Biopower versus battery boost: The eco-balance of e-bikes

Road bikes and gravel bikes stand for efficiency, lightness and maximum propulsion under their own power like few other types of bike. Eating up kilometres, sporty commutes, experiencing nature away from traffic - all of this is classically "organic".

E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes, on the other hand, were long regarded as borderline products: heavier, technically more complex and with a supposedly poor environmental footprint. But this comparison falls short. The ecological assessment does not end with a look at frame weight or battery capacity, but only really begins with actual use.

Here in particular, e-road bikes and e-gravel bikes shift the balance significantly - similar to other types of e-bike. If you want to make a well-founded assessment of the life cycle assessment, you need to consider not only production, transport, wear and tear and recycling, but above all which means of transport can realistically be replaced. This is because a bike that is used more frequently and in a more versatile manner can achieve a better overall balance despite a higher production load.

Production: The ecological starting block

In the manufacturing phase, the advantages clearly lie with non-motorised bikes. Depending on the material mix and components, a modern road or gravel bike made of aluminium or carbon generates around 120-180 kg of CO2 equivalents. The main drivers are the frame, wheels and the energy-intensive carbon processing.

E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes are significantly higher. The motor, power electronics and, in particular, the lithium-ion battery increase the production footprint to around 280-330 kg of CO2 equivalents. The battery alone accounts for around 60-100 kg of CO2 equivalents.

Interim conclusion: the advantage of the classic bike

In terms of production, non-motorised road bikes and gravel bikes have a clear advantage. But this advantage is only a snapshot.

Transport: Globalisation meets weight

Whether organic or electric - road bikes and gravel bikes today follow the same global supply chains: frames from Asia, gear groups from Japan, motors from Europe, final assembly in Europe or Taiwan.
Transport accounts for only around 5-10 per cent of the total life cycle CO2 balance for both variants. The additional weight of e-road bikes and e-gravel bikes (4-8 kg) causes slightly higher transport emissions, but remains marginal in the overall context.

Interim conclusion: draw

Transport is not an ecological game changer - neither for the classic road bike nor for the e-road bike. Its share of the overall ecological footprint is relatively small, and the weight disadvantage of the e-bike is irrelevant.

Wear: the components suffer

There are differences in operation. E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes are somewhat heavier, and thanks to the motor, the torques are generally somewhat higher. This leads to greater wear on the brakes, tyres and drivetrain. Studies and workshop experience assume 10 to 20 per cent higher overall wear, especially on the chain and sprockets, as the motor torque introduces additional forces - even if modern mid-motors regulate very sensitively.

Interim conclusion: draw

This point also goes to the classic bike: in terms of material efficiency, non-motorised road bikes and gravel bikes are definitely more durable.

Substitution: This is where the balance sheet is decided

In all previous disciplines, non-motorised bikes are ahead in terms of eco-balance. But now come the crucial questions: frequency of use and car replacement. E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes are used more frequently and for longer distances, especially in everyday life:

• Organic racing bikes and gravel bikes are mainly used for sporting purposes - often on training laps or weekend rides. Only 20-30 per cent of journeys realistically replace car journeys.
• E-bikes achieve values of over 60 per cent car substitution, especially in commuter traffic.

Crucially, e-gravel bikes and e-road bikes compete directly with cars in terms of usage - not with walking or public transport. E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes in particular appeal to performance-orientated commuters: faster than classic trekking e-bikes, sporty, efficient and without the need to "break a sweat". If you regularly ride 15, 20 or more kilometres per route, an e-bike often permanently replaces the car - something that even trained organic riders often don't take on in everyday life. Classic racing bikes and gravel bikes, on the other hand, are mainly used for sporting and leisure purposes - they are a supplement to other modes of transport, but rarely an alternative.

Interim conclusion: advantage of electric drive

In terms of real-world modal shift, e-road bikes and e-gravel bikes are hard to beat ecologically. Experience shows that e-bikes of all types are used more frequently as commuter bikes than conventional bikes. The resulting savings in car kilometres have a high impact on the overall eco-balance,

Recycling: battery as a weak point

At the end of their life, organic bikes benefit from their simplicity. Aluminium, steel and many carbon fibres can be easily recycled. The critical point with e-bikes remains the battery. However, modern recycling processes now achieve 70-95 per cent recovery rates for valuable metals such as copper, nickel and cobalt. The EU Battery Regulation will significantly tighten take-back and recycling obligations from 2027.

Interim conclusion: the advantage of the classic bike

The e-bike has more challenges when it comes to recycling - but they are technically solvable and secured by regulations. The bottom line, however, is that the non-E types win in this discipline.

The comparison at a glance

The bottom line: billing does not start at the counter

From a purely technical point of view, non-motorised racing bikes and gravel bikes are the more environmentally friendly sports equipment. However, the ecological reality is not only created through production, transport and recycling, but mainly through everyday use. E-road bikes and e-gravel bikes show their strengths where organic bikes often fall behind: in regular commuting, over longer distances, under time pressure, topography and everyday constraints. If you consistently use your e-bike instead of a car, you not only compensate for the higher production CO2 footprint, but also significantly outperform the organic bike in ecological terms. In other words, the most sustainable road or gravel bike is not necessarily the one without a motor and battery - but the one that most frequently replaces the car.