Electric Cycle Subsidy

[Ackbar-Lsqkac]]

Hi

Are there currently any subsidies/incentives available for
those that switch to more more eco-friendly Electric Cycles
rather than traditional motor vehicles?

I'm looking at getting an Electric Cycle for going to work
on but am currently a little preturbed by the high price of
these machines.

Somebody mentioned that in some cases the goverment will
help with the funding. I am Diabetic and have decided to go
with an Electric Cycle because the high price of insurance
and the additional medical rulings for driving a motor
vehicle have basically priced me tottaly out of the market.

Any ideas as to what I can do or who to contact to get
me mobile?

Mick - Hull

[Peter Clinch]

AcKBaR[KAC] wrote:

> Any ideas as to what I can do or who to contact to get
> me mobile?

Don't know about the economics, but for an actual vehicle
I'd suggest getting in touch with Ben Cooper at Kinetics
(see http://kinetics.org.uk/). He can convert existing bikes
and/or supply purpose built electric assist bikes. They're
not the cheapest on the planet but you'll get what you pay
for AFAICT.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext.
33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177
Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Tony Raven]

AcKBaR[KAC] wrote:
> Hi
>
> Are there currently any subsidies/incentives available for
> those that switch to more more eco-friendly Electric
> Cycles rather than traditional motor vehicles?
>
> I'm looking at getting an Electric Cycle for going to work
> on but am currently a little preturbed by the high price
> of these machines.
>
> Somebody mentioned that in some cases the goverment will
> help with the funding. I am Diabetic and have decided to
> go with an Electric Cycle because the high price of
> insurance and the additional medical rulings for driving
> a motor vehicle have basically priced me tottaly out of
> the market.
>
> Any ideas as to what I can do or who to contact to get
> me mobile?
>

Not aware of any specific subsidies but you could see if
your employer will help by using the tax break on bicycles
that can halve the price. Have a look at http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-
news/article.php?id=3866 http://www.booost.uk.com/

If it doesn't work for an electric bike you could always get
a normal bike converted.

Tony

[Ambrose Nankive]

In news:h0eko1-alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
> in message <p7qdnX0tdcsDyyrdSa8jmw@karoo.co.uk>,
> AcKBaR[KAC] ('mick@corsair.karoo.co.uk') wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Are there currently any subsidies/incentives available
>> for those that switch to more more eco-friendly Electric
>> Cycles rather than traditional motor vehicles?
>
> I really don't see what's eco-friendly about an electric
> bicycle. All it does is move the point of pollution from
> the vehicle to the power station chimney, or, in the case
> of nuclear power stations, to the waste disposal site.

Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a maximum
power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it takes
less electricity to ride one than to post here from a
desktop computer.

> Get a pedal cycle, which is cheaper, and use your muscles.
> Better for you, better for your wallet, better for the
> environment.

Which is a slightly cantakerous way to put it. Encouragement
may be better.

I think diabetes is unlikely to cause problems with cycling
and getting exercise certainly improves the prognosis, but
you'd want to consult with your nurse specialist or GP to
make sure you're not going to go hypoglycaemic while doing
it, I guess.

And cycling really isn't too hard. Electric assist does make
things slightly less effort, but it's much cheaper to just
trundle along and get there in your own time, and get nice
low gears to help with the hills (although that may not be a
big issue in Hull, if my geography's correct). Batteries
also add a significant amount of weight that means they have
to be dragged around even when they've run out.

The mum of one of my friends has an electric bike which is
very good for her mobility, as she has bad arthritis, but in
general, if your muscles and joints don't give you medical
problems, you're best off cycling.

Hope that's helpful. Go for it: it should be much more fun
if you do it all yourself,

Ambrose

[Tony Raven]

Simon Brooke wrote:
>
> I really don't see what's eco-friendly about an electric
> bicycle. All it does is move the point of pollution from
> the vehicle to the power station chimney, or, in the case
> of nuclear power stations, to the waste disposal site.

At a power station the power is generated more efficiently
and there is much larger investment in cleaning up the
pollution by products

>
> Get a pedal cycle, which is cheaper, and use your muscles.
> Better for you, better for your wallet, better for the
> environment.

Still produces CO2 (you'd be surprised how much if you work
it out) and probably not a lot better over all than power
from a power station. Plus if you are diabetic it can cause
all sorts of problems managing blood sugar that you and I
are fortunate not to have to deal with, although overall
properly managed exercise has many benefits for diabetics.

Tony

[Ackbar-Lsqkac]]

Many thanks for that Tony. That was exactly what I was looking for. :)

Looks like i'll have to give my employer a dig in the ribs
to sort something out for me. Definitely a step in the right
direction.

"Tony Raven" <junk@raven-family.com> wrote in message news:2hqt6hFfv5v2U2@uni-
berlin.de...
> AcKBaR[KAC] wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Are there currently any subsidies/incentives available
> > for those that
switch
> > to more more eco-friendly Electric Cycles rather than
> > traditional motor vehicles?
> >
> > I'm looking at getting an Electric Cycle for going to
> > work on but am currently a little preturbed by the high
> > price of these machines.
> >
> > Somebody mentioned that in some cases the goverment will
> > help with the funding. I am Diabetic and have decided to
> > go with an Electric Cycle because the high price of
> > insurance and the additional medical rulings
for
> > driving a motor vehicle have basically priced me tottaly
> > out of the
market.
> >
> > Any ideas as to what I can do or who to contact to get
> > me mobile?
> >
>
> Not aware of any specific subsidies but you could see if
> your employer
will
> help by using the tax break on bicycles that can halve the
> price. Have a
look
> at http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=3866
> http://www.booost.uk.com/
>
> If it doesn't work for an electric bike you could always
> get a normal bike converted.
>
> Tony

[Paul Rudin]

"Ambrose Nankivell" <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:

> In news:h0eko1-alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk,
> Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:

> > I really don't see what's eco-friendly about an
> > electric bicycle. All it does is move the point of
> > pollution from the vehicle to the power station
> > chimney, or, in the case of nuclear power stations, to
> > the waste disposal site.
>
> Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a maximum
> power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it takes less
> electricity to ride one than to post here from a desktop
> computer.

Power != energy. Also the output energy is not the same as
the amount of energy you use to charge the batteries.

[Anonymous Cowar]

On Sat, 29 May 2004 04:32:24 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:

> "Ambrose Nankivell"
> <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:
>
>> In news:h0eko1-alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk,
>> Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
>
>> > I really don't see what's eco-friendly about an
>> > electric bicycle. All it does is move the point of
>> > pollution from the vehicle to the power station
>> > chimney, or, in the case of nuclear power stations, to
>> > the waste disposal site.

You could say the same about _any_ bicycle. I'm sure plenty
of fossil fuels get used, in the smelting of bicycle
components and their transport from Taiwan to the UK. It's
surely a matter of degree.

Anyway, CO2 isn't pollution - ask George Bush. Smog and
Chemicals are all that count.

>> Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a maximum
>> power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it takes
>> less electricity to ride one than to post here from a
>> desktop computer.
>
> Power != energy. Also the output energy is not the same as
> the amount of energy you use to charge the batteries.

Compare and contrast with the alternatives, like cars or 2-
stroke mopeds.

My guess is that most people with electric bikes will only
use the full power output going uphill. If this makes the
difference between someone being able to ride or not, more
power to them - I say.

AC

[Ambrose Nankive]

In news:m3hdtzykl3.fsf@ntlworld.com,
Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> typed:
> "Ambrose Nankivell"
> <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:
>
>> In news:h0eko1-alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk,
>> Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
>
>>> I really don't see what's eco-friendly about an
>>> electric bicycle. All it does is move the point of
>>> pollution from the vehicle to the power station
>>> chimney, or, in the case of nuclear power stations, to
>>> the waste disposal site.
>>
>> Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a maximum
>> power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it takes
>> less electricity to ride one than to post here from a
>> desktop computer.
>
> Power != energy. Also the output energy is not the same as
> the amount of energy you use to charge the batteries.

Fair point. Battery charging is about 90% efficient at high
speeds and electric motors are 60-70% efficient.

But of course power != energy. However most bike rides are
finite and predictable in length, unless I'm wrong.

A

[Paul Rudin]

anonymous coward <anonymous.coward@nospam.nowhere> writes:

> On Sat, 29 May 2004 04:32:24 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:
>
> > "Ambrose Nankivell"
> > <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:
> >
> >> In news:h0eko1-
> >> alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk, Simon Brooke
> >> <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
> >

> >> Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a
> >> maximum power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it
> >> takes less electricity to ride one than to post here
> >> from a desktop computer.
> >
> > Power != energy. Also the output energy is not the same
> > as the amount of energy you use to charge the batteries.
>
> Compare and contrast with the alternatives, like cars or
> 2-stroke mopeds.
>
> My guess is that most people with electric bikes will only
> use the full power output going uphill. If this makes the
> difference between someone being able to ride or not, more
> power to them - I say.
>

I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
required to "post here from a desktop computer" which is, I
think, misleading.

[Ambrose Nankive]

In news:m3d64nyb9l.fsf@ntlworld.com,
Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> typed:
> anonymous coward <anonymous.coward@nospam.nowhere> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 29 May 2004 04:32:24 +0100, Paul Rudin wrote:
>>
>>> "Ambrose Nankivell"
>>> <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>> In news:h0eko1-
>>>> alb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk, Simon Brooke
>>>> <simon@jasmine.org.uk> typed:
>>>
>
>>>> Well, there's the fact that they're limited to a
>>>> maximum power output of 150W (IIRC), which is to say it
>>>> takes less electricity to ride one than to post here
>>>> from a desktop computer.
>>>
>>> Power != energy. Also the output energy is not the same
>>> as the amount of energy you use to charge the batteries.
>>
>> Compare and contrast with the alternatives, like cars or
>> 2-stroke mopeds.
>>
>> My guess is that most people with electric bikes will
>> only use the full power output going uphill. If this
>> makes the difference between someone being able to ride
>> or not, more power to them - I say.
>>
>
> I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
> required to "post here from a desktop computer" which is,
> I think, misleading.

Well, I don't think it's that misleading, with chips now
pushing 100W in heat dissipation and 300W power supplies
common. Add a monitor into that, and you've got some quite
high energy consumption.

A

[Paul Rudin]

"Ambrose Nankivell" <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:

> In news:m3d64nyb9l.fsf@ntlworld.com, Paul Rudin
> <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> typed:
> >>
> >
> > I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
> > required to "post here from a desktop computer" which
> > is, I think, misleading.
>
> Well, I don't think it's that misleading, with chips now
> pushing 100W in heat dissipation and 300W power supplies
> common. Add a monitor into that, and you've got some quite
> high energy consumption.

Beacause power supplies are capable of pumping out 300W it
doesn't mean that they're doing so all the time.

But anyway you can make a post in a minute and then turn
your computer off.. so the energy expenditure involved in
running your computer for making a post isn't huge.

[Ambrose Nankive]

In news:m3vfifwdru.fsf@ntlworld.com,
Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> typed:
> "Ambrose Nankivell"
> <$FirstnameInitialofSurname$@onetel.net.uk> writes:
>
>> In news:m3d64nyb9l.fsf@ntlworld.com, Paul Rudin
>> <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> typed:
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
>>> required to "post here from a desktop computer" which
>>> is, I think, misleading.
>>
>> Well, I don't think it's that misleading, with chips now
>> pushing 100W in heat dissipation and 300W power supplies
>> common. Add a monitor into that, and you've got some
>> quite high energy consumption.
>
> Beacause power supplies are capable of pumping out 300W it
> doesn't mean that they're doing so all the time.
>
> But anyway you can make a post in a minute and then turn
> your computer off.. so the energy expenditure involved in
> running your computer for making a post isn't huge.

Well, it takes more than a minute to unsuspend my computer
from disk*, and on dialup, it takes another minute to
connect, etc, etc.

If we want to compare the energy consumption to something
else, then how about an hour's use of an electric bike at
full power is about the same as a minute in the shower or 8
seconds driving down the motorway at 90mph? But PCs still
use disgustingly large amounts of power compared to what
they should do, and electric bikes use insignificant amounts
compared to other motorised transport.

Ambrose

*but my computer only uses a max of 70W and an average of
about 25W, so the energy point is moot.

[Tony Raven]

Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
>
> If we want to compare the energy consumption to something
> else, then how about an hour's use of an electric bike at
> full power is about the same as a minute in the shower or
> 8 seconds driving down the motorway at 90mph?

...or boiling a kettle

Tony

[Chris Malcolm]

Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> writes:

>I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
>required to "post here from a desktop computer" which is, I
>think, misleading.

Exactly. Desktop computers are the cars of the computer
world. If you posted here from a Psion5mx which runs for 30-
50 hrs on a pair of AAs, and a mobile phone as modem, both
of which can easily be carried on a bicycle, posting here
only takes a fraction of a watt.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

[Geoff Pearson]

"Chris Malcolm" <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:cco8tq$1j9$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> writes:
>
> >I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
> >required to "post here from a desktop computer" which is,
> >I think, misleading.
>
> Exactly. Desktop computers are the cars of the computer
> world. If you posted here from a Psion5mx which runs for
> 30-50 hrs on a pair of AAs, and a mobile phone as modem,
> both of which can easily be carried on a bicycle, posting
> here only takes a fraction of a watt.
>
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445
> DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings,
> Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>

But their manufacture consumed huge amounts of energy -
possibly more than making a car. You have to add that energy
cost into the cost of posting here. On that basis desk tops
and Psions are probably about the same.

[Gawnsoft]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:19:10 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
<gspearson1647@hotmail.com> wrote (more or less):

>
>"Chris Malcolm" <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
>news:cco8tq$1j9$1@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>> Paul Rudin <paul.rudin@ntlworld.com> writes:
>>
>> >I was really respoding to the comparison with the energy
>> >required to "post here from a desktop computer" which
>> >is, I think, misleading.
>>
>> Exactly. Desktop computers are the cars of the computer
>> world. If you posted here from a Psion5mx which runs for
>> 30-50 hrs on a pair of AAs, and a mobile phone as modem,
>> both of which can easily be carried on a bicycle, posting
>> here only takes a fraction of a watt.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651
>> 3445 DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings,
>> Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
>> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>>
>
>But their manufacture consumed huge amounts of energy -
>possibly more than making a car. You have to add that
>energy cost into the cost of posting here. On that basis
>desk tops and Psions are probably about the same.

Are you really trying to contend that a Psion's small
transistor count over a few chips, a pair of PCBs and a
small case, is equivalent to that of a desktop PC, with it's
many PCBs, high chip count, many chips containing very high
transistor counts, and large cases, keyboards and displays?

Never mind the energy cost of cars, each of which has a
very considerable amount of chips and pcbs in it these
days, even before you go into the smelting and welding
energy costs of large metal body shells, suspension
componentry and engine parts?

(The manufacturing + decommisioning energy costs of cars
were reckoned (in an American study of 1990) to be
equivalent to 14 years use and maintenance energy costs, at
typical annual mileages, btw).

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

[Ambrose Nankive]

In news:14o0f0dvub77es2j7lbf9mi2unhtlr8dem@4ax.com,
Gawnsoft <xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> typed:
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:19:10 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
> <gspearson1647@hotmail.com> wrote (more or less):
>> But their manufacture consumed huge amounts of energy -
>> possibly more than making a car. You have to add that
>> energy cost into the cost of posting here. On that basis
>> desk tops and Psions are probably about the same.

A car uses 120 GJ [of energy] in manufacture, which is about
£800 worth of gas or £1600 worth of electricity (priced at
about 2.5p & 5p / kWh respectively). A Psion cost about £200
of which a significant amount was probably R & D, retailer
margin, etc, so I doubt it could come anywhere near even £50
worth of energy in its manufacture, i.e. 1/16th the amount.

> (The manufacturing + decommisioning energy costs of cars
> were reckoned (in an American study of 1990) to be
> equivalent to 14 years use and maintenance energy costs,
> at typical annual mileages, btw).

http://www.ilea.org/lcas/macleanlave1998.html (source of
above figure as well) gives 878 GJ of fuel for a 14 year
life cycle, plus 105GJ for refining and transporting the
fuel. I'd be interested in a citation for your figure.

Ambrose

[Gawnsoft]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 23:17:15 +0100, "Ambrose Nankivell"
<$firstname+n$@gmail.com> wrote (more or less):

>In news:14o0f0dvub77es2j7lbf9mi2unhtlr8dem@4ax.com,
>Gawnsoft
><xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> typed:
>> On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:19:10 +0100, "Geoff Pearson"
>> <gspearson1647@hotmail.com> wrote (more or less):
>>> But their manufacture consumed huge amounts of energy -
>>> possibly more than making a car. You have to add that
>>> energy cost into the cost of posting here. On that basis
>>> desk tops and Psions are probably about the same.
>
>A car uses 120 GJ [of energy] in manufacture, which is
>about £800 worth of gas or £1600 worth of electricity
>(priced at about 2.5p & 5p / kWh respectively). A Psion
>cost about £200 of which a significant amount was probably
>R & D, retailer margin, etc, so I doubt it could come
>anywhere near even £50 worth of energy in its manufacture,
>i.e. 1/16th the amount.
>
>> (The manufacturing + decommisioning energy costs of cars
>> were reckoned (in an American study of 1990) to be
>> equivalent to 14 years use and maintenance energy costs,
>> at typical annual mileages, btw).
>
>http://www.ilea.org/lcas/macleanlave1998.html (source of
>above figure as well) gives 878 GJ of fuel for a 14 year
>life cycle, plus 105GJ for refining and transporting the
>fuel. I'd be interested in a citation for your figure.

I'm trying to get it myself... it was a 1990 study, from
pone of the north-eastern US unis, e.g MIT or Harvard.

As soon as I get the name rank and serial number, I'll post.
(may take a while, for which I apologise in advance)

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk