Connect with us

Published

on

The increasing popularity of electric bicycles with their convenient electric boost has seen more and more commuters riding each day, especially car drivers who wouldn’t have otherwise opted for two wheels. This growth in cycling has spawned calls for improved bike lanes and additional bicycling infrastructure.

Some drivers have interpreted this call for safer bike lanes as if it was some type of “war on cars”. In actuality, car drivers should love seeing more people on bikes and e-bikes. In fact, it’d be better for them if they encouraged more people to switch to bikes. Here’s why.

More cyclists means less traffic

It shouldn’t take any major leaps of logic to realize that each person riding a bike to work or the store can help take another car off the road. Even if you never plan to give up your car entirely, each bike rider means one less car currently on the road creating traffic. Remember: you aren’t stuck in traffic; you are traffic.

But what you might not realize is just what a big impact on traffic reduction bikes can make. A study in Belgium found that when just 10% of drivers switch to two-wheelers, traffic congestion decreases by 40%! Another study in Atlanta, Georgia found that during a period when the city banned rental scooters, travel time for car trips increased by around 10%. And that’s even with many people still riding their own private scooters and bikes!

Suffice it to say that the more people using bikes, scooters, motorcycles, and other personal vehicles, the less traffic for everyone.

More bikes means more parking

You know who doesn’t take up parking spots? Cyclists. The next time you’re driving laps around the block looking for parking or zig-zagging through a packed parking lot, remember that the reason for the lack of parking spots is that everyone is driving a car, just like you. If more people rode bikes, you’d have more empty parking spots.

It’d be pretty easy, too. If you supported initiatives that encourage more people to ride a bike in your city, you’d be sitting pretty in your parking spot more often. It doesn’t cost that much to replace that painted stripe on the ground with bollards, separating the bike lane in a safe way that encourages more people to ride bikes. Just think of all those big, beautiful parking spots those cyclists would be freeing up!

You could have better roads

No one likes driving on beaten-up, pockmarked roads. No one likes dodging road debris. And no one likes waiting for lengthy road construction projects that repair all of that accumulated road damage.

You probably see where this is going. Bikes don’t wear down road surfaces or leave hub caps in the middle of intersections. They’re lightweight vehicles that often don’t even mingle with cars on roads – at least not when they’re given their own protected bike lanes to use.

What you might not realize is just how extreme the difference in road wear truly is. The damage to a road increases with the weight of the vehicle according to the fourth power law. To oversimplify it, a vehicle that is twice as heavy per axle doesn’t do twice as much road damage, but rather 16 times as much. If you consider the average cyclist and bike weight to be 250 pounds compared to an average car at 4,000 pounds, that car is doing around 65,000 times the damage to the road surface. The difference is mind-boggling.

If more people rode bikes, there’d be incredibly less wear and tear on the roads. That means roads would be smoother and more comfortable each day, and there’d be less frequent road work performing repairs. Ultimately, that makes everyone’s lives better.

electric street sweeper for bike lanes

Drivers will feel better when other people ride bikes

When more people ride bikes around you instead of driving, you’ll feel better.

Stick with me, I’ll show you why.

Even the most ardent car drivers have a basic understanding that the exhaust coming out of their car is “not good”. If someone asked you to put your lips around the tailpipe as they turn on your car, you’d probably protest. And I’m guessing the same goes for if someone asked your kid to do the same.

So we all know car emissions are bad. But you might not realize just how bad. Studies put the number of premature deaths worldwide due to automotive exhaust pollution at around a third of a million people each year. That amounted to 361,000 people in 2010 and 385,000 in 2015.

The exhaust from combustion engines is a killer, plain and simple. People literally use car exhaust to kill themselves. Here’s a grim metric from Australia: until catalytic converters became standard, the rate of suicide by car exhaust increased faster than the rate of vehicle registrations.

All of this car exhaust in the air is quite simply poisoning you. Yes, statistically speaking you will likely not be one of the nearly 400,000 people this year to actually die from it. But what other medical problems is it still causing you? The more people that switch from cars to bikes, the less particulate pollution is in the air and the healthier you will be.

And don’t for a second think “Ok, but maybe people can just drive electric cars and that will fix it.” Electric vehicles don’t have tailpipe emissions, but their heavier weights actually cause more tire pollution. Those microscopic bits of tire that get flung into the air eventually either get breathed in or settle into the water system. Either way, they work their way into our bodies and kill us in a slightly different way. We’re only recently learning just how bad this stuff is for us. In fact, particulate pollution from tires is up to 2,000 times worse than tailpipe emission pollution from modern cars. Fun!

And don’t even get me started on the extremely carcinogenic brake pad pollution from cars and trucks.

Long story short: more people riding bikes means that you live in a cleaner and healthier world. Your morning coffee has less tiny bits of tire in it and you won’t die as early from preventable causes like lung cancer or one of dozens of other ailments caused by car pollution.

toyota mpg car driver exhaust

More people riding bikes makes you richer

Want more money? Tell your friends to ride a bike.

I mean, you too could also save a huge amount of money riding a bike. But even if you’re sticking to your car, other people riding bikes saves you money.

That reduced traffic? It saves you fuel cost and increases your productivity by spending less time idling in the middle of the road.

That reduced road wear? Those are your tax dollars that don’t have to be spent on road repairs.

That increased health of the society around you? There are untold healthcare savings there. Insurance companies don’t have to charge as much, dropping your own premiums. Tax dollars don’t have to go towards as much healthcare. You don’t have to buy your kid an inhaler because he never got asthma from the extra car exhaust produced by drivers like you.

That’s all extra money in your pocket, all because a bunch of people started riding their bikes.

aventon soltera electric bike

What have we learned?

Here’s the thing: all of these benefits can only happen if more people get out of their cars and get onto a bike. More people need to turn from drivers into riders. Electric bikes, which make cycling easier (and can make it basically effortless if you use a throttle-controlled e-bike) have made the biggest strides in getting more people onto bike seats. So if you really want to enjoy these benefits, consider giving a bike a try.

But even if you can never see yourself getting around without your car, then you can still enjoy every single one of these benefits simply by encouraging others to use bikes. Support bike lanes being installed in your city. Support incentives for e-bikes. Support safety campaigns that help drivers become more aware of e-bikes. Hell, take an extra glance yourself at intersections for cyclists.

You can sit pretty in your SUV and live a better life simply by helping the rest of us feel better riding our bikes. It’s one of those rare cases where a rising tide lifts all ships. Let’s ride that tide to a more cycling-friendly world, baby!

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

The aluminum sector isn’t moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

Published

on

By

The aluminum sector isn't moving to the U.S. despite tariffs — due to one key reason

HAWESVILLE, KY – May 10

Plant workers drive along an aluminum potline at Century Aluminum Company’s Hawesville plant in Hawesville, Ky. on Wednesday, May 10, 2017. (Photo by Luke Sharrett /For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Aluminum

The Washington Post | The Washington Post | Getty Images

Sweeping tariffs on imported aluminum imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump are succeeding in reshaping global trade flows and inflating costs for American consumers, but are falling short of their primary goal: to revive domestic aluminum production.

Instead, rising costs, particularly skyrocketing electricity prices in the U.S. relative to global competitors, are leading to smelter closures rather than restarts.

The impact of aluminum tariffs at 25% is starkly visible in the physical aluminum market. While benchmark aluminum prices on the London Metal Exchange provide a global reference, the actual cost of acquiring the metal involves regional delivery premiums.

This premium now largely reflects the tariff cost itself.

In stark contrast, European premiums were noted by JPMorgan analysts as being over 30% lower year-to-date, creating a significant divergence driven directly by U.S. trade policy.

This cost will ultimately be borne by downstream users, according to Trond Olaf Christophersen, the chief financial officer of Norway-based Hydro, one of the world’s largest aluminum producers. The company was formerly known as Norsk Hydro.

“It’s very likely that this will end up as higher prices for U.S. consumers,” Christophersen told CNBC, noting the tariff cost is a “pass-through.” Shares of Hydro have collapsed by around 17% since tariffs were imposed.

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

The downstream impact of the tariffs is already being felt by Thule Group, a Hydro customer that makes cargo boxes fitted atop cars. The company said it’ll raise prices by about 10% even though it manufactures the majority of the goods sold in the U.S locally, as prices of raw materials, such as steel and aluminum, have shot up.

But while tariffs are effectively leading to prices rise in the U.S., they haven’t spurred a revival in domestic smelting, the energy-intensive process of producing primary aluminum.

The primary barrier remains the lack of access to competitively priced, long-term power, according to the industry.

“Energy costs are a significant factor in the overall production cost of a smelter,” said Ami Shivkar, principal analyst of aluminum markets at analytics firm Wood Mackenzie.  “High energy costs plague the US aluminium industry, forcing cutbacks and closures.”

“Canadian, Norwegian, and Middle Eastern aluminium smelters typically secure long-term energy contracts or operate captive power generation facilities. US smelter capacity, however, largely relies on short-term power contracts, placing it at a disadvantage,” Shivkar added, noting that energy costs for U.S. aluminum smelters were about $550 per tonne compared to $290 per tonne for Canadian smelters.

Recent events involving major U.S. producers underscore this power vulnerability.

In March 2023, Alcoa Corp announced the permanent closure of its 279,000 metric ton Intalco smelter, which had been idle since 2020. Alcoa said that the facility “cannot be competitive for the long-term,” partly because it “lacks access to competitively priced power.”

Similarly, in June 2022, Century Aluminum, the largest U.S. primary aluminum producer, was forced to temporarily idle its massive Hawesville, Kentucky smelter – North America’s largest producer of military-grade aluminum – citing a “direct result of skyrocketing energy costs.”

Century stated the power cost required to run the facility had “more than tripled the historical average in a very short period,” necessitating a curtailment expected to last nine to twelve months until prices normalized.

The industry has also not had a respite as demand for electricity from non-industrial sources has risen in recent years.

Hydro’s Christophersen pointed to the artificial intelligence boom and the proliferation of data centers as new competitors for power. He suggested that new energy production capacity in the U.S., from nuclear, wind or solar, is being rapidly consumed by the tech sector.

“The tech sector, they have a much higher ability to pay than the aluminium industry,” he said, noting the high double-digit margins of the tech sector compared to the often low single-digit margins at aluminum producers. Hydro reported an 8.3% profit margin in the first quarter of 2025, an increase from the 3.5% it reported for the previous quarter, according to Factset data.

“Our view, and for us to build a smelter [in the U.S.], we would need cheap power. We don’t see the possibility in the current market to get that,” the CFO added. “The lack of competitive power is the reason why we don’t think that would be interesting for us.”

How the massive power draw of generative AI is overtaxing our grid

While failing to ignite domestic primary production, the tariffs are undeniably causing what Christophersen termed a “reshuffling of trade flows.”

When U.S. market access becomes more costly or restricted, metal flows to other destinations.

Christophersen described a brief period when exceptionally high U.S. tariffs on Canadian aluminum — 25% additional tariffs on top of the aluminum-specific tariffs — made exporting to Europe temporarily more attractive for Canadian producers. Consequently, more European metals would have made their way into the U.S. market to make up for the demand gap vacated by Canadian aluminum.

The price impact has even extended to domestic scrap metal prices, which have adjusted upwards in line with the tariff-inflated Midwest premium.

Hydro, also the world’s largest aluminum extruder, utilizes both domestic scrap and imported Canadian primary metal in its U.S. operations. The company makes products such as window frames and facades in the country through extrusion, which is the process of pushing aluminum through a die to create a specific shape.

“We are buying U.S. scrap [aluminium]. A local raw material. But still, the scrap prices now include, indirectly, the tariff cost,” Christophersen explained. “We pay the tariff cost in reality, because the scrap price adjusts to the Midwest premium.”

“We are paying the tariff cost, but we quickly pass it on, so it’s exactly the same [for us],” he added.

RBC Capital Markets analysts confirmed this pass-through mechanism for Hydro’s extrusions business, saying “typically higher LME prices and premiums will be passed onto the customer.”

This pass-through has occurred amid broader market headwinds, particularly downstream among Hydro’s customers.

RBC highlighted the “weak spot remains the extrusion divisions” in Hydro’s recent results and noted a guidance downgrade, reflecting sluggish demand in sectors like building and construction.

— CNBC’s Greg Kennedy contributed reporting.

Continue Reading

Environment

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Published

on

By

One of the world’s largest wind farms just got axed – here’s why

Danish energy giant Ørsted has canceled plans for the Hornsea 4 offshore wind farm, dealing a major blow to the UK’s renewable energy ambitions.

Hornsea 4, at a massive 2.4 gigawatts (GW), would have become one of the largest offshore wind farms in the world, generating enough clean electricity to power over 1 million UK homes. But Ørsted announced that it’s abandoning the project “in its current form.”

“The adverse macroeconomic developments, continued supply chain challenges, and increased execution, market, and operational risks have eroded the value creation,” said Rasmus Errboe, group president and CEO of Ørsted.

Reuters reported that Ørsted’s cancellation of Hornsea 4 would result in a projected loss of up to 5.5 billion Danish crowns ($837.85 million) in breakaway fees and asset write-downs. The company’s market value has declined by 80% since its peak in 2021.

The cancellation highlights significant challenges currently facing offshore wind development in Europe, particularly in the UK. The combination of higher material costs, inflation, and global financial instability has made large-scale renewable projects increasingly difficult to finance and complete.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Ørsted’s decision is a significant setback to the UK’s energy transition goals. The UK currently has around 15 GW of offshore wind, and Hornsea 4’s size would have provided almost 7% of the additional capacity needed for the UK’s 50 GW by 2030 target, according to The Times. Losing this immense project off the Yorkshire coast could hamper the UK’s pace of reducing dependency on fossil fuels, especially amid volatile global energy markets.

The UK government reiterated its commitment to renewable energy, promising to work closely with industry leaders to overcome financial and logistical hurdles. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told reporters in Norway that the UK is “still committed to working with Orsted to seek to make Hornsea 4 happen by 2030.”

Ørsted says it remains committed to its other UK-based projects, including the Hornsea 3 wind farm, which is expected to generate around 2.9 GW once completed at the end of 2027. Despite the challenges, the company emphasized its ongoing commitment to the British renewable market, pointing to the critical need for policy support and economic stability to ensure future developments.

Yet, the cancellation of Hornsea 4 demonstrates that even flagship renewable projects are vulnerable in the face of economic pressures and global uncertainties, which have been heightened under the Trump administration in the US.

Read more: The world’s single-largest wind farm gets the green light


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

Published

on

By

Is the Tesla Roadster ever going to be made?

The Tesla Roadster appears to be quietly disappearing after years of delay. is it ever going to be made?

I may have jinxed it with Betteridge’s Law of Headlines, which suggests any headline ending in a question mark can be answered with “no.”

The prototype for the next-generation Tesla Roadster was first unveiled in 2017, and it was supposed to come into production in 2020, but it has been delayed every year since then.

It was supposed to get 620 miles (1,000 km) of range and accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Site default logo image

It has become a sort of running joke, and there are doubts that it will ever come to market despite Tesla’s promise of dozens of free new Roadsters to Tesla owners who participated in its referral program years ago.

Tesla uses the promise of free Roadsters to help generate billions of dollars worth of sales, which Tesla owners delivered, but the automaker never delivered on its part of the agreement.

Furthermore, many people placed deposits ranging from $50,000 to $250,000 to reserve the vehicle, which was supposed to hit the market 5 years ago.

The official timelines from Tesla are pretty useless at this point since they haven’t stuck to any of them, but the latest official one dates back to July 2024 when CEO Elon Musk said this:

“With respect to Roadster, we’ve completed most of the engineering. And I think there’s still some upgrades we want to make to it, but we expect to be in production with Roadster next year. It will be something special.”

He said that Tesla had completed “most of the engineering”, but he initially said the engineering would be done in 2021 and that was already 3 years after the prototype was unveiled and a year after it was supposed to be in production:

Musk commented on the Roadster again in October 2024, but he didn’t reiterate the 2025 timeline. Instead, he called the new Roadster “the cherry on the icing on the cake.”

Tesla’s leadership has been virtually silent about the new Roadster since. Two Tesla executives even had to be reminded about the Roadster by Jay Leno after they “forgot” about it when listing upcoming new Tesla vehicles with tri-motor powertrain.

There was one small update about the Roadster in Tesla’s financial results last month.

The automaker has a table of all its vehicle production, and the Roadster was updated from “in development” to “design development” in the table:

It’s not clear if that’s progress or Tesla is just rephrasing it. Either way, it is not “construction”, which makes it unlikely that the Roadster is going into production this year.

If ever…

Electrek’s Take

It looks like Tesla owes about 80 Tesla Roadsters for free to Tesla owners who referred purchases, and it owes significant discounts on hundreds of units.

It’s hard for me to believe that Tesla is not delivering the new Roadster because the vehicle program would start about $100 million in the red, but at this point, I have no idea. It very well might be the reason.

However, I think it’s more likely that Tesla is just terrible at bringing multiple vehicle programs to market simultaneously. Case in point: it launched a single new vehicle in the last five years.

At this point, I think it’s more likely that the Roadster will never happen. It will join other Tesla products like the Cybertruck Range Extender.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending