> “An e-bike is a car trip replacer,” Cherry said, “but an e-cargo bike is a car replacer. An e-cargo bike offers a chance to do just about anything that most Americans need a car to do, like school runs, grocery runs, and so on.”
I don't really agree with this. Cars are faster, can go further, they haul more, and they are comfortable to ride in any weather conditions. While I think that some people could make do with an e-bike instead of a car (or maybe one less car for a family), replacing a car with an e-bike would require a lot of sacrifices that I don't see the averge American being willing to make.
And in my case, as someone who enjoys riding a bike and is even willing to do it in the rain, I don't see it as replacing a car trip but rather a bus trip. For the three months of the year when it snows and it's not safe/possible to ride a bike to the office, I ride a bus instead (I would prefer to drive my car, but parking is too expensive/inconvenient).
> Even more baffling, Congress chose to make any e-bike costing over $4,000 ineligible for a credit, eliminating almost all e-cargo bikes.
A quick google search turns up lots of cargo e-bikes for less than $4,000. [1]
> And even with the motor providing some of the muscle, the cyclist will receive a surprisingly good workout.
I wouldn't really call it a "workout". I find it to be about the same amount of exertion as walking (at a fairly leisurely pace). So definitely better than driving, and for sedentary people it might provide some meaningful benefit. But I have actually been considering switching to a regular bike for commuting just for the added exercise.
[1] https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/a25054215/best-cargo-bi...