Comment by jseliger | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jseliger | Hacker News Reader

Ebikes are particularly interesting: there have been a rash of ebike Kickstarters (see e.g. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hongquan/karmic-kyoto) and startups recently, and if the bikes get cheap enough they could really change a lot of people's attitudes towards biking and bike infrastructure. They might also make bike shares more attractive; Seattle is very hilly and its bike share may go electric: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/leading-bi...

My girlfriend bought an electric bike four years ago, but that was a little too early, and when we moved to a place with stairs the electric bike had to go. But the person who bought it on Craigslist loves it and rides it to drop her kid off at daycare, then to work.

If you haven't ridden a pedal-assist electric bike, you should stop by your local bike shop and try one out. They're quite remarkable, but in a way that is difficult to appreciate over text. I personally don't need one and ride a Novarra Gotham (https://www.rei.com/product/888337/novara-gotham-bike-2016), but I see the appeal and think that these will eventually take off, maybe sooner than is widely expected.

There are various problems or trade-offs, which I'm sure people will point out in this thread, but the cost-benefit is there or getting there.

I wish items like this got more attention. It's my opinion that all the hoopla over self driving cars is masking other really important modes of transportation. If the cost was low enough, it would be far more efficient to ride an E-Bike to your destination if it was in close proximity, especially for community to work. Of course there are trade-offs, but I can't help but think about how much this would alleviate traffic congestion, how this could contribute to someone living a more healthy lifestyle, and the impact on someone's happiness of riding a bike instead of being in a car.

They are getting cheaper and yes, they are great. I have a e-twow scooter. It has a 450w motor. I think that an e-bike would be better because the wheels are bigger, but for some reason there are only 250w bikes.

250 watts is the legal limit in the EU, whereas most states in the US consider e-bikes providing up to 750 watts of power (about 1hp) as still "bicycles" (meaning no registration, license requirements, insurance, etc). A lot of the retail bike manufacturers are designing motors for the 250 watt limit unfortunately, and although I have it on good authority that many bikes actually exceed their reported power limits, they're still dinky compared to DIY kits.

I think e-bikes are going to have the same issue that scooters and mopeds have (and even bikes too) - safety. If you live in a city, you are going to have to be riding near cars, and it is simply a fact that a collision is much worse when you are on a bike or scooter than when you are in a car. A minor fender bender in a car could be serious injury on a bike or scooter.

Everyone I know who commutes to work on a bike has been in an injury accident, ranging from bad cuts and bruises to broken bones and brain injuries. When you combine the basic lack of courtesy from car drivers, the inability to see bikes compared to cars, and the exposed nature of a bike rider compared to a car, the danger is simply too great for many people (myself included) to take.

Unless we get lots of dedicated bike roads where you never have to interact with cars, I don't see how this problem is solvable. As ebikes get faster and more powerful, the danger is going to increase rather than decrease. This is the same reason I don't ride a motorcycle; while it would be efficient and quicker to commute on one, they are simply too dangerous.

> dedicated bike roads where you never have to interact with cars

We desperately need more of these. They exist in many places, but not nearly enough. They're also far cheaper to build & maintain than regular roads, needing less width or thickness, as well as zero paint, curbs, stop lights or most other things city streets require.

More power is not always more dangerous. When I have to share a lane with cars, I feel much safer doing 28mph on my illegally powerful custom e-bike [0] than I would at 16mph, because my speed is better matched to the cars' and they have less desire to pass me.

But I agree, more dedicated bike lanes would be great.

ETA: Oh! I see California now (as of last Jan. 1) allows 28-mph pedal-controlled bikes under the new "class 3" designation. Unfortunately, my bike still doesn't quite fit in this category, as it's throttle-controlled. Hmm -- it's not clear to me why that distinction is that important.

[0] http://www.nomadcyclespdx.com/electric-bicycle-conversion-sy...

I commute to work 15km each way on an e-bike and I do almost all of it on bike paths away from cars. It's a very pleasant way to commute. I don't need to use any special "bike roads" - the existing bike path infrastructure in Melbourne (Australia) works for me.

Yes, there are cities where the existing structure works for bikes safely. In my city (Los Angeles), there is simply no way to get anywhere without going on streets with cars.

> I can't help but think about how much this would alleviate traffic congestion

Especially given that I do not see how self driving cars could decrease traffic congestion problems. A self driving car takes as much space as a "regular car", so only ways I can imagine autonomous cars reducing traffic are:

1. People ride less with cars. 2. People share rides more. 3. Autonomous cars are significantly more efficient finding free parking spaces, so they reduce the amount of cars looking for a free parking spot. 4. They do not need to be parked, so parking space is given to moving cars (and this actually helps, not increases, congestion). 5. Autonomous cars can drive in less space and/or are smaller.

Of course, any of these claims being wrong attribute to increased congestion due to autonomous cars. And to be honest, I find it unlikely that any of those claims would be correct in the sense that it would materially reduce the congestion problems.

(Well, maybe one more option came to my mind that might actually help. If the autonomous cars would be able to increase the capacity of crossroads by somehow communicating with each others like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pbAI40dK0A )

> (Well, maybe one more option came to my mind that might actually help. If the autonomous cars would be able to increase the capacity of crossroads by somehow communicating with each others like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pbAI40dK0A )

How do cyclists and people walking handle that type of intersection?

Good point. Maybe bridges?

Most trips during high traffic are single passenger. Self-driving taxi services will right-size the vehicles for the task, which will reduce congestion some amount, and the vehicles themselves will drive in a more uniform fashion than humans, which will alleviate traffic waves and congestion due to accidents.

I have difficulties seeing people who now drive 5 series BMW to change to self-driving Renault Twizy[1] just because a self-driving taxi service decides the it is big enough.

And there is a limit how far uniform driving helps. If the capacity is full, it is full.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Twizy

Why? The experience of not driving or looking for parking at all and doing absolutely anything else while you are transported is significantly better than driving a BMW. That's why the really rich people have chauffeurs. There will likely be taxi services that cater to the elite with better interiors, just like there are private plane services that cater to them. The vast majority of people driving mere 5-series BMWs will be happier with merely slightly upscale right-sized taxi services.

Because they can also change to a self driving 5 series BMW instead of Twizy. If they now pay the premium, why not with self driving cars?

They will then have to find a place to park the car, handle maintenance, etc. The cost premium of offering luxury vs. no luxury is in line with the cost premium of owning a 5 series vs. owning a Toyota. The premium of owning a car vs. not owning a car is not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com