A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think that e-bikes should be speed-limited when operating under power. They're motor vehicles, even if the motor is electric and the vehicle is a bike frame.
Anything going above 20mph has no business being in a bike lane.
I've got good news for you. That's already the case. E bikes already have a class system: I, II, and III. Class I is only allowed 20mph with pedal assest. Class II is allowed 20mph with pedal assist or a throttle. Class III is allowed 20mph with throttle and 28mph with pedal assist. Typically in America only up to Class II is allowed on bike paths. Anything beyond those capabilities is treated like a dirt bike/motorcycle; it's only supposed to ridden off road or plated to ride on the road.
The problem is this is dang near impossible to enforce. How many police are on the bike paths? How many people know these regulations?
yeah; I think the current system is overall pretty reasonable. the issue is really enforcement
And other countries don't use that class system either. UK to ride as an ebike needs to be 15mph pedal assist only and motor can't be over 250w. Anything else would be considered a motorcycle and require registration and insurance, also can't use bike lanes.
Not sure if there are many electric bikes with pedals that are sold as motorcycles.
That's really low speed. That feels like over reach, but that's from my American perspective I suppose.
It's likely a very slight underestimate. The EN-15194 standard comes out of the EU but has basically become the international standard definition of "safe, legal, ebike". It requires the motor to cut out at 25 km/h and have no more than 250 W.
It's about the speed that someone pottering about on a Dutch style bike is probably going, though it's quite slow for a road bike. The 250 W limit is the bigger problem. It's fine in the Netherlands, but for people in hillier countries it makes e-cargo bikes rather inaccessible.
That's 15.5mph, not far off. That makes the ebike barely worth it.
That makes the ebike barely worth it
Eh, I wouldn't go that far. As advocates very often say: ebikes aren't for making you go faster, they're for helping you go further. And the evidence bears that out: ebike riders do tend to ride further than regular bike riders do. They go about as fast as a casual cyclist usually will on the flat, and much faster up hills. It's not about speed, it's about convenience.
That said, I have advocated here in Queensland for increasing it from 25 to 32 km/h in the past, to bring it in line with America's 20 mph. And more recently I used my submission to a parliamentary inquiry to suggest a 35 km/h limit for users with a licence (the context here being that the government is proposing a law which will restrict ebikes to 10 km/h on footpaths and shared paths—which make up over 90% of the things called "bike paths" in my city—as well as requiring a licence for all ebikes, even EN-15194 25 km/h ones). As a stronger cyclist, when on flat ground I tend to average about 30 km/h and can go above that for reasonable periods of time, and I don't think it would be a safety risk for responsible adults to go just a hair faster than that.
But I really do want to emphasise that speed is not the primary advantage of an ebike, and it shouldn't be seen as if it is.
You don't live in the mountains, I presume?
The ebike benefit isn't for going faster. It's great for helping to climb mountains. 15.5 mph is FANTASTIC compared to walking up and pushing a bike
Which is why I use a regular bike, save on weight compared to hauling a useless motor and battery.
I’m used to them being limited to 25 kph (~15.5 mph) the high speed ones are considered mopeds with all their rules
I've clocked 40 mph coming down a mountain with just gravity and my leg power.
But that's why bike lanes don't make sense. We need space for passing.
Since E-bikes are a substitute for far more dangerous vehicles (cars), it only makes sense to address this once the danger of cars has been adequately addressed. Which we are light years away from in CA.
Putting more burdens on cyclists will just make more people drive. And driving is so so so much more dangerous than even the worst e-bike, this this very clearly makes people less safe.
Except e-bikes operate in many places that cars do not. Cars being an issue isn't an excuse for anarchy everywhere else. I've seen plenty of people on e-bikes driving 30+ km/h down a public pathway in a park; you won't see a car anywhere within 300 feet of this but it's a clear danger to those in the area.
And I'd hardly call a speed limit for a bike a "burden," and e-bikes have operated in a nebulous zone as mentioned above, they are motor vehicles.
Even if you had to get a plate and follow a speed limit, there are still a million reasons why people should get out of cars and onto bikes (e- or otherwise) to move themselves around.
Cars being an issue isn’t an excuse for anarchy everywhere else.
This doesn't really address the logic of what you're responding to though, and it clearly is a justification. If people are deterred from using ebikes for transportation and therefore use cars instead, then the resulting harm is whatever difference there is between injuries/deaths caused by an ebike and injury/death caused by a car over the same time period, it hardly matters for that where they are using them.
And I’d hardly call a speed limit for a bike a “burden,”
Whatever you call it, if there is an effect where a registration requirement results in more driving than otherwise, that has to be taken into account.
I'd be more for California physically limiting the speed of every vehicle sold in the state to 70 mph.
I thought you're gonna say 50kmph easily with a twist of a throttle but alas, it's only 30kmph, which can be achieved easily for a period of time by an average cyclist on a roadbike.
But i do agree ebike that can do more than 30kmph with a throttle are a danger to the pedestrians, it's already a moped, which is something people doesn't seems to realise.
My city just installed 15mph speed limits. I welcome regulation and citations for speeding e-bikes at 25-30mph. It's for safety.
Funny how there's vocal outcry when "rules for thee, not for me" breaks down.
I can cycle without a motor faster than 15mph, when cycling you don't even know your speed.
Here they just go by if you are going faster than is safe for the conditions, it isn't a specific speed but doing 25 in a busy street with pedestrians is probably considered dangerous. Would be illegal and almost certainly unenforced. Then again, cars speeding is rarely enforced either.
How do non ebike cyclists know their speed? It's easy to go above 15 mph on a push bike. And most push bikes don't have speedometers
As mentioned in another thread on the topic, the proposed rules essentially bring the e-bike rules in California in line with the rules in Europe.
I don't think energy should be wasted being against this
Licensing bikes will only hurt people that can't get a license. The issue is infrastructure and enforcement, neither of which are helped solely by adding licensing.
Pedelecs that stop providing power at 25 km/h are still not going to be licensed under the proposed rules - in line with EU rules on the matter.
E-bikes with a throttle are really just stealth motorcycles, and it's reasonable to treat them as such.
I have an ebike with a throttle, I only use the throttle to break inertia for the first 2 seconds and then I only peddle. It is nothing like a motorcycle. I would immediately stop using an ebike if it was treated as one. I ride safely, never exceeding 20 mph on flats and slow way down for pedestrians while getting passed by mamil's going 30 mph in unsafe conditions. I use bike infrastructure entirely, 50% of which is separated from traffic and ride 1500 miles a year commuting. There is no reason for me to be punished because some dirtbag on an e-dirtbike is being described as an ebike.
With a pedelec, you would get the power boost when pushing on the pedals, and you could turn it off if you're not into the assist. With regards to speed, it only assists up to 25 km/h, after that it's all leg power adding additional speed.
Fundamentally, if you ride the way you do, then there's basically no limitations under pedelec rules, so you should really welcome them - they only limit people using their throttle-supplied bikes in a less safe manner.
Just because you don't murder people doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws against it.
Whole lot of ford lobbyists here ig. bikes shouldnt be regulated. Period. I gurantee the next strategy of the car lobby is to just regulate alternatives into the ground. Oh you want a cheap vehicle to get around? That will be 1000 dollars registration, insurance, inspection, fees, and 80 hours of waiting in lines and making phone calls (we're only open on tuesday 9am to 11 am btw). No thank you, keep cycling free.
E-bike as a category is too wide and varied for this to be worthwhile.
Read the article, please.
Class 1 e-bikes stay without license.
Class 2 and 3 get licenses,
Class 1 and 2 are slowed down to 16 mph (25kmh), currently 20 mph (32 kmh)
Class 1 is analogous to EU pedelecs - you need to pedal for assist. Class 2 has a throttle instead. Class 3 is for higher speeds and children are not allowed to drive them.
What further category do you want?
Class 1 isn't getting licenses.
Class 3 isn't slowed down.
Great headline, I wonder why people are confused about if the e-bike they buy is illegal or not.
Not only that. Pedestrian space is becoming more and more part of delivery services that use ebikes. I'm all for evs, but It starts to feel like an erosion of walkways.
Dirtbikes have been regulated my whole life. How are these any different?
Part of the issue is that the category of "ebike" is quite large. It really needs to be split into multiple subcategories for regulation.
For bikes intended to mix with pedestrians, you definitely need to limit speed and weight. Europe's 250W, 25kph rules seem reasonable for this.
The problem most places have is the grey area between ebike and moped, particularly for cargo bikes. They are fast/heavy enough to be a risk to pedestrians, but not enough to be classed as motorbikes. They need some restrictions/licencing to keep pedestrian areas safe, but not so much that they get lumped in with cars.
You mean like into 3 classes of e-bikes? Like California already does? With these rules specifically applying to some of these classes and not to others, as it says in the article?
Like what do you want more? These rules would make Class 1 exactly like in the EU pedelecs (with more wattage).