E-Bike Injuries Are a Massive Burden, Say Surgeons
- Reference: 0179195538
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/09/13/007205/e-bike-injuries-are-a-massive-burden-say-surgeons
- Source link:
> Surgeon Jaison Patel is seeing more and more cases like this. "It's a massive burden on our department and I'm sure it's the same across the whole of London," he tells us. "If we can reduce the number of patients coming in with these sorts of injuries it would be great for the patients obviously, but also takes massive pressure off us in the NHS."
>
> Jaison deals with lower limb injuries. Just along the corridor his colleague Nick Aresti does the upper limbs. Nick explains that he is a cyclist himself, and it's something he encourages people to do for the benefit of their health. But, he has real concerns about e-bikes, and says: "What we've noticed with e-bikes is that the speed in which people are coming off is much higher and as a result, the injuries are much worse." He shows us X-rays of someone who has broken their collarbone. He explains that with e-bikes, the injuries they're seeing are much more severe, and as such, people are "struggling to get back to normality."
>
> Nick and Jaison both agree it's something they're seeing increasingly more of as time goes by, and they think the industry needs better regulation. "We should do something about it, I don't think we can let this carry on," Jaison says. Over recent days of course, thousands of Londoners have taken to e-bikes to help beat the strikes. For many it has been an essential way to get about. Currently, anyone aged 14 or over can legally ride an e-bike. The power output of an e-bike's motor should be capped at 250 watts, and the motor should not be capable of propelling the bike any faster than 15.5mph (25kph), according to government rules.
>
> London's Walking and Cycling Commissioner Will Norman says the rules need changing and says better regulation of the rentable electric bikes could be on the way. "We need to ensure that the vehicles are safe, that there's parking, they're not scattered all over the place, and that the batteries are safe," he says. "I'm really delighted that the government has now indicated in its English Devolution Bill that London and other cities across the UK will be getting more powers so again we can start regulating that, to ensure that they're safe for people to use and operate while they get around". The bill is currently going through parliament, and as yet there is no date for when it will be passed.
Duncan Dollimore, head of campaigns at Cycling UK, who are members of the Electric Bike Alliance, argues against the regulation of e-bike usage. "The cost of inactivity-related health issues to the NHS each year is 7.4 billion pounds, and people cycling saves them 1 billion pounds. We have seen a slight rise in the number of incidents involving hired e-bikes in London, but the health benefits of people cycling outweigh the risks by around 20 to one."
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2ejgrw9yepo
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Just a few days ago one of you idiots on rental motored two-wheelers nearly drove over my dog and would have injured me if I had not evaded the attack. Luckily, the idiot hit a streetlight and remained there whimpering and waiting for the ambulance, the police and the insurer.
Want to ride but are too lazy to pedal? Fuck you, drive in the street with the other motor vehicles, fucktard. You have no business on the sidewalk and the bike lanes. Incidentally, die in a battery fire while you're at it, disgusting
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that e-bikes, in general, attract riders with little riding experience. The primary hurdle of riding a bike is being fit enough to pedal across the various terrains. That limited the rider's speed until they developed stamina and experience.
Re:more anti-ebike BS (Score:5, Informative)
> I not only don't believe this, I believe this is an intentional lie.
What don't you believe about this? Newton's second law? Conservation of momentum? To be clear yeah this is a pointless hit piece, but the one point you're arguing against is also the single most obvious point as much as the sky is blue (or grey since we're talking about London). More weight, heavier bikes, higher speeds. All three are features inherent to e-bikes, all of them are obvious contributors to severity of injury and always have been on every mode of transport.
> Not a surprise, attacks against e-bikes always come from the cycling community. This is just propaganda.
No. Attacks on e-bikes come from communities where infrastructure is shared in a way that differences in transport modes is made more severe. E.g. in London where bikes often share space with roads or pedestrians.
On the flip side you look to places with good infrastructure and there's no attacks on e-bikes. There's attacks on specific dumb things, such as the importing of Fatbikes which illegally have their speed limiters removed and are ridden around by 14 years old who think they are gangsters, but then that is obvious.
Re: (Score:1)
Quite.
It's obviously the case that now ebikes exist there are infinitely more ebike related injuries than before they existed. That's kind of how causality works. There are also infinitely more motor vehicle deaths than in 1850, but no one seems terribly bothered by that.
It's possible that lime bikes do cause certain injuries though. They are awfully heavy compared to a normal bike or ebike and they are all super fucked. Don't think I'd want one to land on me if I hit one of the many potholes around here. S
Re: (Score:2)
Rental bikes have always been heavy because they have to survive the rigors of users that will abuse them because they don't own them.
Throw the electric element in and they get far heavier yet.
It sounds like there's a need for regulation on bicycle weight as well as speed.
Re: (Score:1)
> I not only don't believe this, I believe this is an intentional lie. I doubt there is the slightest evidence of "much worse" injuries correlated to e-bike use compared to bikes. I doubt this kind of data is even collected. Nick is a liar.
Have you seen an e-bike recently? I have. There are rental e-bikes parked around the city where I live and are available for rent to those that download their app to a smart phone and do whatever else so the rental company gets paid. These e-bikes are heavy, likely heavier than the shitty little 100cc dirt bike we had on the farm to chase down pigs that got away, or go out to check animal traps and cattle fences. Well, at least the e-bikes I've seen are quite heavy, and I'd expect any e-bike made to be
Not an E-bike injury (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a shithouse infrastructure injury. Painting a little symbol on the road does not make cycling infrastructure. When given the choice between driving with cars or driving with pedestrians in either case injuries will be high as an excessive amount of attention needs to be paid to those who the pathway is shared with.
You don't see "excessive" injuries in the Netherlands, and that's a place with less requirements to wear safety gear. Sure there's always an increase in injury due to speed and weight of e-bikes, but that should be minor, not excessive if your infrastructure is properly set up for it.
Re:Not an E-bike injury (Score:5, Informative)
> You don't see "excessive" injuries in the Netherlands,
Says who? The number of bike road accidents leading to serious injuries has been steadily increasing in the past few years.
[1]https://swov.nl/en/fact-sheet/... [swov.nl]
The increase is mostly attributed to older idiots killing or injuring themselves in e-bikes, or young rascals riding e-bikes injuring older people.
[1] https://swov.nl/en/fact-sheet/serious-road-injuries-netherlands
Do you want us in cars or not (Score:2)
Unless the numbers are per distance ridden, we do not know anything. Motorcycles on a spring day in may appear to death machines, but 45% of the miles put on a motorcycle are on a spring day the hospitalizations on a calendar numbers mean virtually nothing. With every ebike having an app attached, and each user phone has a map app at least attempt to get a per mile ridden. This is where jornalism has fallen apart, one study is news article, with no good questions as the counter point. Why does
Idiots do idiotic things (Score:5, Insightful)
This is simply a case of Idiots doing idiotic things.
The first problem e-bike or not is people gettIng on their bike for the first time in years with a level of confidence that far exceeds their ability, due to being out of practice. The do things like underestimate stopping distances at speed, as well as being unaware of dangers, when you cycle regularly you are on the lookout for danger.
The next problem is simply there are far too many inconsiderate people in urban environments. Mindless pedestrians looking at their phones instead of where they are going stepping out in front of you. Delivery van drivers and parents taking their kids to school in their 4x4 using cycling lanes as parking spaces. Cyclists wobbling all over the place and ignoring traffic laws, riding on pavements, the wrong way down cycle lanes and most frustrating ignoring red lights and failing to give way to pedestrians at crossings.
Finally there is a massive problem with illegal bikes, with high powered motors, that propel the bike at speeds far higher than the legal limit as well as not requiring the rider to pedal. The worst offenders are food delivery riders, that get paid by the delivery, so they zoom around at top speed, ignoring all tules, going on pavements to get past stationary traffic with earbuds in and often using their ordering app on a phone attached to the handlebars. The police do nothing, they even get their doughnuts delivered to their office by these riders and do nothing. Regular confiscation of these illegal bikes would be a good starting point.
Re: Idiots do idiotic things (Score:2)
The police do confiscate them. They even had several bigger operations in London and Manchester in the oast few months.
But you're right - delivery riders make the majority of the offenders. In their books time is money and untill we disincentive illegal bikes, the riders will use them. The chances of getting caught are low. The payouts are high. Simple economics. Confiscations and fines are just the cost of business.
Perhaps it's the delivery companies who should be given more responsibility.
If we had a law
Re: (Score:2)
There is never the discussion that cities are too dense, and that the UK is the prime example of not enough space to build, not enough green space accessible per child. That the entire nation is constantly wet and has eternal slime on sidewalks and roads, and then paints every single thing on the roads. High powered bicycles and livestock are a problem in scotland, just like with motorcycles and cars, but nobody in rural lands is going to say spend another 30 minutes at 20km/hr instead of 80km/hr in th
Re: (Score:2)
If I ever see a car fully change lanes like they are supposed to when overtaking a cyclist legally riding in a traffic lane, I'll eat my hat. Police do nothing. What we should do is confiscate the automobiles who fail to obey the law, right?
Mostly these are motorbike injuries! (Score:5, Informative)
So, riders and pedestrians are being injured more due to the higher speeds of e-bikes than ordinary bicycles? But, it also says that e-bikes should be limited to 15mph when propelled by the motor.
You need to spend no more than a couple of minutes in any built-up area in the UK to see that many of the alleged 'e-bikes' are vastly more powerful than that. They are quite obviously unlicensed electrically powered motorbikes with some entirely nugatory pedals added.
So, the conclusion we should reach is that if you allow huge numbers of people to suddenly ride motorbikes without any training, protective clothing or requirement to obey any traffic rules then many of them - and any unfortunate pedestrian who can't jump out of the way in time - will receive serious injuries. Why is this surprising?
Re: (Score:1)
My e-bike that I used to commute for years was limited to 15-20mph. Folks in Lycra just zip right by you. I remember using it to cover the off-road parts of a 100 mile bike ride event with the local amateur radio group. Ride out to the mid-point all I heard as "On your left. On your left. On your left." Only on long steep hills is it an equalizer. But, I can totally believe there are folks getting better motors there even if it is regulated.
Re: (Score:2)
The operative word here is "should". I see a lot of imported drives that have no restrictions and with them bikes can fly with 40 km/h or more. Not only can they fly, they do fly. Then there's the riding style - it is not uncommon these days to see teenagers in a big, 4+ lane road riding an ebike or one of these smaller wheel contraptions, the electric scooters, sometimes against the traffic and in the fast lane.
It is insane.
Re: (Score:2)
Whats wrong with being on the street at over 20-40km/hr. Its not like traffic moves much quicker than that for the dense parts of England. The empire imported everything else from India, survival techniques of the people of India on scooters in mixed traffic is the last thing? Who knew?
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing's wrong being in the street.
The problem is these are not in the street, but on the sidewalk.
Re: (Score:2)
> some entirely nugatory pedals added.
Think of them as the blades on a chariot wheel.
They're more dangerous than any other vehicle... (Score:5, Insightful)
... to pedestrians in cities with high foot and cycling traffic.
I spend a lot of time in a major European city which has dedicated bike lanes on most major streets. I get around by walking and using a regular bicycle.
I now consider e-bikes to be the most likely vehicle I'm going to be hit by, either as a pedestrian or a biker, because they're fast and often times *practically silent*. As a pedestrian, the sidewalk and bike lines in this city are often both part of the same stretch of "sidewalk" where the bike lane is only designated by a line or the use of different bricks. This means that bikes and pedestrians are sharing the same space, and bikers often go out of the bike lane to pass other bikers, putting them in very close proximity to pedestrians and what are now very high e-bike speeds. Someone moving unexpectedly, or a child suddenly bolting from behind a walking parent, could mean a serious accident. It can be argued that this is an infrastructure problem, but even if you create completely separated bike lanes, you still have the issue of silence combined with high speed (and mass) relative to other cyclists: The other day I was biking on a quiet off-street with no other traffic on the road. Out of nowhere, a food delivery e-biker flew past my left side at easily twice my speed. The sound of the air passing my ears from casually cycling was enough to cover what little sound his bike made such that I never heard him coming, and had I veered left from my course just before he passed, I'm certain I would've ended up in the emergency room.
The food delivery e-bikers are a huge part of the problem: they're under pressure to go fast, which means they're also more likely to take risks, and even if they see need to stop, they're moving the extra weight of their delivery plus the heavier bike itself (battery, larger frame, often big tires) to hinder a fast stop.
With all this in mind, I'm of the opinion that 1. e-bikes should only be allowed on actual roads (not bike paths), because any law saying "certain e-bikes" or even having a speed limit on a bike path would be extremely difficult to enforce, plus these e-bikes are often traveling at the same speed as cars, and 2. e-bike drivers should require a license, *at least* for commercial use, i.e. food delivery, which must be verified by the company, with steps taken to ensure the registered driver is the one doing the actual deliveries (so no one can "borrow" a friend's delivery account), and a visibly displayed license on the bike.
TL;DR: e-bikes are now as fast as mopeds but silent, and should be treated as such.
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny because bike messengers were legendary (notorious) even before e-bikes.
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMBt9N_CwwI
Oppressive idea (Score:2)
I know the UK and other EU countries (I think) have very oppressive licensing laws concerning motorcycles and the size of bike you can ride, based on "experience".
What laws do they have concerning e-bikes? Do they require licensing? If not, maybe they should, just like they do with motorcycles.
Here is some reading material for those who are interested:
[1]https://www.autoevolution.com/... [autoevolution.com]
[1] https://www.autoevolution.com/news/motorcycle-licensing-in-europe-explained-90006.html
Re:Oppressive idea (Score:4, Informative)
I live in Sweden and have an e-bike that is legally regulated as a moped, a Specialized Turbo Vado 6. It came with a CoC for submission to the transport agency for license plates and it has a VIN decal behind the head. The bike comes with a license plate mount. It also has a moped grade headlight with high-beam, hydraulic disc brakes, and an electric horn. It has no throttle, but it does have pedal assist up to 45km/h. To ride it, you need an AM-class drivers license and moped insurance. It looks like a bicycle, rides like a bicycle, but definitely should not be ridden by someone who does not have moped experience. I'm perfectly ok with the regulation on it.
Re: (Score:2)
As far as you know, is Sweden atypical in this regard? Or is this common Europe wide? What about UK specifically, which the article is focused on?
Re: (Score:2)
The same applies across Europe, the regulations are grounded in EU and very similar across countries.
The outrage in the article is synthetic. I call to make something illegal that is already illegal. (Electric motorcycles that have no type approval, no insurance, and no business in public.)
Ebikes in pedestrian spaces (Score:2)
What annoys me most is that motorized electric vehicles are allowed in pedestrian spaces. This should be changed.
Nobody saw this coming ? (Score:3)
e-bikes have greater acceleration and top speed than traditional bicycles. It is a recipe for increased rider injuries and deaths. Letting them in pedestrian spaces increases their collateral damage.
Re: (Score:2)
Here is where the US legal system shows its world dominance on changing of behavior.
If it does not have an insurance requirement it is generally stuck on the sidewalk or the slowest of surface streets. City police fill their day with control of something that truely does not need control. Simply add an insurance requirement, add a plate and the rider will have to move to the street and 60km/hr will be normal speed in a 40km/hr. A scooter never was a high bar, it was what you gave to a teenager to g
Re: (Score:2)
> If it does not have an insurance requirement it is generally stuck on the sidewalk or the slowest of surface streets.
I have no idea where you got this notion from. Where I live, bicycles are not supposed to ride on sidewalks, because bicycles are classed as vehicles. They're supposed to be ridden on the street, and in the correct direction of travel for the side of the street that they're on. In some cities even vehicles as minimal as skateboards are supposed to be on the street, not on the sidewalk, and there may be requirements to dismount any 'vehicle' when using a crosswalk except on special-purpose multi-use paths
It's the same everywhere (Score:2)
There's a surge in e-bike-related injuries everywhere. The main problem is teenagers in the streets with motorized vehicles that can self-propel, making slowing down for dangerous situations or stopping at stop signs an inconvenience. The natural consequence is they don't slow down or stop, when they would do so if the bike was not self-propelled.
Re: (Score:2)
I see many, many adults on regular bikes speed through intersections too.
From my observations around this city, when confronted with a stop sign at an intersection, I'd say the odds of the cyclist blowing through it without even slowing down are 2:1. The odds of them blowing through it while slowing down slightly are 4:1. The odds of them slowing down substantially, but not coming to a complete stop like they're supposed to, are 8:1.
Overall? The odds of a cyclist coming to a complete stop at a stop sign, as
It's a moped (Score:3)
E-bikes ARE mopeds by definition. MOter / PEDal powered vehicles. They should be regulated as such.
Blame free health care. (Score:2)
This is what happens when people don't have to worry about paying for the results of their own actions.
Re: (Score:2)
The US tort courts for the win.
What kind of bike is discussed here? (Score:3)
There are different types of electric bikes.
Some jurisdictions restrict electric bicycles to those with "electric assist", where you'd still have to crank the pedals to make the motor run. Those are more or less operated like regular pedal-powered bikes but you won't have to be an athlete to get up a slope.
I don't think that type is the one called out here.
Any type where a motor is controlled by a "throttle" is actually a moped, and should be legally classified as a moped IMHO.
And neither mopeds or bicycles should be allowed to run at speed on a pedestrian path. If it is not a road or bicycle path, you should first not be there unless there is an alternative, and you are restricted to walking speed, regardless of vehicle. That is often the law.
There are many places where regulations originally for scooters for disabled people have been misapplies to newer types of electric vehicles that hadn't been envisioned yet when the rules were put in place.
Especially companies renting out electric kick-bikes have been taking advantage of that type of loophole, in too many cities. Those are the most dangerous of all: high centre of mass, small wheels, large mass because it is a rental vehicle and must be sturdy, and used by people that aren't used to bicycles and somehow think they are infinitesimally narrow and can move like pedestrians -- only faster.
Top speed (Score:3)
I recently got a mobility scooter. Its speed is limited to 4mph.
Maybe e-bikes should be limited thusly. Slow everyone the fuck down.
Re: (Score:2)
> I recently got a mobility scooter. Its speed is limited to 4mph.
They don't even let you move at a full adult male walking pace? I can go 5 mph without trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
> "I recently got a mobility scooter. Its speed is limited to 4mph. Maybe e-bikes should be limited thusly. Slow everyone the fuck down."
Um, 4mph is unreasonably low for any type of bicycle. That is just brisk walking speed. Had you said 10mph, I would probably agree. One of the purposes of riding a bike instead of walking is save some significant time.
In any case, if it is a true "e-bike" then you can't really limit speed, you can just limit how much assistance to pedaling effort. So a 10mph limit w
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they should do this for cars as well. For safety.
Well, they're sort-of right (Score:2)
I have been riding a bike since I was four or five years old (I don't remember exactly).
I tried the eBikes at work once (I had an outside-appointment at a place not easily reachable by public transport). The go up to 45km/h.
It's insane. I don't have a motor-cycle license and never ridden one - but I would assume it's not much different.
There's very little margin of error there and no crash crumple-zone like in a car except your own body.
My commute involves a downhill-section (on public road) that I can reac
Re: (Score:2)
50km/hr.... That is downwind in flat midwest america, where the only bicycle injuries of note are cars not yeilding at our high tech replacements for traffic circles, 4 way stops. What the hell you all running into, sheep and old guys crossing the street? Or is it the all people you invited in to provide cheap labor?
Re: (Score:2)
It's a somewhat winded road in the city, with cars around you and a bus-stop in the middle of the road. At the end of the road is a roundabout with backed-up traffic and a gas-station with cross-traffic, sometimes (which I had to find out the hard way).
It's not in the US, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Catching a tailwind on a bicycle with a downhill 90km/hr isnt a speed that anyone cannot control, especially since breaks are hub mounted on most fun things these days. The pedestrian stepping off the curb is the problem and always has been. The pedestrian always has some fault when it is a truck, bus, car. But shared fault when it is a bike or a fork lift, we have put a class of viechale having more responsibly a bar that the cyclist can never clear while riding down the center of a road. I was 20
Re: (Score:2)
I'm primarily interested in my own well-being.
Who wants a tombstone with the engraving "...but he had the right of way!"?
Embrace, don't ban (Score:1)
Sounds like they do need registration, insurance, and specific enforcement partially paid for by those fees for excessively powered bikes. Charge by bike weight as that's what drives pedestrian injuries and likely speed capability. Mandate lights and speedometers so they can comply with safety speed limits
I don't know about London (Score:2)
But the problem I saw with these in America was when they were widely available for rent people who weren't used to riding them would jump right on them and go full throttle.
If you've never taken a bike up to 20 mph it's very different than riding it at 5 to 10. I used to cycle a lot and could reliably hit 15 mph and downhill could hit 25. You need practice and control to do that.
That was a powered bike and I have the common sense when I was learning to limit my speed. Going down some of the steeper
Legal/illegal bikes (Score:2)
This is the second anti-ebike article I've seen about London specifically in the last couple weeks - [1]https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2025/sep/04/britains-e-bike-boom-desperation-delivery-drivers-and-unthinkable-danger [bbc.com]
Feels like a build up to....charging more money -
> They just get on and ride around without insurance, tax, the bike not conforming to lights and everything else it should conform to, it’s not registered with the DVLA, all these things.”
Basically they want them to be treated as mopeds, probably requiring insurance and registration and licensing. TBF it sounds like there's a lot of modified or illegal bikes in London (legal: an electric motor with a maximum pow
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2ejgrw9yepo
Re: (Score:2)
FFS I guess I copy/pasted the original article as the href = [1]https://www.theguardian.com/li... [slashdot.org]> [2]https://www.theguardian.com/li... [theguardian.com]
[1] https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/09/13/007205/a
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2025/sep/04/britains-e-bike-boom-desperation-delivery-drivers-and-unthinkable-danger
Re: (Score:2)
Ok that time I know i didn't fsck the link.....i give up, copy and paste the first :-
Re:Legal/illegal bikes (Score:5, Informative)
> This is the second anti-ebike article I've seen about London specifically in the last couple weeks
That's because London has rubbish infrastructure making cyclists a menace out of necessity, either sharing a footpath (e-bikes are a legit danger to pedestrians due to their weight and speed), or sharing with the road (where e-bikes are less of a problem than normal bikes).
> Basically they want them to be treated as mopeds
Regulations are important for any place. I see e-bikes from across the pond that absolutely I think should be outright fucking banned. Able to drive 40+km/h, able to do so without pedal assist (not an e-bike despite being sold as one, actually a moped), excessively heavy, shit breaks, and lights that are worse than a car with high-beams. This shit should be regulated, and I say that as an e-bike owner.
In London you absolutely should have extra rules as well. Too many e-bikes are on pedestrian paths due to the aforementioned shit infrastructure. They absolutely should be forced to have public liability insurance. While it'll piss off the drivers, e-bikes should *NEVER* share foot paths. Normal city bikes on the other hand do far less damage in an accident.
By the way the picture in your article shows a policeman with two "Fatbikes". They are specifically an illegal menace, and even places like the Netherlands which is a bit of a cycling Mecca, are attempting to ban them. [1]https://www.iamexpat.nl/expat-... [iamexpat.nl]
[1] https://www.iamexpat.nl/expat-info/dutch-news/more-20-dutch-municipalities-call-national-fatbike-regulations
Re: (Score:1)
Bullshit cyclists are a menace.
Cars are a menace. How many people die on the roads due to cars in London. How make sure to bikes? Heck, how many people die on the pavements due to bikes?
Bikes are treated badly but the idea that cyclists are ax menace is the result of 50 years of right wing propaganda. Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth, to the point where even left wing places like the guardian will not question it. But it's not true. The statistics show that cars are far far far more danger
Re: (Score:2)
Don't see too many cars on walking paths and sidewalks. The number of e-bikes on walking paths and sidewalks has skyrocketed. It's almost as if someone decided being a pedestrian is a sinful activity, and that every walkway must now be infested with morons on wheels.
Then let me get started on mobility scooters.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really care what you see, the statistics don't lie.
More pedestrians are killed by cars mounting the pavement tank by bikes on pavements. Many many more.
But also, yeah you're writing from America, not London. People decided walking was sinful the day they let car companies write laws banning crossing the street. Being a pedestrian in America is a nightmare and bikes have absolutely nothing to do with that.
Re: (Score:3)
> Legal E bikes have no need for more insurance than push bikes. 15.5mph is their maximum speed and it's frankly slower than I go most of the time anyway.
It's not the legal ones that are a problem. 90% of the e-bikes you notice when visiting London (and actually most UK cities) are clearly illegal food delivery bikes. You can see they completely stop pedaling which is a dead giveaway and the speed is normally visibly more than the rest of the traffic, so at least 25MPH. Normally on a narrow pavement, going the wrong way down a one way road and expecting everyone to jump out of the way, 'cos there's no way they can stop.
Re: (Score:2)
[I bike a lot (no ebike though)]. More accidents with ebike, sure that's a given: they are heavier so in a collision will do more damage; many are unlocked and can go to 80kph and that's scary as shit on a footpath, and they are often driven by people who are not used to biking (old people with poor reflexes, mothers with 2 kids on the back seat...). As for banning those e-fatbikes, they are still way better than motorbikes (slower and quieter), so maybe just restrict them to roads.
Re: (Score:2)
You can say the infrastructure is "shit" for ebikes, but how could it not be? It's a new class of vehicle, so people want it not to mix with pedestrians, and not to mix with cars. OK, so where do we paint lines for these new lanes exactly?
Bicycles themselves have always had the same issue because of their small numbers - only a certain type of person commonly rides even 10+ miles consistently in a day. e-bikes could bring that to the masses with speeds that are less than scooters mixing with traffic bu
Re:Legal/illegal bikes (Score:4, Insightful)
> You can say the infrastructure is "shit" for ebikes, but how could it not be? It's a new class of vehicle, so people want it not to mix with pedestrians, and not to mix with cars. OK, so where do we paint lines for these new lanes exactly?
This is really simple. A normal UK legal e-bike is fine (though maybe there should be a lower weight limit?). I can overtake it 90% of the time with no motor on anything other than a long hill climb. It can go on a bike lane. Anything else must follow motorcycle rules with licensing and everything. Then it goes on the normal road as a normal scooter or motorbike.
Arrest and incarcerate for anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Why the lower weight limit? ("Upper" weight limit maybe?)
Re: (Score:2)
> I see e-bikes from across the pond that absolutely I think should be outright fucking banned. Able to drive 40+km/h, able to do so without pedal assist (not an e-bike despite being sold as one, actually a moped), excessively heavy, shit breaks, and lights that are worse than a car with high-beams. This shit should be regulated, and I say that as an e-bike owner.
These illegal electric motorcycles are common, but illegal on the road.
There is no regulation necessary, because motor vehicle are illegal on t
What's a fatbike? (Score:1)
Like are they just trying to ban bikes and/or e-bikes with 'fat' tires originally from beach-bicycles and generally a softer ride? Or is it a local/EU term that means something more specific/different?
Re: (Score:3)
The guardian article isn't anti e bike, but also you linked the wrong article.
I agree that there is a problem with illegal ebikes: loads are being sold which aren't remotely road legal and have dangerously unsafe batteries. There's also a problem with companies like deliveroo which are relying on loopholes to avoid even minimum wage, so the people desperate enough to work there can only afford the illegal bikes from Amazon. The point of contractor rules wasn't so companies could avoid safety, insurance, leg
Re:Legal/illegal bikes (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd just like them banned from walking paths. At least once a day I'm getting some crazy asshole ringing his bell as he comes flying up behind me. I'm not a fan of any kind of bike on walking paths, but at least the people on regular bikes have more control. The worst are probably older riders who often seem like they're barely in control. And the three wheeled ones take up outrageous amounts of space on smaller paths, regularly forcing other users on some of the narrower paths I frequent to get to the side of the road.
It's hard to imagine, short of motor vehicles, anything more hazardous to a pedestrian than some stupid prick on an e-bike.
Re: (Score:1)
> Basically they want them to be treated as mopeds, probably requiring insurance and registration and licensing.
What is the distinction between a moped and a bicycle? In the USA, at least as I recall, there is none.
People riding a bicycle are expected to adhere to the rules of the road but there's no real enforcement of licensing, insurance, or whatever. So long as they stay off the highways and sidewalks they aren't likely to be stopped. Though my bother got a speeding ticket on his racing bicycle (as in all aluminum, so sparse on weight that there was no paint but the logo) while at university, he called his aut
Re: Legal/illegal bikes (Score:2)
Would treating them as mopeds be so bad?
What weâ(TM)re looking at is exactly what happened when gasoline cars started to become popular and created problems with deaths, injuries, and property damage. The answer to managing those problems and providing accountability was to make the vehicles display registration plates, require licensing of drivers, and enforcing minimum safety standards on cars. Iâ(TM)m not necessarily suggesting all these things should be done to e-bikes, but I donâ(TM)t se
Re: (Score:2)
> Would treating them as mopeds be so bad?
Road legal e-bikes with a 15mph speed limit are literally too slow. They would be in danger if forced to follow moped rules all the time. If you think about that, you will realize that most of the e-bikes you have seen are illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
The article is shit.
It confuses pedelecs, which are tightly regulated and limited to 15mph, with illegal electric motorcycles.
While pedelecs have some risk for injury, it is really not much different from a bicycle.
Illegal electric motorcycles, on the other hand, are more dangerous than motorcycles. Which should not be surprising.
Obviously, banning pedelecs is not going to solve the problem of illegal electric motorcycles.