"Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
If you want to say what you think is important about an article, that's fine, but do it by adding a comment to the thread. Then your view will be on a level playing field with everyone else's: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
Mode choice, substitution patterns and environmental impacts of shared and personal micro-mobility seems to be the original title.
I was originally going to leave my comments at this. But I reviewed the article a little further. This is a different topic, but personally I did not find the title editorialized heavily. I found this quote fairly quickly within the above-the-fold abstract, which seems 100% in-line with what the "editorialized" title was:
> Substitution patterns reveal that personal e-scooters and e-bikes emit less CO2 than the transport modes they replace, while shared e-scooters and e-bikes emit more CO2 than the transport modes they replace.
This seems to be the key finding of the study, according to the abstract.
It resounds with some fears I have. From personal experience, I cry a little when I see a pickup or full-sized van with 3+ generators going down the street with a couple score of scooters charging. I'm still very very doubtful this micromobility really is worse than a full sized vehicle, but for sure, the way we charge these devices is very very shit & sub-optimal & the environmental impacts are dozens of times higher than they ought to be. I'd like to see civic systems with better charging infrastructure.
I'm now three times removed from my original comments & intent, so, apologies apologies apologies. I also am rate limited here though, so this is just how I have to operate. Being unable to reply properly is how I have been forced to live for years.
Quadruple & pentuple apologies, readers. I simply cannot help but express some truths as I neander along.
For that segment of the population, it's more analogous to going from horse and buggy to gasoline cars. The autonomy increased and more trips were made.
> I'm still very very doubtful this micromobility really is worse than a full sized vehicle
its only worse if the users were never going to use a full sized vehicle. which the article is saying the majority of users never were. thats why its "worse", for emissions, because the trips weren't going to be made using something else with more emissions, or weren't going to be made at all. the article isn't drawing any conclusion about the benefits of mobility, just giving data where there was an abscence of data.