$1500 Tax Credit for Bike Purchases
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 1,729
Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 87 50th Daccordi, 79 & 87 Guerciotti's, 90s DB/GT Mtn Bikes, 90s Colnago Master and Titanio, 96 Serotta Colorado TG, 95/05 Colnago C40/C50, 06 DbyLS TI, 08 Lemond Filmore FG SS, 12 Cervelo R3, 20/15 Surly Stragler & Steamroller
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 600 Post(s)
Liked 777 Times
in
495 Posts
Bill should be amended to credit all greener and more heathy commuting like any biking, walking, running.
Should require proof of commuting records.
Many organizations already credit car/van poolers.
This would reward commuters needing new bikes or extra income for saving gas.
Likes For joesch:
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,839
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6934 Post(s)
Liked 10,938 Times
in
4,673 Posts
I don't think it's any more ridiculous than a $7500 tax credit for a Porsche Taycan 4S.
I think it would be better if it was targeted specifically to e-Cargo bikes rather than pure recreational ones. If it kickstarts a few American manufactures what's wrong with that? Wouldn't be the first or last manufacturer helped by the tax structure. About 1 out of every 3 dollars today didn't even exist last March, so if we are using the National credit card willy-nilly we might as well some of it to get more people on bikes and more cycling infra-structure out if it.
I think it would be better if it was targeted specifically to e-Cargo bikes rather than pure recreational ones. If it kickstarts a few American manufactures what's wrong with that? Wouldn't be the first or last manufacturer helped by the tax structure. About 1 out of every 3 dollars today didn't even exist last March, so if we are using the National credit card willy-nilly we might as well some of it to get more people on bikes and more cycling infra-structure out if it.
If we split the difference, I'd say that Bill is about right.
Likes For Koyote:
#29
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
Thanks, Koyote. I learned something today.
Likes For AlmostTrick:
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,839
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6934 Post(s)
Liked 10,938 Times
in
4,673 Posts
You're welcome.
In case you are interested, and never had the opportunity to take a course in macroeconomics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation
In case you are interested, and never had the opportunity to take a course in macroeconomics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation
#31
Junior Member
I'll agree with you on the Taycan though, if you are buying a Porsche it's almost a sin to buy one without a real engine, just for the sound.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 478
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked 252 Times
in
147 Posts
I don't think it's any more ridiculous than a $7500 tax credit for a Porsche Taycan 4S.
I think it would be better if it was targeted specifically to e-Cargo bikes rather than pure recreational ones. If it kickstarts a few American manufactures what's wrong with that? Wouldn't be the first or last manufacturer helped by the tax structure. About 1 out of every 3 dollars today didn't even exist last March, so if we are using the National credit card willy-nilly we might as well some of it to get more people on bikes and more cycling infra-structure out if it.
I think it would be better if it was targeted specifically to e-Cargo bikes rather than pure recreational ones. If it kickstarts a few American manufactures what's wrong with that? Wouldn't be the first or last manufacturer helped by the tax structure. About 1 out of every 3 dollars today didn't even exist last March, so if we are using the National credit card willy-nilly we might as well some of it to get more people on bikes and more cycling infra-structure out if it.
Motorcycles had a section in that rebate as well, I think it was around 2500 max. I have quit following the rebates so I dont know what current status is.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hollister, CA (not the surf town)
Posts: 1,734
Bikes: 2019 Specialized Roubaix Comp Di2, 2009 Roubaix, early 90's Giant Iguana
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
549 Posts
One of the sponsors, Jimmy Panetta, is my rep and I will definitely write him. I don't have a problem with incentivizing activities that improve the environment, etc. but I believe the benefit of this will be very minimal. If someone buys an e- mountain bike, who otherwise would not be riding in the mountains, that does the environment zero good. How many of these subsidized bikes will actually replace the use of a car? This looks more like it's intended to subsidize the ebike industry. Note: Specialized HQ is also represented by Mr. Panetta if I'm not mistaken.
The other thing I'll mention to Jimmy is how bout spending some money on bike infrastructure. Very few roads have decent shoulders to ride on around here and the ones that do are almost never swept so flats are a regular occurrence.
Much better ways to spend the money IMHO.
The other thing I'll mention to Jimmy is how bout spending some money on bike infrastructure. Very few roads have decent shoulders to ride on around here and the ones that do are almost never swept so flats are a regular occurrence.
Much better ways to spend the money IMHO.
Likes For Ogsarg:
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 478
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked 252 Times
in
147 Posts
One of the sponsors, Jimmy Panetta, is my rep and I will definitely write him. I don't have a problem with incentivizing activities that improve the environment, etc. but I believe the benefit of this will be very minimal. If someone buys an e- mountain bike, who otherwise would not be riding in the mountains, that does the environment zero good. How many of these subsidized bikes will actually replace the use of a car? This looks more like it's intended to subsidize the ebike industry. Note: Specialized HQ is also represented by Mr. Panetta if I'm not mistaken.
The other thing I'll mention to Jimmy is how bout spending some money on bike infrastructure. Very few roads have decent shoulders to ride on around here and the ones that do are almost never swept so flats are a regular occurrence.
Much better ways to spend the money IMHO.
The other thing I'll mention to Jimmy is how bout spending some money on bike infrastructure. Very few roads have decent shoulders to ride on around here and the ones that do are almost never swept so flats are a regular occurrence.
Much better ways to spend the money IMHO.
#35
Newbie racer
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,406
Bikes: Propel, red is faster
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1575 Post(s)
Liked 1,569 Times
in
974 Posts
My thing is that sure, in the US it is an increasing thing. If they said "e-bikes get the money or nobody gets it", I can't say not to give it a shot. I just don't believe the existing infrastructure is at the usage level like it is in Europe for bike commuting.
It's still 50/50 a toy.
But, fewer cars, whatever. Give it a shot. Maybe demand on the infrastructure will drive improvement there that benefits us all!
It's still 50/50 a toy.
But, fewer cars, whatever. Give it a shot. Maybe demand on the infrastructure will drive improvement there that benefits us all!
#36
Hear myself getting fat
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Inland Northwest
Posts: 754
Bikes: Sir Velo A Sparrow
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times
in
134 Posts
If the battery is classed correctly...
https://www.newsbreak.com/news/15444...s-in-the-ocean
https://www.newsbreak.com/news/15444...s-in-the-ocean
Go Ahead, It's Legal
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 701
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Liked 418 Times
in
250 Posts
Thanks! I actually like M0 because it is the amount of the most ‘liquid’ money sloshing around. But I know some economists prefer the M2 number as better representation. The Federal Reserve shows M0 as +148% increase between Jan 2020 and Dec 2020 and has increased faster than M2. This isn’t counting the massive stimulus package approved in January or the one currently being considered, so even more dollars are being created out of thin air! Anyway, let’s use some free money for bike things.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,509
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20801 Post(s)
Liked 9,448 Times
in
4,666 Posts
I mean, this isn't far from the mark - some are acting like this is a zero sum game, but it's far from that. A little bill giving people a tax credit for 30% of their e-bike purchase wouldn't make a ripple in the bucket of the national budget.
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Upstate SC
Posts: 1,692
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 815 Post(s)
Liked 1,646 Times
in
776 Posts
Hmm, I wonder how the government would define an eligible e-bike?
Would I be able to purchase one of these cheap e-bike conversion kits, tell them I installed it on my $6,000 road bike, and get my $1500 tax credit? (Shame it didn't work well, and I had to 'remove' it. Oh well....)
Would I be able to purchase one of these cheap e-bike conversion kits, tell them I installed it on my $6,000 road bike, and get my $1500 tax credit? (Shame it didn't work well, and I had to 'remove' it. Oh well....)
Likes For Bald Paul:
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,349
Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,941 Times
in
1,904 Posts
I do not see it as a 0 sum game. It's a get it when it's made available game. A lot of the hands outs seem to keep flowing down the same polluted river. There are many crap rivers that the hand out can be dumped into, yet doesn't happen. If pointless spending is going to happen, at least choose different purposes. So far it's a broken record of spending.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
-Oh Hey!
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,349
Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,941 Times
in
1,904 Posts
Hmm, I wonder how the government would define an eligible e-bike?
Would I be able to purchase one of these cheap e-bike conversion kits, tell them I installed it on my $6,000 road bike, and get my $1500 tax credit? (Shame it didn't work well, and I had to 'remove' it. Oh well....)
Would I be able to purchase one of these cheap e-bike conversion kits, tell them I installed it on my $6,000 road bike, and get my $1500 tax credit? (Shame it didn't work well, and I had to 'remove' it. Oh well....)
__________________
-Oh Hey!
-Oh Hey!
Likes For Troul:
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,839
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6934 Post(s)
Liked 10,938 Times
in
4,673 Posts
The proposals’s objective is to increase the use of bicycles in lieu of automobiles. Per dollar spent, a blanket subsidy for ebikes is probably not the best way to accomplish that goal.
Your rationalization is sort of like shrugging and then spending $2000 on an aero wheelset… When a $300 aero helmet would give the same advantage. (Not that I know whether that analogy is correct… But you get the idea.)
Likes For Koyote:
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,509
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20801 Post(s)
Liked 9,448 Times
in
4,666 Posts
The proposals’s objective is to increase the use of bicycles in lieu of automobiles. Per dollar spent, a blanket subsidy for ebikes is probably not the best way to accomplish that goal.
Your rationalization is sort of like shrugging and then spending $2000 on an aero wheelset… When a $300 aero helmet would give the same advantage. (Not that I know whether that analogy is correct… But you get the idea.)
Your rationalization is sort of like shrugging and then spending $2000 on an aero wheelset… When a $300 aero helmet would give the same advantage. (Not that I know whether that analogy is correct… But you get the idea.)
Likes For WhyFi:
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,839
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6934 Post(s)
Liked 10,938 Times
in
4,673 Posts
Since we're talking about federal money, let's go with grants to state and local governments for infrastructure, including (but not limited to) construction of bike lanes; creating better interfaces for cycle commuters who also use busses and trains (plenty of examples of this in some cities); more racks; more citi bikes (perhaps with free access for households that already qualify for other means-tested programs such as SNAP, or something else that can serve as a proxy for 'low-income'); tax incentives for employers to provide bike storage, showers, and health insurance breaks for employees who ride to work; free helmets and lights.
Is that enough?
I have no problem with using taxes and subsidies to incentivize people to behave in more socially-beneficial ways. But as an economist, I've spent a good chunk of my career studying the ways in which this can be done most effectively...And an across the board ebike incentive is likely NOT the most efficient way to get people out of their cars. That is pretty obvious to anyone who's actually read the data.
Likes For Koyote:
#45
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,604
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10947 Post(s)
Liked 7,473 Times
in
4,181 Posts
Authored by Congressmen Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) and Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), the Electric Bicycle Incentive Kickstart for the Environment (E-BIKE) Act supports the use of e-bikes as a zero-carbon transportation mode. Compared to other transportation modes, the bill recommends e-bikes because they are more affordable and accessible.
“E-bikes are not just a fad for a select few; they are a legitimate and practical form of transportation that can help reduce our carbon emissions,” Panetta said. “My legislation will make it easier for more people from all socio-economic levels to own e-bikes and contribute to cutting our carbon output. By incentivizing the use of electric bicycles to replace car trips through a consumer tax credit, we cannot only encourage more Americans to transition to greener modes of transportation, but also help fight the climate crisis.”
“E-bikes are not just a fad for a select few; they are a legitimate and practical form of transportation that can help reduce our carbon emissions,” Panetta said. “My legislation will make it easier for more people from all socio-economic levels to own e-bikes and contribute to cutting our carbon output. By incentivizing the use of electric bicycles to replace car trips through a consumer tax credit, we cannot only encourage more Americans to transition to greener modes of transportation, but also help fight the climate crisis.”
If people want ebikes for recreation, cool. If people want ebikes for transportation, cool. But lets not kid ourselves here- tere is 0 chance those bikes have a lower carbon effect than a typical manual pedal bike. Whether you account for energy and emissions from manufacture to end of life or you only account for energy and emissions from retail purchase to end of life, an ebike will require more energy and create more emissions.
PeopleForBikes, which supports this bill, urged bicycle advocates to send a short letter to their representative, encouraging their support. PFB said studies show that across the U.S. there would be an 11% decrease in carbon emissions with a 15% increase in e-bike mode share.
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,509
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20801 Post(s)
Liked 9,448 Times
in
4,666 Posts
You're not reading very carefully, then. You didn't see the posts about infrastructure? Okay, let me spell it out.
Since we're talking about federal money, let's go with grants to state and local governments for infrastructure, including (but not limited to) construction of bike lanes; creating better interfaces for cycle commuters who also use busses and trains (plenty of examples of this in some cities); more racks; more citi bikes (perhaps with free access for households that already qualify for other means-tested programs such as SNAP, or something else that can serve as a proxy for 'low-income'); tax incentives for employers to provide bike storage, showers, and health insurance breaks for employees who ride to work; free helmets and lights.
Is that enough?
I have no problem with using taxes and subsidies to incentivize people to behave in more socially-beneficial ways. But as an economist, I've spent a good chunk of my career studying the ways in which this can be done most effectively...And an across the board ebike incentive is likely NOT the most efficient way to get people out of their cars. That is pretty obvious to anyone who's actually read the data.
Since we're talking about federal money, let's go with grants to state and local governments for infrastructure, including (but not limited to) construction of bike lanes; creating better interfaces for cycle commuters who also use busses and trains (plenty of examples of this in some cities); more racks; more citi bikes (perhaps with free access for households that already qualify for other means-tested programs such as SNAP, or something else that can serve as a proxy for 'low-income'); tax incentives for employers to provide bike storage, showers, and health insurance breaks for employees who ride to work; free helmets and lights.
Is that enough?
I have no problem with using taxes and subsidies to incentivize people to behave in more socially-beneficial ways. But as an economist, I've spent a good chunk of my career studying the ways in which this can be done most effectively...And an across the board ebike incentive is likely NOT the most efficient way to get people out of their cars. That is pretty obvious to anyone who's actually read the data.
So, would the ebike bill preclude these other measures? I don't see that. How do you know efficient an ebike incentive would be? You say that it's pretty obvious to anyone who's read the data, yet you offered an example of a sporty $13k ebike when the bill only applies to bicycles $8k and under - are you sure that you read the data? How much are they projecting in tax incentives through this and how much is that relative to the infrastructure build out on the scale that you're that you're talking about? I'm thinking it's chump change, but show me the data that you've read. You also voiced misgivings about who would take advantage of the incentive, yet you ignored the fact that there would be a mandatory IRS report after two years so that incentives could be adjusted for equity among tax brackets.
Do I think that the bill is perfect? Of course not - that's silly. But two steps forward and one step back is still a step ahead of where we are and I've seen enough non-action because something isn't perfect.
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,509
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20801 Post(s)
Liked 9,448 Times
in
4,666 Posts
But lets not kid ourselves here- tere is 0 chance those bikes have a lower carbon effect than a typical manual pedal bike. Whether you account for energy and emissions from manufacture to end of life or you only account for energy and emissions from retail purchase to end of life, an ebike will require more energy and create more emissions.
No, they're not saying that. They're talking about an increase in mode share, the percentage of people that get to where they're going by that method of transportation. That's not an increase of 15% over the number of current ebike users; it's probably an order of magnitude increase or more over current ebike use.
Likes For WhyFi:
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,839
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6934 Post(s)
Liked 10,938 Times
in
4,673 Posts
oh my, some substance. *golf clap*
So, would the ebike bill preclude these other measures? I don't see that. How do you know efficient an ebike incentive would be? You say that it's pretty obvious to anyone who's read the data, yet you offered an example of a sporty $13k ebike when the bill only applies to bicycles $8k and under - are you sure that you read the data? How much are they projecting in tax incentives through this and how much is that relative to the infrastructure build out on the scale that you're that you're talking about? I'm thinking it's chump change, but show me the data that you've read. You also voiced misgivings about who would take advantage of the incentive, yet you ignored the fact that there would be a mandatory IRS report after two years so that incentives could be adjusted for equity among tax brackets.
Do I think that the bill is perfect? Of course not - that's silly. But two steps forward and one step back is still a step ahead of where we are and I've seen enough non-action because something isn't perfect.
So, would the ebike bill preclude these other measures? I don't see that. How do you know efficient an ebike incentive would be? You say that it's pretty obvious to anyone who's read the data, yet you offered an example of a sporty $13k ebike when the bill only applies to bicycles $8k and under - are you sure that you read the data? How much are they projecting in tax incentives through this and how much is that relative to the infrastructure build out on the scale that you're that you're talking about? I'm thinking it's chump change, but show me the data that you've read. You also voiced misgivings about who would take advantage of the incentive, yet you ignored the fact that there would be a mandatory IRS report after two years so that incentives could be adjusted for equity among tax brackets.
Do I think that the bill is perfect? Of course not - that's silly. But two steps forward and one step back is still a step ahead of where we are and I've seen enough non-action because something isn't perfect.
See post #23, above. If you want me to cite some of the studies, I guess I can do that. But you could also try to find something on your own.
btw, you have not responded substantively to a single thing I've written. I'm not arguing that this policy would not get anyone out of a car; I'm arguing that the same money could be used differently to better achieve the policy's goal. And the data supports that: cost is not the most significant factor in preventing people from bike commuting, according to the data in multiple studies. Infrastructure is the biggie.
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,509
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20801 Post(s)
Liked 9,448 Times
in
4,666 Posts
You're either taking part in a conversation without reading all of the posts, or you are being deliberately obtuse.
See post #23, above. If you want me to cite some of the studies, I guess I can do that. But you could also try to find something on your own.
btw, you have not responded substantively to a single thing I've written. I'm not arguing that this policy would not get anyone out of a car; I'm arguing that the same money could be used differently to better achieve the policy's goal. And the data supports that: cost is not the most significant factor in preventing people from bike commuting, according to the data in multiple studies. Infrastructure is the biggie.
See post #23, above. If you want me to cite some of the studies, I guess I can do that. But you could also try to find something on your own.
btw, you have not responded substantively to a single thing I've written. I'm not arguing that this policy would not get anyone out of a car; I'm arguing that the same money could be used differently to better achieve the policy's goal. And the data supports that: cost is not the most significant factor in preventing people from bike commuting, according to the data in multiple studies. Infrastructure is the biggie.
But yeah - cite the studies. I understand that infrastructure is a problem with pedal bikes, particularly with riders that can't maintain a decent speed relative to vehicular traffic (I've been there in spring after particularly fat winters), but I also know that the infrastructure is less problematic when you can hold a decent relative speed, so said studies had better factor the use ebikes on the current infrastructure. I've also already addressed the chicken/egg problem with cycling infrastructure pushback, and this was in two of the most bike-friendly metro areas in the US. Who's being obtuse and/or not reading?
And again, you're playing an either/or, zero sum game. It's not that. Last year, there were ~500,000 ebikes sold. What's a fair average price - $2k? 30% of that is $300MM. How much infrastructure does that get you? Not much, so are we really stealing from the starving mouth of infrastructure? I don't think so.
Look, this bill is supported by a pretty broad coalition and they have their studies, too -
A recent study found that if 15 percent of car trips were made by e-bike, carbon emissions would drop by 12 percent. 46% percent of e-bike commute trips replaced automobile commute trips according to a recent North American survey, and a more thorough review of European studies showed that e-bike trips replaced car trips 47% to 76% of the time.
Last edited by WhyFi; 02-10-21 at 04:46 PM.
#50
Sunshine
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 16,604
Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo
Mentioned: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10947 Post(s)
Liked 7,473 Times
in
4,181 Posts
I understand regular bikes may be more physically accessible to some, but to me, that doesnt mean regular bikes should be excluded. If the goal is to reduce vehicle use, then why limit the incentive to one specific type of bike? It especially doesnt make sense when the bike type that is included is going to be the least 'green'. I mean really, how does that make sense when the goal is lower emissions and smaller carbon footprint?
Include regular bikes AND ebikes. That would give greater access to those who cant financially swing an ebike even with the tax credit, but can afford a regular bike. Wouldnt greater access and less emissions be good?
My issue with this proposed bill isnt that ebikes are included, its that ebikes are all thats included. Heck, all the trendy forms of transportation could be included- scooter, bike, ebike, that skateboard ball thing, etc. They are all recreational and all potentially modes of transportation that reduce emissions compared to driving gas vehicles.
They're targeting cars. The energy required to move a person and 40 lbs of ebike is much less than moving a person and 4,000 lbs of SUV.
No, they're not saying that. They're talking about an increase in mode share, the percentage of people that get to where they're going by that method of transportation. That's not an increase of 15% over the number of current ebike users; it's probably an order of magnitude increase or more over current ebike use.
What they should have said is- If ebike use as a mode of transportation increases to 15% of all transportation, then there will be an 11% reduction in carbon emissions.
Clearly, I disliked the article. Which sucks because I like the general ideas of the article. Also, PFB sucks if they arent pushing for regular bikes to be included. I mean, its in their name- bikes. Support bikes as a mode of transportation and not just a certain section of bikes.