Pros and Cons
Cargo bikes have much to commend them. They have some advantages over motorized vehicles such as:
- less likely to be stuck in traffic congestion
- don't create air pollution problems (e.g. enclosed warehouses and industrial plants)
- don't create safety problems (e.g. crowded pedestrian areas)
- cost less to operate at a profit for businesses
- cost less to operate for households
- are not limited by fuel availability
- are not limited by the availability of on-street parking
- are not restricted for environmental reasons (e.g. protected lands)
- are more efficient for short order production or distribution schedules or for the last mile phase of delivery
- won't generate sparks (due to electrical components) in refineries, chemical, petrochemical and many other industries where there is a fire hazard threat.
A limitation of a human-powered utility vehicle is the relative weakness of human power compared to many motors, leaving a narrow scope for balancing tare weight, payload, geographical and topographical range against each other. These limitations might in some cases dissuade some people from using cargo bikes, whereas others still find them useful, and have been in increasing numbers.
Some cargo bike makers and users utilize power assist motors (often with electric motors) to complement the power of the cyclist. Power assist can increase the payload and range of cargo bikes, but also increases the cost of the bicycle and requires a fuel or electrical source.
Because of the unavoidable physical demands on a driver who also has to propel the vehicle, and the lack of protection against either the elements or other traffic, there is also a potential for working conditions becoming a problem. Technical efforts to improve conditions are hampered by the need for low weight and sturdy simplicity to achieve low costs in small-scale operations.
Read more about this topic: Freight Bicycle
Famous quotes related to pros and cons:
“Quite generally, the familiar, just because it is familiar, is not cognitively understood. The commonest way in which we deceive either ourselves or others about understanding is by assuming something as familiar, and accepting it on that account; with all its pros and cons, such knowing never gets anywhere, and it knows not why.... The analysis of an idea, as it used to be carried out, was, in fact, nothing else than ridding it of the form in which it had become familiar.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)