In brief, UK reporting on "ebike" collisions and battery fires confuses lawful, UK/EU-compliant electric bicycles with illegal, unregistered, uninsured electric motorcycles. As a result, public perception is deeply skewed compared to the actual risks posed by bona-fide electric bicycles.

A similar phenomenon can be seen in California, but there is drafted legislation to mandate accurate advertising of "e-motos" versus ebikes, with fines accruing to vendors that fail to correctly represent what they're selling.

IMO, it's hard for me to blame consumers whom, given high gasoline/petrol prices, need some form of transportation that gets them where they need to go and minimizes external harms (eg automobile risk of injury). Evan correctly identifies vendors and importers that flout the law and push the legal risk into riders. At the same time, e-motos are legit for off-road use and here in California, they're great fun in that regard. At bottom, fair advertising isn't controversial; it's no different than wanting to know the ingredients in food products.

On a separate note, Evan also flagged a case of police misidentification and confiscation of a lawful e-bike. Which I find particularly surprising, given that UK police tend to be more uniformly instructed than their American counterparts. No doubt that Californian police have also confused ebikes with electric motorcycles on occasion, but the result in the UK seems is to go immediately to confiscation and destruction without any meaningful system of review. Which seems problematic, at best

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

Sounds to me like most of your complaints are about e-motos, not e-bikes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 14 hours ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 8 points 14 hours ago* (3 children)

    In the US e-bikes are legally capped by the manufacturer at 28mph, so anything faster than that should be categorized as an e-moto, even if it visually resembles a bicycle.

    Not sure about other countries but I think they're generally the same or lower.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago* (1 child)

    I'm not sure how it is in the US (I think it varies by state?), but where I am at least, a Class 3 28 mph e-bike would be considered a road vehicle. You would not be allowed to ride those on trails. Legally, they differ from motorcycles only in that they do not require a licence and insurance.

    Trail-rated e-bikes top out at Class 2 20 mph. In the UK where the guy in the video lives, it sounds like Class 1 15 mph is as high as you can go legally?

    Incidentally, even with a class 3, I think the throttle mode (where you don't need to pedal) is required to top out at 20 mph in most jurisdictions? The higher speeds are only allowed with pedal-assist. Some people remove the pedals altogether on a class 3, and that is illegal where I am.

    Anyway, if you see people sailing by at high speeds on trails, this is not legal in most places. The man in the video was trying to push for more clarity in the media that it is the illegal ebikes that are giving all the others a bad name.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

    Yes, I totally agree with you.

    The US is a bit complicated because there aren't really national laws governing trail usage. Most are managed by local municipalities and the rules vary. However, anecdotally I will say that most do not allow class 3 e-bikes. I know mine do not. However, based on comments I see it appears the rules are widely flouted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

    However, anecdotally I will say that most do not allow class 3 e-bikes. I know mine do not. However, based on comments I see it appears the rules are widely flouted.

    Yeah, they're technically not allowed in a lot of places. But there's absolutely zero enforcement of this.

    Part of the problem is that enforcement would be a huge pain. The difference between a legal and an illegal ebike is often impossible to discern at a distance, so actual effective enforcement would require stopping and closely inspecting all suspicious-looking ebikes, which would be a huge pain for people who are riding legal ones. (And would cost a lot of money to pay the enforcers.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 child)

    Yeah I agree with you. Not to mention the potential violence any amount of police involvement inevitably brings.

    However it's starting to feel like there needs to be some kind of solution. If we don't come up with a good one, a bad one may be forced on us. Unfortunately, I don't really have any easy fixes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago

    Well, there's the possibility of enforcement at the manufacture/import/sale level. Make it illegal to manufacture/import/sell any 'ebike' that's too powerful or too fast. (Defined as any vehicle in the general shape of a bicycle or tricycle, having bicycle-like pedals, and exceeding speed/power limits.)

    That moves enforcement away from the street level, making it less difficult and less dangerous.

    You'll still have some issues with previously existing overpowered ebikes, and from the occasional person who builds/modifies a DIY one of their own, but that will be much rarer and much less of a problem than what we have now, where anybody can buy one off of Amazon at any time ... often maybe not even realizing what exactly it is that they're buying.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

    It is trivial to hack them to 40 mph.

    But this is the danger of relative speed differences. 28 mph into a pedestrian could kill them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 hours ago (1 child)

    Honestly, on my regular analog bike, I rarely get above 15mph. 10-12mph is normal cruising speed. And hitting low to mid 20s on a downhill quickly starts to feel very dangerously fast.

    28mph is already a very generous speed limit, and IMO it should honestly be lower than that. (Outside of certain specialty applications, perhaps.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 14 hours ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

    I will say 28 can feel pretty fast when it's whizzing right by you. It sounds low if you're used to being in a driver's seat but it's not.

    I think this gets contentious because on streets, it's obviously safer for pedestrians for people to ride an e-bike than drive. And the higher speeds can be really crucial for people with longer commutes. Since I ride and walk mainly on city streets I've usually been against further regulation because I worry it will prevent people from moving away from cars that are way way more dangerous.

    But I keep hearing people people talk about mixed use trails, and there it obviously can be a safety issue. I'm not really sure what the best solution is. Ideally something that limits the conflict on trails but still allows people to ride in the road.

    It also seems like it must be demographically or geographically concentrated somehow because I've seriously never had an issue feeling threatened by a fast e-bike and I ride my (acoustic) bike every day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 hours ago (1 child)

    Even 20mph past someone walking is too fast. Unfortunately, that seems to be the norm for acoustic cyclists around here. I'm sure people on ebikes do it too, but I don't see them much.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago (1 child)

    I agree but what's the solution? Ideally separate walking and cycling paths but I don't really see that happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago (1 child)

    Just get rid of the car paths and there'd be no problem with getting separate paths. An option with more of a chance of happening would be just giving cyclists protected bike lanes on roads instead of just having them share the lane with cars going 40 mph.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago

    Well as you point out this isn't super likely to happen any time soon but also it doesn't address what seems to be the main point of contact which is shared use bike trails in parks. I suppose you could add a second parallel trail for just pedestrians but that seems quite expensive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago*

    E-Bikes are legally limited to 28mph max in the US as Class 3 (20mph on most trails as Class 1), and 15.5mph in the EU.

    I think the current laws just need better enforcement, ebikes already have perfectly reasonable speed limits in the US defined by law, and typically aren't allowed on bike paths or sidewalks in many places. But the enforcement is lacking, and instead states constantly try to create more and more ebike laws that just won't get enforced either.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

    That’s exactly my point: if they can go faster than 28mph they are e-motos not e-bikes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 13 hours ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

    You cannot tell by looking the difference between an ebike and an emoto. However an emoto will go much faster.

    I'm assuming level ground. Down hill they both (and an acoustic bike) can all get going dangerously fast.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 13 hours ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago

    I would expect rental bikes to only really be viable in busy places where there are a lot of pedestrians. Bikes are unsafe in those areas. Even a normal acoustic bike on a slight uphill is going to be too fast to share a path with pedestrians.

    What we need in busy situations is 4 different types of trails. One for those acting like a pedestrian, one for those acting like an acoustic bike, one for that acting like a slow speed car, and one for those acting like a high speed car. Acting is important, often you can choose to operate in different ways. However these is extremely expensive and needs a lot of space so we almost always compromise and put two different uses into one and then the conflicts you describe happens: there is no easy/cheap solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

    Sure… of course they can be dangerous.

    But that’s why you get pushback when you complain about “e-bikes”: there’s a big difference in the danger and you paint with too broad a brush.

    Mass and speed make all the difference and there’s an order of magnitude difference to an e-moto:

    • acoustic bike (10 kg, 20 km/h = 29 kN)
    • e-bike (20 kg, 30 km/h = 73 kN)
    • small e-moto (60 kg, 55 km/h = 340 kN)

    (Assuming 85 kg / 190-lb rider for all cases and typical speeds)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] -1 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

    was 100% an ebike rented from a local company

    This is precisely the sort of deceit which California's draft legislation would penalize. There's an implicit focus on Southern California, where tourists not familiar with local laws are convinced by sketchy shops that an e-moto is "just a bicycle". The idea is that by firmly defining what an e-moto is, it becomes a form of fraud or unfair business practice to advertise as an "ebike rental shop" but actually be flogging e-motos.

    I'm not aware of any other US State which is addressing this angle, so you may want to speak to your representative about misbehaving shops in your area.

    I don't know why you've chosen to dismiss my concerns here.

    I'm aware this wasn't directed at me, but please be mindful that when someone presses on the substance of your complaint, they may be trying to understand the attendant context, not because they want to belittle the consequences you've witnessed. And it matters, because the worst case scenario is to misidentify the root-cause and pass legislation that villifies the wrong party, while letting the real wrongdoers continue harming the public.

    There are real costs to just throwing ideas into law. If you're being chronically "shouted down" by others for supposed anti-ebike opinions, it may help to try understanding their context for why they view your opinion as such.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments