>>1981641I've done the math in uni once and while I don't remember I must say I suspect the numbers provided here ignore the extra nutrition the cyclist consumes. In fact the emissions associated with the production of the extra nutrition needed, assuming the average western diet, quickly catches up to the initial investment of producing the extra parts needed: Battery, motor, charger, control unit.
Electric motorcycles are still shit and gay IMO. But the fact remains that they are environmentally more friendly since a unit of energy in human nutrition is emission intensive and the human organism is pretty inefficient in terms of mechanical work. Meanwhile the whole well to wheel (or well to bottom bracket) chain for an electric system is very efficient and not very emissions intensive. It also scales far better.
But it is a theoretical non issue. Not using a murdercage and opting for the most efficient converter of energy to forward momentum at a given speed, the bicycle, just slashes emissions. The difference between electric motorcycles and bicycles is marginal in comparison.
Note: I have no knowledge let alone experience regarding the lifetime of the electric bits on an electric motorcycle and I am assuming the same lifetime as a bicycle has, which is very obviously wrong and as such the initial investment would have to be repeated several times.
