad.
The study isn't weighing that.
Its just saying emissionAmount(method) < emissionAmount(otherMethod)
results might surprise you
That seems counter-intuitive. If I had to get somewhere not served by public transport, I would simply drive there. Having a conveinient way to get an e-bike once I get to the closest transit stop is the thing that would make me consider not taking the car.
Did these guys get public funding for this?
The study has percentages of what people did what, multiple cities, multiple sample sizes, multiple breakdowns of population. Some were using cars and public transportation. More weren't.
I skimmed the article and I commented.
Then study is doing a bogus comparison then. All forms of transportation are bad for environment when the alternative is people are forced to stay home.
haha ding ding ding
well the study wasn't making an opinion about it and just posted the results of their finding