[jaxbot]

There's important findings in here, but it also reminds me of reactions to Prius, Tesla, public buses, etc., where people latch on to any viable excuse to continue their wasteful status quo.

Scooters aren't perfect, just like everything else, but there's some interesting innovations happening in micromobility that encourage more walkable cities and greener commutes. I'm excited to see where the trends head, even if the immediate scooter to car eco comparison is muddy.

[thatfrenchguy]

> that encourage more walkable cities and greener commutes

People using a bike that lasts 20 year is much greener than a shared scooter that dies after 100 days of use.

Having more walkable communities start with removing cars from the streets, adding density, by planning our cities. There is no magic tech that will fix the status quo.

[yholio]

Early bikes probably had similar reliability problems. Once the scooter design stabilizes, we will see refurbished units and mass recycling of consumables.

There is nothing inherently wasteful or prone to rapid breakdown in scooters; the fact that there is economic reason to dump them after 100 days only points out how inefficient is everything else and how improperly we tax environmental damage.

[gibolt]

Time of life isn't important, duration and ridden distance are. If a bike you have for 20 years only moves you 100 miles (probably less for most bike owners due to low utilizatio ) but a shared scooter can make it ~500 miles in 100 days, the scooter is better.

[jimmaswell]

Having to exert yourself so much all day isn't an option for everyone

[kennywinker]

You have to compare a scooter being used 24/7 as a rental with a bike being used similarly. Pretty sure docked or dockless ride share bikes need a lot of maintenance too.

[phillipcarter]

> There's important findings in here, but it also reminds me of reactions to Prius, Tesla, public buses, etc., where people latch on to any viable excuse to continue their wasteful status quo.

I think the point raised in here is that taking the bus or biking is generally more environmentally friendly. Existing solutions are already better for this particular metric.

The one thing this article hints at is that riders may have taken a more wasteful option had the scooters not been there. But it's only one survey.

[harlanji]

I saw a scooter traveling in a bike lane, and it seems like encouraging that combined with more bike lanes could be great. Traveling by car or transit with a bike to go the last few miles in the bay area is common, and I am honked at and cut off and pulled over almost every day on my bike and it could be better, as there is no economical bike path even between big cities on the peninsula just 5-10 miles apart... scooters could be used all along my daily path and bikes would instantly fill the lanes. Maids and landscapers could also switch to utility bikes if we connected wealthy and poor areas.

[noir_lord]

I mean the european continent (not so much the UK sadly) has shown that if you build a connected thought out cycle network it will get used heavily.

I was out with my stepson for a ride today and the UK is failing poorly on this one.

[mc32]

I think the main problem with these stand on scooters is their semi-disposability. The sit-on scooters (like the ones from Scoot/GenZe) are likely way more durable, people also likely treat them way better and overall have a better impact on environment. Moreover, they fit into traffic patterns a lot better (they fit well into traffic rules, whereas the stand on ones are often in a grey zone like sidewalks, etc).

[baybal2]

No, at least from my experience in China.

People like new, shiny bikes more and companies who bet on making "unkillable" bicycles lost out as nobody wanted to ride grimey, dirty, squeaky, and generally worn out bicycles.

Ones who gained a lot were ones who bet on flimsy, but more frequently and cheaply replaceable bikes.

[amelius]

Why not use e-bikes instead, where the user paddles along with the motor?