I don’t get it. Because humans breathe more when they pedal?
How about: you need to consume calories to turn pedals and if those calories come from certain sources (cows) a larger carbon footprint is generated.
God knows, imma just speculating a hypothesis.
Please help and share the source of this, I’m always looking for fun and creative marketing examples LOL
I would love to know how the pure genius have managed to come to a conclusion like this, must be some serious number crunching and comparing Apples to Elephants 
1 Like
I’m not moving the frame. Standard bicycles are still included in that assessment.
That’s exactly it. They’re more efficient at converting electricity to kinetic energy than we are at converting calories to muscle power.
1 Like
I can do better than this. I recommend dieting and fasting and not moving an inch. That’ll definitely be “more efficient” won’t it.
Guy
2 Likes
Also less farting would be good 
2 Likes
It’s a big stretch to say they are more carbon efficient than a human powered bicycle though, obviously the battery has a significant environmental impact even if a 100x less than a gasoline powered scooter or car .
Most of us could do with burning off our extra calories anyway.
2 Likes
Didn’t realise it was some kind of competition. It’s just literally what ‘carbon efficient’ means. And the motor is more carbon efficient than a human body at converting energy into work. Nothing controversial about it, dunno why some people are pissing their pants. Reminds me why I tend to stay offline.
I think most of us here share your joy with e-bikes.
That doesn’t mean we need to guzzle the koolaid used to market them nowadays, as several posters are quietly pointing out to you.
Sorry if this offends you.
Guy
1 Like
The carbon efficiency is to do with the work produced while moving. You’re referring to the manufacturing cost, although when you do the math they both even out thanks to the more efficient engine. Of course you can’t account for things like child labour, slavery, etc involved in the creation of the battery, but that’s a function of capitalism, not something inherent in the production of batteries.
I’m not guzzling any kool-aid, I’m just not regurgitating decade old data.
So it turns out that cycling a kilometer, depending on how efficiently you pedal and what your diet consists of, runs at anywhere from 16-50g of CO2 per km. Conversely, an electric bike using a modern motor, not an ancient one like the ‘skeptics’ here seem to be familiar with, runs at an average of 18-22g depending on whether or not you include the manufacture of the ebike. So in all but the most extreme cases I’ll stand by what I said.
Why not buy a sofa instead? Much more carbon efficient per hours usage. Also keeps you away from those environmental killing exercises those planet killing doctors are recommending, so double benefit 
5 Likes
What is what you love about your bike? Because once it is converted it will be a different bike, you may like it more, or not. It’ll depend on what you actually like about it now.
Well those motor and battery has weight. So your bike performance is going to go way down. It’s just how it is.
They add about 3-4 kg in weight, which will only be a few percent on top of the combined bike and rider weight. They provide propulsion, so obviously the performance will go up rather than down.
To the OP what sort of kit are you considering? Only ask as my father fitted one of the front wheel hub types to one of his bikes a few years ago and it felt really odd to ride. He ended up buying a proper E-bike in the end.
Sorry I should say when it’s not assisting, it affects performance. Like when the battery is out.
A lot of this back and forth can be avoided by offering or requesting citations
1 Like
Do electric assist bike need registration, insurance and all that like e bikes?