New posts

ebikes on the Shore

Oct. 31, 2019, 5:49 p.m.
Posts: 63
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Brocklanders

Yes Syncro we are always going to be buying newer bikes/tech as the sport progresses. I don't feel guilt, just feel better that I'm not in that cycle anymore. It's just the facts of outdoor sports is that much of the products we buy go in the dumpster and it's on to the next great thing. Reducing consumption just that little bit can make a big difference. Have had my 29er for coming on 3 years now, bought it used/demo with no plans to replace it anytime soon. 

That pic of the wooden bikes is gold by the way, shredding!

Maybe for some, but is it fair to say that about everyone? I know Norona is an easy target for a lot of reasons in this thread, but to light him up on the enviro front without knowing the whole story is a bit much imo. Sure the new bikes are better, but I think a lot of the push to buy them is falling prey to the marketing schtick of you need this because it's newer and better. If we want to fix the enviro damage that comes from rampant consumerism then the best way to do that in the short run is at the till vix luxury taxes. I have no problem with the idea of a luxury tax on expensive items that are used primarily for recreation like mtb's, snow mobiles, dirt bikes, etc.

I guess my biggest disappointment here is that trying to get some convo going on ways to help support trail crews manage increased trail wear got ignored in light of the enviro debate.

Nov. 1, 2019, 9:18 a.m.
Posts: 11
Joined: April 27, 2018

Syncro, I definitely wasn't trying to single out Norona! Just bring attention to the incremental cost of adding motors/batteries/etc to mountain biking. 

I agree that we need to find a way to support the trail crews and funding through some form of luxury tax would be great. Your idea would need to target online shoppers as well as the LBS...or else it'll just make them less competitive!

Nov. 1, 2019, 1:29 p.m.
Posts: 467
Joined: April 11, 2011

Posted by: syncro

Maybe for some, but is it fair to say that about everyone? I know Norona is an easy target for a lot of reasons in this thread, but to light him up on the enviro front without knowing the whole story is a bit much imo.

I don't understand what you're going on about? During one of his childlike rants, Norona alluded to the recycling of his batteries. Rightly, someone asked him where he recycled these batteries. His response (though hard to read) suggests that he doesn't recycle the batteries and that everyone who rides a bike for leisure is a hypocrite. What am I missing?

I'm not a pedal-assist hater, but I think it's important to point out that the footprint is bigger with these bikes. All personal mountain bike consumption is not equal. One of my favorite riding partners is on a 2006 Slayer and can't be bothered with the marketing. He consumes far less than I do. We should all acknowledge that there is a continuum of consumption and recognize where we exist on its scale. Far more important than generating funding for trail crews.


 Last edited by: Henry-Chinaski on Nov. 1, 2019, 1:33 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Nov. 1, 2019, 2:32 p.m.
Posts: 63
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Henry-Chinaski

I don't understand what you're going on about? During one of his childlike rants, Norona alluded to the recycling of his batteries. Rightly, someone asked him where he recycled these batteries. His response (though hard to read) suggests that he doesn't recycle the batteries and that everyone who rides a bike for leisure is a hypocrite. What am I missing?

I'm not a pedal-assist hater, but I think it's important to point out that the footprint is bigger with these bikes. All personal mountain bike consumption is not equal. One of my favorite riding partners is on a 2006 Slayer and can't be bothered with the marketing. He consumes far less than I do. We should all acknowledge that there is a continuum of consumption and recognize where we exist on its scale. Far more important than generating funding for trail crews.

Maybe I overstated the dogpile analogy, but so is saying that his post was a childlike rant. His response was that he's kept most of those ebikes short term and then sold them on to other people so the batteries didn't need to get recycled as they were still in use. He also stated that the batteries are good for many thousands of km's. The hypocrite suggestion came from the idea that a pedal mtb is way more green than an e-mtb. Sure the pedal mtb seems greener, but it's not by a huge margin. For example if the ebike is being ridden to the trail head instead of being driven then there's a chance the ebike may actually be more green. I'm not sure where you're from, but in BC there are mandatory recycling programs for most things these days including batteries, so the chance of an ebike battery here in BC not getting recycled is probably pretty low.

I agree that the footprint with ebikes is potentially bigger, but it's not guaranteed. Like you say there is a continuum of consumption and waste. Maybe that is more important than generating funding for trail crews but it's a bit off topic from my previous post that got this green bit started of trying to tie trail funding to mtb'ing purchases considering that they are essentially a luxury item - especially if one is buying new.

Nov. 1, 2019, 3:29 p.m.
Posts: 467
Joined: April 11, 2011

Posted by: syncro

Maybe I overstated the dogpile analogy, but so is saying that his post was a childlike rant. His response was that he's kept most of those ebikes short term and then sold them on to other people so the batteries didn't need to get recycled as they were still in use. He also stated that the batteries are good for many thousands of km's. The hypocrite suggestion came from the idea that a pedal mtb is way more green than an e-mtb. Sure the pedal mtb seems greener, but it's not by a huge margin. For example if the ebike is being ridden to the trail head instead of being driven then there's a chance the ebike may actually be more green. I'm not sure where you're from, but in BC there are mandatory recycling programs for most things these days including batteries, so the chance of an ebike battery here in BC not getting recycled is probably pretty low.

I agree that the footprint with ebikes is potentially bigger, but it's not guaranteed. Like you say there is a continuum of consumption and waste. Maybe that is more important than generating funding for trail crews but it's a bit off topic from my previous post that got this green bit started of trying to tie trail funding to mtb'ing purchases considering that they are essentially a luxury item - especially if one is buying new.

I've been perusing this forum for a long time.  Most of what Norona has posted over that time sounds like it comes from a child.  Not sure what to say...

I'm from Western Washington and have been in BC for 10 years.  Honestly, I have no idea what percentage of lithium batteries end up being recycled in BC, relative to other places.  I couldn't find it with quick google query.  You're right, the footprint probably does depend on your use case.  I personally couldn't ride an e-bike cleaner than and acoustic.  I hope people are using this line of thinking when purchasing these bikes.  I'm all-in on a luxury bike tax.

Nov. 1, 2019, 4:13 p.m.
Posts: 63
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: Henry-Chinaski

I've been perusing this forum for a long time. Most of what Norona has posted over that time sounds like it comes from a child. Not sure what to say...

I'm from Western Washington and have been in BC for 10 years. Honestly, I have no idea what percentage of lithium batteries end up being recycled in BC, relative to other places. I couldn't find it with quick google query. You're right, the footprint probably does depend on your use case. I personally couldn't ride an e-bike cleaner than and acoustic. I hope people are using this line of thinking when purchasing these bikes. I'm all-in on a luxury bike tax.

I agree that his posting style often leaves something to be desired, but that particular post wasn't so bad. Personally I think he would benefit from taking a bit of time to make clearer posts as it would help others understand his position a little better - Dave???

Unfortunately I doubt most people give much thought to enviro consideration when buying any sort of consumer product. In terms of mtb's I would feel confident in saying the enviro affects are not a consideration for probably 95% or higher of riders when buying a new bike or gear. It sucks, but until making the more enviro friendly option becomes easier or the less enviro friendly option becomes harder (more expensive) the avg person is not going to run their lives based on enviro concerns. A good example is the ratio of light truck and SUV sales to small car sales. People are more concerned about their own little bubble than how their actions affect the planet and everyone else on it.


 Last edited by: syncro on Nov. 1, 2019, 4:42 p.m., edited 2 times in total.
Nov. 1, 2019, 10:33 p.m.
Posts: 313
Joined: May 11, 2018

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Henry-Chinaski

I don't understand what you're going on about? During one of his childlike rants, Norona alluded to the recycling of his batteries. Rightly, someone asked him where he recycled these batteries. His response (though hard to read) suggests that he doesn't recycle the batteries and that everyone who rides a bike for leisure is a hypocrite. What am I missing?

I'm not a pedal-assist hater, but I think it's important to point out that the footprint is bigger with these bikes. All personal mountain bike consumption is not equal. One of my favorite riding partners is on a 2006 Slayer and can't be bothered with the marketing. He consumes far less than I do. We should all acknowledge that there is a continuum of consumption and recognize where we exist on its scale. Far more important than generating funding for trail crews.

Maybe I overstated the dogpile analogy, but so is saying that his post was a childlike rant. His response was that he's kept most of those ebikes short term and then sold them on to other people so the batteries didn't need to get recycled as they were still in use. He also stated that the batteries are good for many thousands of km's. The hypocrite suggestion came from the idea that a pedal mtb is way more green than an e-mtb. Sure the pedal mtb seems greener, but it's not by a huge margin. For example if the ebike is being ridden to the trail head instead of being driven then there's a chance the ebike may actually be more green. I'm not sure where you're from, but in BC there are mandatory recycling programs for most things these days including batteries, so the chance of an ebike battery here in BC not getting recycled is probably pretty low.

I agree that the footprint with ebikes is potentially bigger, but it's not guaranteed. Like you say there is a continuum of consumption and waste. Maybe that is more important than generating funding for trail crews but it's a bit off topic from my previous post that got this green bit started of trying to tie trail funding to mtb'ing purchases considering that they are essentially a luxury item - especially if one is buying new.

Syncro, I agree with most of what you post here but I cannot get on board with luxury taxes for mtb. The government spends tons of money on things for the health of our population. Swimming pools, tennis courts, beaches etc. Volunteer built and maintained trails on vacant land is far from a luxury activity. Sure, I have some nice bikes but that doesn't mean I'm rich. Many mountain bikers arrive with bikes on their trailer hitch that are worth more than the car carrying them.

Mountain biking is a decent tourist draw for BC. It has literally transformed towns like squamish and Cumberland. In Cumberland, there are more people in the Forrest than in the community centre any night of the week. In my opinion the government should be spending more on mountain biking. Creating access to quality trails is good for the health of our population and the economy. 

I pay way more taxes than I would prefer and aside from streets and sewage, use very little our government provides. I don't see Mountain biking as a luxury activity, save that monicker for golf or something like that. That being said, I do believe everyone should be contributing through donations, trail passes and participating in maintenance

Nov. 2, 2019, 7:29 a.m.
Posts: 84
Joined: March 1, 2017

" That being said, I do believe everyone should be contributing through donations, trail passes and participating in maintenance"

Especially the ones riding twice a day every day on E-bikes ;)

Nov. 3, 2019, 9:55 a.m.
Posts: 63
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: RAHrider

Syncro, I agree with most of what you post here but I cannot get on board with luxury taxes for mtb. The government spends tons of money on things for the health of our population. Swimming pools, tennis courts, beaches etc. Volunteer built and maintained trails on vacant land is far from a luxury activity. Sure, I have some nice bikes but that doesn't mean I'm rich. Many mountain bikers arrive with bikes on their trailer hitch that are worth more than the car carrying them.

Mountain biking is a decent tourist draw for BC. It has literally transformed towns like squamish and Cumberland. In Cumberland, there are more people in the Forrest than in the community centre any night of the week. In my opinion the government should be spending more on mountain biking. Creating access to quality trails is good for the health of our population and the economy. 

I pay way more taxes than I would prefer and aside from streets and sewage, use very little our government provides. I don't see Mountain biking as a luxury activity, save that monicker for golf or something like that. That being said, I do believe everyone should be contributing through donations, trail passes and participating in maintenance

Fair point and I would like to see more govt funding for mtn biking too. But compared to things like say swimming,  I'd guess that mtb participation numbers pale in total province wide. And something like tennis differs in that it is basically a one time capital investment that needs little to no maintenance. I think a better comparison would be something like playing fields, where regular maintenance is required. As for the luxury moniker I'm looking at the cost of new bikes these days as well as upkeep, mtbing is not exactly a cheap sport to participate in.  I get your point here though as I am all about the min-max idea and try to ride on the cheap, but even at that it's still an expensive activity.

Nov. 3, 2019, 2:45 p.m.
Posts: 861
Joined: March 18, 2017

^ Looks like a new low spec’ed FS complete on a proper frame is in the $3500-4000 range. An ebike is $5000+

Biking is an expensive sport. Especially once you add in a new Tacoma TRD and roof top tent

Nov. 3, 2019, 8:49 p.m.
Posts: 1591
Joined: May 23, 2006

Posted by: Endur-Bro

^ Looks like a new low spec’ed FS complete on a proper frame is in the $3500-4000 range. An ebike is $5000+

Biking is an expensive sport. Especially once you add in a new Tacoma TRD and roof top tent and 

fyp

Nov. 23, 2019, 3:58 p.m.
Posts: 49
Joined: Aug. 11, 2015

https://electrek.co/2019/11/23/drycycle-electric-bicycle-quadricycle/

Nov. 23, 2019, 10:17 p.m.
Posts: 504
Joined: Nov. 6, 2006

?

Nov. 26, 2019, 6:43 p.m.
Posts: 728
Joined: Aug. 14, 2003

Not the shore, but just another indication of where this is leading: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/us-forest-service-sued-over-ebikes-in-tahoe-national-forest.html 

Nov. 26, 2019, 11:05 p.m.
Posts: 1591
Joined: May 23, 2006

far out!

Forum jump: