Time to subsidize e-bikes?
clivethompson.medium.com
clivethompson.medium.com
It’s a fun thing to ride, gets me a bit more activity (I don’t consider it a workout, but it is more of a workout than driving), and gets me more time outside.
I’m turning into an evangelist among my friends, and any sort of subsidy would definitely make that effort easier.
If you’re on the fence, give it a go! They’re pretty mature tech these days, with a wide range of available models and price ranges.
You might be surprised. The amount of exercise you get while "cheating" on an ebike is way more than people think, especially if you don't get one powerful enough to basically classify as a motorbike. I'm Australian, and here the power output is limited to 250 watts which means it's really just an assist rather than the main power plant (which is still the rider). Riding it uses significantly more energy than walking does since I like to go fast, so it's still very much legitimate exercise.
“During a normal stage of the Tour de France, pro riders can pump out around 230-250 watts on average, which equates to burning about 900 calories per hour. But on some of the harder stages they can average over 300 watts, or 1,100 calories per hour. Tadej Pogačar has a Functional Threshold Power – an estimate of the power he can sustain for around one hour – of around 415 watts. But for explosive one-hour attacks on big climbs, some Tour riders have been known to exceed an average of 500 watts. And in the final stages of a sprint finish, sprinters can hit maximal efforts of over 1,500 watts.”
https://www.alpecincycling.com/en/pro-peloton/from-body-fat-...
Here is Ted King in the 2014 TDF (random stage). Weighted average power: 205 watts. Actual average power: 134 watts.
An assist won't be as much exercise as no assist, but it's still exercise.
A throttle powered class 3 ebike on a flat paved path is going to be a different story. Likely less of a workout than a walk. Much better than a car though, for both the body and the planet.
Of course, assuming terrain allows options, one could alter their route to get a better workout. Reducing the assist would be an option too.
And you get a hill you don't like, you just use max assist and go up without sweating.
I really wish they allowed for a very token level of assist to help counter the extra weight of the system, ideally as a curved reduction down to a minimum of eg 10% of the available assist as speed increases past the assistance speed limit (or even starting at a lower speed, eg 20 kmh, thus gently increasing the pedaling effort from an earlier point).
I'm not advocating that they should be as easy, given that the extra weight of the bike makes them harder to stop and less maneuverable, however something in between would be great.
Strong riders are more often than not experienced and thus competent riders, making them safer, however ebikes removes this "barrier" altogether - even a complete noob can go very fast, without the competence - therefore I'm all for a revised (analogue trail off) speed limit system in the interest of safety.
Then for the bike side, pick one which has a wide range of non electric bikes too.
I was going to suggest any long-established bike brand with a broad product line. Trek, Specialized, Cannondale, etc.
A non-cyclist might get sticker shock (an avid cyclist will think, "huh, cheap").
As long as the bike has those three things sorted it's probably safe. Note that these things don't come cheap, so any e-bike with these parts is likely to start at $3000.
For specific bikes I like Priority Current. They're a little vague on the exact parts used because they may swap them out based on availability, but they usually pick real parts instead of cheap replacements.
Japan is like a different world. At least to me as a tourist, it feels so organized, safe, culturally rich and stress-free.
I wonder what Japanese people think and feel when they visit San Francisco.
Well, what they think of Paris is well documented:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_syndrome
> Paris syndrome (French: syndrome de Paris; Japanese: パリ症候群, romanized: Pari shōkōgun) is a sense of extreme disappointment exhibited by some individuals when visiting Paris, who feel that the city was not what they had expected. The condition is commonly viewed as a severe form of culture shock.
> The syndrome is characterized by a number of psychiatric symptoms such as acute delusional states, hallucinations, feelings of persecution (perceptions of being a victim of prejudice, aggression, hostility from others),[1] derealization, depersonalization, anxiety, as well as psychosomatic manifestations such as dizziness, tachycardia, sweating most notably, but also others, such as vomiting.[2]
> While the syndrome has been particularly noted among Japanese tourists, it has also affected other travelers or temporary residents from East and Southeast Asia, such as those from China, South Korea, and Singapore.
I’m sure SF is all that and worse, although expectations might not be as high.
For me the real key is disc brakes (whether mechanical or hydraulic). Rim brakes don't have enough stopping power for an e-bike.
Get this one for the torque sensor over a cadence sensor, can't go wrong.
And then the big bike brands like Trek, Specialized have their own bikes that are worth looking into.
The prices compared to the Ali-Express stuff might surprise you.
Reddit of course has an e-bike subreddit you can dig through.
Do bike shops just turn them away because of the brand/lack thereof, sight unseen?
If you don’t know it’s going to fit your life that’s a lot of money to throw on a bet. I wasn’t sure so I bought a budget bike, a RadPowerBikes Radwagon. And it’s… fine. The components aren’t great. The gears are janky. The brakes are insufficient given the weight and speed the bike is capable of. But it’s $2k and if it didn’t exist I don’t think I would ever have dropped $4.5k on one of the better specced alternatives.
But first of all, look for local dealerships and find out which brands they're selling. You need regular maintenance for your electric bike and many bike shops refuse to work on bikes bought elsewhere, especially cheap bikes bought online, and I can't really blame them.
A good electric bike ain't cheap, but lasts a lot longer than a no name/cheap one. A cheap bike with one problem after the other sucks all the joy out of owning one and is the surest way to a dust collecting piece of metal in the back of your garage, nevermind the extra costs.
And get electric bike insurance. Budget for it in advance. Getting your brand new expensive ebike stolen is quite traumatic.
By "aware of" do you mean "you should consider" or "you should not consider"? Genuine question...
If you're a cyclist, you may balk at the goofy design. But it's great for getting around town. You can zip-tie a milk crate on the back to hold your stuff.
If you have Decathlon in your country then you might have it available too - Riverside 500E
https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/electric-hybrid-bike-riverside...
The problem for me is that riding a bike in the city can be unsafe - often my area is full of double parked cars even late at night and no respect for the bike lane (which to be fair is just painted on).
So just like any other lane a driver is expected to follow. I suggest we stop cutting drivers any slack.
They basically just drive on bike lanes and give people fines for parking on it all day. People are just lazy, there might be a parking space just across the street, but they'll still rather park half way on the bike lane and half way on the pavement.
Easy to say until physics and a car has their way with you and you end up a stain on the road.
Unprotected bike lanes are unsafe and relying on people following the rules and/or not making mistakes to keep bikers safe won't work.
But the ride to my kids school has isolated bike lanes for the vast majority of the trip. Most people aren’t so lucky and will (rightly) fear the idea of taking their kids on a bike. It’s such a shame.
I often feel that it's a fragile equilibrium though— it wouldn't take much to get the sports field turned into a big parking lot and have everyone immediately defect in the face of it not "feeling safe" any more.
[1]: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/170315130/boosted-board...
Anyway, as soon as I got an electric car I started using the ebike less and less. I was finding that it occupied an awkward middle ground between convenience and exercise. I now just use my car or my non-electric bike. The problem with ebikes is that when they run out of battery it feels like hauling rocks to pedal them. When you run out of "battery" on a non-electric bike all you need is a bowl of carbs and you're good to go for another 25-50 km. And carbs are much easier to find in the middle of nowhere than publicly-accessible electric outlets.
Regarding running out of battery, my ebike is 99% used for my commute and I just charge at home every 3 days I ride. Works perfectly. Shorter trips for food I use my regular bike.
It’s the main reason I’m not considering an e-bike right now even though I have an EV. It helps that I can just walk to anything I need to get to on daily basis (eg kid’s school is 7 minutes away by walking).
Yeah my property manager keeps telling people to move their bikes inside. I moved my regular bike to my patio, but I refused to move my ebike indoors because I'm not confident about the battery quality and don't like the idea of having 1 kWh of questionable-quality lithium battery inside my apartment in a wooden building.
I also used to charge it from the outlets in the parking lot, but the new property manager that came along last year locked those outlets up so now I have to do the more fire-hazard thing of charging it next to the wooden building with a long extension cord.
I offered them to pay a reasonable fee for the electricity to use the parking lot outlets, letting them know it was in the interest of fire safety, but they chose the more dangerous option.
No good ideas otherwise. I wouldn’t worry about the battery inside much unless it’s from a really dodgy supplier (but then again, all the Chinese e-bike batteries are, and people still charge inside, it helps that they use concrete rather than wood).
Yes it is removable, but that doesn't change anything. The problem is the battery, not the bike. I'd rather store/charge large lithium batteries away from residences and flammable structures. 1kWh going into thermal runaway is no joke. It should really not be allowed by fire code, to be honest, unless the building is concrete and the charging location allows for safe egress if a fire starts.
That said, a larger fraction of Chinese buildings are concrete and more likely to be okay (provided people pay attention to evacuation route if the battery goes on fire in their apartment). My entire complex of 50+ apartments in California is a huge wooden structure. One bad fire could easily send all of it up in flames. There are safer, concrete buildings here, but they cost USD $4000+ for a 1-bedroom.
Regardless where you are, removable battery is a huge fire hazard. News about devastating fires caused by e-bikes batteries shows up from time to time. In China, It's common to see posters advocating for the storage of e-bikes outside building.
So don't store it in your home.
I don't know, but I'm mostly just focusing energy on looking for a new apartment now. My current place changed management last year and it's been horrible in many other ways as well. Frankly it's also possible they want me out so they can rent out my place to a new tenant at a much higher price, so they try to be assholes in whatever ways they legally can.
I feel SO bad for the other parents at the park that ask me about my experience because they get a 10 minute rave session from me where I talk about all the benefits we've enjoyed, especially when a simple "we love it!" probably would have been enough.
Some of the specifics, including but not limited to: removing 1-5 mile car trips from our lives (we've put over 2k miles on it, about 1k a year), riding to random parks, bakeries, beaches, putting the kids in a great mood getting fresh air when we cruise around the neighborhood with no destination after dinner, etc.
They're not only practical for the above, but they honestly make transportation more fun.
You are right, it's not really a workout.. until you run out of battery miles from home (oops), a ~60lbs bike is some inertia to overcome, but I made it without too much trouble.
If the infra isn't there for safe cycling as a form of transit, you end up subsidizing what become essentially toys which can only be used in places like greenways and parks which are designated for recreation. Whereas if you make the city safer for cycling first, these things could become a major component in a better / safer way to navigate the world.
Maybe the idea is that the new e-bike owners then turn around and demand (and are willing to fund) the fixes to make cities actually support these vehicles properly, but it seems like a bit of magical thinking to me.
But, if you look to the Netherlands, building it as tram:car:bike:people each flow direction isn't a bad model. (as a sometime Amsterdam resident 7 years ago I too made the classic mistake of walking in the ride path. You don't do that too often)
If I had an e-bike I don't think I'd change very much of my distance, but I might change frequency of use.
Some friends with e-bikes say it re-socialised riding, because before power it was totally about cadence and strength so they rode 50-100m apart mostly, a function of their natural pace and ability. Now, they ride 2x the distance, companionably, and so get the same exercise (this use of eBikes is when they are co-pedalled, its not entirely free of physical effort) but much more nicely.
Right now, ebikes lie in a space which makes them fertile targets for theft. The city hire bikes in Brisbane have made a very odd height decision, you can't elevate the seat to suit my scale. I use them but its an annoyance.
If they became more ubiquitous and if the value in theft dropped, I think that would be a good thing. Or we can cut off the hands of the bike thieves, Either works.
Another problem with subsidies is that it targets a specific mode (e-bikes), while simpler, cheaper, normal bikes might be good enough already. It could also lead to local sellers increasing the price of e-bikes.
Wringing out hands over people not using a subsidized e-bike "enough" seems pretty silly when for two decades we've been handing many thousands of dollars to anyone who has a pulse and buys a hybrid or electric, with little or no conditions. No income/worth caps, no purchase price caps, no annual usage requirements, nothing.
Bike were already environmentally friendly anyway, even before e-bikes were a thing.
Most of my issues come from people riding the latter of those two categories, however some of the concerns directly relate to both.
E-Bikes have a huge part of their ownership caught up into two groups that are doing the entire sector harm as well, the first group causing harm is those who are out modifying these bikes and getting them up to highway speeds in some cases, the second group are people who are turned to these as a mode of transport because they have lost their licenses due to DUIs and now take those same impairments to the E-Bike world.
Several crucial problems exacerbate the situation: the absence of mandatory safety equipment such as helmets, the lack of insurance coverage, insufficient training provisions, and the absence of mechanisms for accountability and identification of riders and their respective bikes.
In my personal opinion, a comprehensive solution for my region involves licensing all E-Bikes under the moped or limited-speed motorcycle license, requiring license plates, and implementing cost-effective insurance options (possibly achieved through government subsidization).
From what I can find ebikes tend to kill their rider. Though I can't find good statistics to answer my question.
To the rider, pedestrians, riders of traditional bikes, and property damage.
In Israel ebikes/escooters became popular 15 years ago if not more. They are universally hated by non riders, because
- riders tend not to obey any rules
- there is a bunch of deaths every year because e-whatever run into pedestrians on high speeds
- it's very fun to ride car on road and have somebody on e-whatever play chicken with you. especially during night. (once, one of those riders chased me to my home and demanded "compensation" for something)
- a whole bunch of fires due to exploding batteries (there is now Israeli startup that installs fire-proof charging stations/enclosures)
- no enforcement as policy too busy to deal with other stuff
So yes, for those who use it, it's probably comfortable and fun. Adds another drop into solving transportation/environmental problems. But at absence of proper legalization and enforcement it's not fun not be around them
However bad you think e-bikes are, the fact remains that cars are worse. As long as e-bikes are replacing cars, they’re a good thing.
You realize that many of these are now being sold going 40-60mph ... that's not low speed, not low risk (many of them are built with wheels and brakes that are not safe for the speeds not to mention the cheap chinese batteries that catch on fire), nor low property damage when they hit things at top speed.
> exercise alone would have a positive impact in the U.S. that could very well offset the costs.
What exercise? The vast majority of these being sold aren't "pedal assisted" they are full electric sudo motorcycles.
> a maximum assisted speed of 32 km/h
https://www.ontario.ca/page/riding-e-bike#section-2
Anything with power assist above 32kmph isn't an ebike in Ontario and would therefore need insurance, registration, license, etc.
The issue is the lack of enforcement. It's crazy the number of stores and brands with illegally fast ebikes!
I know what you mean about there being two types of ebikes, and agree: one is basically a regular bike with assist, the other is basically a moped or motorcycle. They often look different as well, probably because of the battery size.
The problem I have is that individuals are riding the motorcycle-style ones on paths that are clearly designated as off-limits to motor vehicles for safety reasons. These are paths that see high use, with lots of pedestrians and cyclists, and the speeds that people are riding them strikes me as unsafe. They're often much faster than what someone could physically achieve without a motor. They're also often driven by older children, teenagers, or very young adults, many riding them in pairs, one driving, the other sitting behind.
If you were to step back and just consider the the moped-style ebikes for what they are, that's what they are: electric mopeds or motorcycles on a path designated for pedestrian and cycling use only.
My spouse works in rehab and has started seeing injuries from collisions involving these bikes, and they're basically the same as moped or motorcycle injuries.
I'm not sure what the solution is, because the "regular" ebikes seem just like bikes to me, and it seems strange to require a license and training for them. But it also seems unacceptable to let motorized vehicles on trails specifically meant to be free of them, because of a loophole in regulations.
For the legal "electrically assisted pedal cycles" as they are called in the UK, the solution has to be police actually doing their jobs: when they see the driver of a bike with a battery & cargo casually going >= 20 mph without any effort being put into the pedals (I spot these every single day, nearly all of which are operated by Deliveroo/Just Eat/Uber Eats): Stop them! Confiscate the vehicle! Prosecute the driver for driving an unregistered, non-certified vehicle, uninsured and without a driving license!
Because they are much cheaper to produce, and overall the segment doesn't require any licensing, safety inspections, or really any "check in" to operate on the roads with the government so very difficult to enforce any rules.
>Stop them! Confiscate the vehicle! Prosecute the driver for driving an unregistered, non-certified vehicle, uninsured and without a driving license!
Easier said than done it seems because the police in my area can't barely enforce normal traffic rules on conventional bikes let alone e-bikes that go much faster.
I do ride some shared roads but they are low-traffic side streets, and I have to zip down an inner city bike lane on my commute but again, totally different to a shoulderless high speed road.
All that being said it can be challenging in a few ways:
- Infrastructure: We partially chose our current suburb home due to the good bike infrastructure and will have to be even more hyper aware if we have to move again. The two important pieces to us are: trail systems that get you 80% of the way to most places without interacting with cars AND dedicated bike/ped under/over passes around major motordom infrastructure like freeways. Luckily our current home had both.
- Maintenance: I think there is a market opportunity for ebike components that are WAY beefier than the current incumbent components. In particular the brake pads and brake systems are just not up for the job in any hilly terrain. And given the weight/size of a cargo ebike getting it to a shop via a car is annoying. So, I have learned to just bleed and replace pads myself but it is a tedious task that needs to be done about every 600miles under my use.
- Price: The Tern GSD is pretty crazy expensive at ~$6k but was the only thing that checked the boxes of belt drive, integrated hub, and mid-drive assist for us.
Also, to share with friends and interested folks the ways we get around I started sharing recordings of my routes and rides with an overlay map: https://github.com/philips/bike-cam-map-overlay
They also have electric versions. They're a bit pricey but very high quality. Being from the UK, they are limited to electric assist up to 25km/h which is a bummer for Canadians who typically get to go up to 32km/h and Americans which are limited at 40km/h, but you can also buy a regular non-electric Brompton and add on a Swytch Kit (https://www.swytchbike.com/) which. We've done that and it's worked out really well.
Brompton is still excellent though. We know someone who cycles to the airport, takes it on the plane as hand luggage to Munich and then cycles to his mums house.
https://www.costco.com/jetson-haze-electric-bike.product.400...
Tax cars more, particularly big ones and parking. Subsidize bikes and bike lane projects.
I'm very pro bike (writing this as I've walked in from a 35mi ride tonight). Ebikes allow people that are not in the best of shape to get moving. It's worked miracles for some people and is a gateway to better health.
If we haven't learned yet, subsidizing has a way of creating glut, waste and abuse. How do you think Comcast got entrenched? How do you think recreation.gov came to be? The thought behind "hey we should subsidize ebikes" is a good one. Unfortunately it's the wrong solution.
More like higher taxes for some and higher wages for others.
I do think that we should build infrastructure and penalize driving significantly which would encourage bike riding but subsidies don't seem like they will hurt nor create some weird monopoly like you suggest.
looks over at the massive, entrenched, systemic subsidization of low-occupancy motor vehicles
"Use fees" don't cover the costs of just roadway maintenance and construction in any state in the US. They typically make up much less than half.
Then there's all the other costs we as a whole subsidize, like police/fire/ems resources used responding to dangerous drivers and crashes, which tend to be dominated by low-occupancy passenger vehicles. Professionally driven vehicles for cargo and people are involved in far, far fewer incidents.
Years ago I had a bad knee injury and for a while I didn't have the range of motion to peddle a normal bike. So I bought an E-bike with a throttle (it's basically a motorcycle in every way except the regulation). But, when I was able to ride a regular road bike again, I opted for it instead.
Later, my mother in her 60s came to visit and we went on a 25 mile ride. She LOVED it. I gave it to her and she took it home. My dad liked it so much that he bought one too and now they go out on long 40 mile E-bike rides.
They love it. I joke that I saved their marriage. I'm not sure it's really a joke. They wouldn't be able to get out and get this much enjoyment on regular bikes.
E-bikes are accessible to nearly everyone. It's a fabulous way to cut down on our obsession in the USA!
Building good Li-Ion chargers that don't overcharge or overheat batteries is known technology. Those features might add $10 to the cost of the crappy chargers, and their use should be mandated by law.
We need a multi-phase, 30 year plan to eliminate the need for personal cars. It's a hard problem to solve in general, but moreso in the US which is built for cars. More protected bike lanes need to be rolled out, bike racks expanded tremendously, park-and-ride options expanded, increased public transit. There's plenty of mobility needs that a bike simply can't replace that need new solutions, so funding for experiments, new businesses, etc will be needed. It requires funding, construction, passing of contentious city and county ordinances.
It's a complex problem. There is no simple solution.
For example, the recent efforts in the Bay to defund public transit were being pushed heavily by a State Rep based out of SF who lives in the wealthiest, most car-centric portion of the neighborhood. Despite his own constituents being against his position, there's nothing they can do but vote him out during the next election cycle.
The Denver program at least limited it to low-income individuals which I think is the correct approach to avoid significant pricing disruption.
I have moral issues with the wealthier members of society getting an $8K handout from the govt for buying a new car, but that's a different matter.
No, it's not. Production is elastic, it grows to accommodate price changes. For most things you get a minuscule increase in price with a large increase in usage.
yes, that's the goal here.
Yes, it may encourage manufacturers to increase price, but that gives them more money to do marketing, and incentivizes them to try to sell more of the product since the margins are now so good.
It was striking how fast all the car marketing in Norway changed towards pushing EVs. While in other countries the car makers still seem to be primarily pushing ICEVs. Considering that consumer awareness is an important aspect of transitioning to a new solution, this is a very good thing IMO.
I think it's also good that Norway didn't try to limit the subsidy to cheaper cars, to not fall for the temptation to exclude luxury cars. (Until very recently, now that the transition is already nearly complete). Making sure nobody feels excluded or singled out makes political support much easier and simplifies everything.
Hard for me to not call this “survivorship bias.” You don’t hear about the times it didn’t work…
> Many new technologies are expensive early on. If they’re technologies that seem likely to offer big public benefits, governments often step in…
Holy smokes, what a great point. We should also subsidize electric cars for families where biking isn’t an option. We should also subsidize computers - who wants to grow up not knowing how to code? Heck, let’s subsidize free Master’s degrees, because an educated nation is a productive nation! Where’s the subsidy for poor families to go to theaters for cultural enrichment?
I’m kidding of course, but to be honest, the argument proves too much and is hardly original.
I think a key point here is that a subsidy might increase the speed of adoption; the climate change argument (which I think relatively weak in this instance) is one reason to speed up adoption.
Enough cycling deaths and severe injuries from cars as it is, we are at a 40 year peak because of smartphones and DWI
The company that sold the bike (SF startup faraday) promptly went out of business. — I want so much to hop back in the saddle… but I’m thinking about e-waste. And feeling pretty shy about the whole thing.
Meanwhile, my 20 year old manual bike is still good as new.
Or go looking for a company that will take an old e-bike and recycle it upon purchase of a new bike, I’m not finding that either.
So it’s easy to be flippant, but if you have concrete links to either of the above, that would be far more useful.
Have you looked at Panasonic?
They’re on my radar now for sure. Thank you.
Also, trying to re-get your bike from an encampment after you tracked it down is dangerous, and the police might not have time to help you get your property back (although I’ve heard a success story here as well).
GPS isn't itself useful. That lets the bike know where it is, which is meaningless without the ability to communicate that to the outside world. That requires a cell connection and active subscription, which costs money. Most bikes do not have this ability.
A normal bicycle is way more ecological than an e-bike. It's healthier too. And less dangerous.
And out in the burbs, forget about it. No way I am taking a scooter or bike out on a busy road.
What we need is a serious conversation around zoning and building communities in such a way that walking, scooters, and bikes become viable for 50%+ of peoples daily commuting.
Isn’t the problem that the “communities” are already built? I live around 20-25 miles from the major employment centers other than medical offices/hospitals and can’t help but think that most people aren’t going to start walking, scootering, or biking no matter what. I’d think subsidies for additional WFH would make a far bigger difference (based on the minuscule commuting traffic I observed during early-ish Covid).
Also, a number of places in the US are still growing and sprawling outwards; reversing that trend would have a positive effect even if none of the existing places change.
> I live around 20-25 miles from the major employment centers other than medical offices/hospitals
This is sort of the problem though. Some people prefer to live that far away, and if you do that's great, but a lot of people end up moving away from cities for economic reasons. Building more housing closer to the employment centers would allow more people to live nearby, which reduces the number of people that need to commute that far.
We need safe bike lanes. If my city has it, I’ll quickly jump the gun to make an investment. To add on top of it, let’s have some theft safety as well by building garages or having an airbnb equivalent of parking in private places. But as I think about these they feel like a child wishing for a gift on Christmas.
But I still sold it, just a week ago. Why? I live in a small apartment and I was getting increasingly paranoid about the possibility of it catching fire. Once a battery that big starts to burn, it just goes, there’s basically no way to put it out and given how cramped my apartment is, it’s game over for everything I own, even if my girlfriend and I get out. I’ve seen some news articles about e-scooter fires, even from the city I live in, and the photos were … haunting.
Cars are so deeply ingrained in American infrastructural thinking, it's ridiculous.
Goods, groceries, e-bikes don’t magically transport to their final destinations.
Edit: there is this Captain Planet like view of cars as though most drivers are evil polluters. We are just trying to get on with our lives and aren’t privileged as folks who can afford to live car free.
TP just grows wings and flies to barhrooms straight from the factories.
Shouldn’t cyclists pay their fair share for their usage? Why no DMV fee for cycles?
It's a common myth that people believe US roads are solely or even mostly funded through user fees.
What about thousands in DMV fees? Your reference doesn’t cover that. Why does everyone ignore that?
> It's a common myth that people believe US roads are solely or even mostly funded through user fees.
Just repeating the same falsehood from biased sources doesn’t make it true.
Once again give me a source with DMV fees.
> Just repeating the same falsehood from biased sources doesn’t make it true.
"I don't believe you so your source is false." Okay so where are your alternate sources?
According to the CA Legislative Analyst's Office [1], 63% of California roads were funded through user fees in 2022-2023. My above source reads 60% as of 2019. This tracks. So unless you think the CA State Government's own Legislative Analyst office is a "biased source", then these figures are probably broadly accurate.
But then china builds all of its projects out quickly.
Luckily I have the sisu and can endure the daily commute whole year on my single speed granny bike. It's so beaten up, no crack heads think they can get a good price for it on tori.fi
The vast majority of e-bikes in Germany are pedelecs that offer electrical support for riders up to 250 watts and only up to a speed of 25km/h (15mph). Bikes that go faster or where one doesn’t need to pedal at all need a license plate and special insurance.
And, critically, they aren't allowed on bike lanes but have to be rode on the road instead, which makes them far less attractive for commuting in the city.
That's why the limited pedelecs are by far the most popular choice of E-Bike in Germany.
CitiBike in NYC is a huge success, and making part of the fleet electric was a big upgrade. But it costs a couple bucks for each electric ride on top of an expensive annual membership.
But the number of e-bikes needs to grow much more, and the cost needs to come down. Either electric rides should be included in the annual fee, or else they should be integrated with a subway/bus pass so you can subway+e-bike for the same price you can subway or bus or subway+bus now.
In NYC, bikes can only be parked in charging stations, and popular areas fill up quickly. On three occasions, I had to ride an additional 10 minutes to find an available station near my destination. That excludes the additional time to walk to my destination. Purchasing an ebike improved the predictability of my commutes in NYC -- even compared to trains and taxis.
In SF, you can park the standard electric bikes anywhere in their service zone for an extra charge. This means that while I often have to walk to get a bike, I can ensure there's parking at my destination if I'm in a hurry, and park for free at a station if I'm not.
I don’t think there’s anything particular about e-bikes that attracts reckless people compared to trucks or motorcycles.
> I don’t think there’s anything particular about e-bikes that attracts reckless people compared to trucks or motorcycles.
I would disagree with this. The people who are reckless are working - they are doing deliveries and trying to get as many jobs in as they can.
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/03/study-cyclists-dont-b...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/10/cyclists...
I run stop signs on my bike all the time (like at 4 way stops) - I don't think this is very dangerous if you do it properly. Obviously I slow down to like a few MPH and can stop quickly if I see a car/someone crossing the street/whatever.
There are a few people who ride balls out, but tend to be in control of their bikes.
How do you do that? An eBike seems like a good first step.
you can build 20 small motorcycles using the materials of one tesla and 50 for 1 e hummer
set city speed limits to 45mph
typical quality e bike is about the same cost as a 150cc moto
e-bikes have the same governors that many disable upon setup .
I lost an uncle a few years ago; he was wearing a typical bicycle helmet, crashed going about 20mph, and hit his heat on a curb. The end.
Wear a good helmet. Be honest with yourself about the risk you are taking if you don't.
Electric motorbike is another story, but I don't think they're that common in the developed world.
Regarding e-waste, subsidize non-electric bike and trikes as well.
Most of the electric motorbikes are limited to 25 mph so insurance and license are not required, but there are some that can do 35 mph and faster.
I think instead of a POS subsidy I would make it a fairly substantial tax credit if you had fewer registered vehicles in your household than adults and keep it rolling every year. And for e-bikes specifically you can do the same sort of thing in addition, if you commit to not having a registered ICE vehicle for 1 year you get say an up to $2000 rebate on the purchase of an e-bike you can claim every so often like maybe 5 years.
Sounds like you've never had one. They are absolutely game changing.
If you're lucky, the change to your life is swift and painless. If you're not, it can be months or years until you walk again.
1. Do not combine alcohol with the activity. A disproportionate ratio of fatalities involve the operator having some alcohol in the blood stream. I'll throw things like "being hydrated" and "not tired" into this bullet.
2. Using the correct safety gear. The amount of gear I wear is well above the minimum legal requirements. Specifically the DOT helmet certification is a joke compared to every other motorcycle helmet certification on the market.
3. Rider training. You get significant insurance deductions for taking a course every 2 years. That's because staying fresh on your training actually has a huge impact on accident likelihood.
Is it? I could imagine someone saying: "Driving my new Model 3 is much cheaper than my old truck, and more comfortable, so I take more trips around the city. Congestion isn't so bad with autopilot and podcasts."
Or, someone in a dense city: "We got by without a car at all, but we thought about buying an EV and this subsidy made up our minds"
There's no way given how much parking costs, the paltry subsidy wouldn't be the tipping point.
As the article points out, there is already high demand for e-bikes. So build appropriate infrastructure, and then add subsidies to speed adoption and reduce reliance on automobiles.
> Do they belong in streets, along with cars? No, the rider is at great risk.
You could equally ask do cars belong in the streets, along with pedestrians and regular cyclists? They put every other street user at great risk. Yet we subsidize new electric cars with up to $15,000. How many people die in car accidents every year? How many die from bicycles?
I intentionally say city area not city, so it's understood I mean certain districts like downtowns and CBDs. Suburbia is what it is, you need a car there at this stage.
Electric cars can't be driven safely, but that hasn't stopped us subsidising them.
> Do they belong in streets, along with cars? No, the rider is at great risk.
Imagine subsidising a form of transport that only endangers the user themselves. That might subtract from vital pedestrian-killing funding.
How do these averages compare? If the ebike is a lot faster, then I would expect the differences to cause problems, since both are traveling in the same lanes.
On what grounds?
Since most collisions happen at junctions, I would think the biggest source of potential conflict would be differences in acceleration from a dead stop - but again that's a problem that exists in the same form (if anything, a more severe form) for ecars.
I disagree with that part. Most e-bikes are speed limited to 20mph, a speed plenty of unassisted bikes can achieve if the rider feels like it, and plenty do. Bike lanes already have a variation in speed.
To achieve this, take one lane from roads and streets with any number of lanes and dedicate it to bikes with a buffer between it and the car lanes. Two lane roads and streets would become one way.