Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation United States

Electric Bikes Won Over China. Is the US Next? (bloomberg.com) 271

Sales of electric-bike is growing in many parts of the world. Asia-Pacific region, for instance, is estimated to see 32.8M of them sell this year, and 1.6m of e-bikes are expected to be sold in Western Europe by the end of this year. In China, in particular, the ban on motorcyle has lead to massive e-bike adoption. Over the years we've seen many companies such as BG and Pedego dish out models after models, offering bikes ranging from elegant folding versions to flat-tire variants. Despite all the growth elsewhere in the world, North America and Latin America are estimated to see less than 250,000 inventories move this year. But going forward, the number is likely to see a major growth. From a Bloomberg article: Electrics "finally have legs to be able to take off in the U.S.," because cyclists are feeling safer on the roads, battery and motor technology is improving, and retail prices are dropping, says Todd Grant, president of the National Bicycle Dealers Association. However, e-bikes have been banned in some U.S. cities because of safety concerns. [...] The U.S. market could develop "way faster" than Europe's did, says Claus Fleischer, who heads Bosch's e-bike division. The German multinational began selling motors and batteries for electric bikes in 2011 and now supplies more than 60 brands, primarily in Europe. It opened a subsidiary in Irvine, Calif., in 2014 and is sponsoring e-bike expos across the U.S., including one in Portland, Ore., that ran for three days in late May.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Electric Bikes Won Over China. Is the US Next?

Comments Filter:
  • by turkeydance ( 1266624 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @05:35PM (#52245895)
    helped. a lot.
    • Indeed. It's a real stretch to call it "Winning Over" when the other choice is banned.

  • by Shadow of Eternity ( 795165 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @05:43PM (#52245929)

    John Forester's cult of Vehicular Cycling [copenhagenize.com]. Cycling in the US has been crippled for decades by a delusional group of ideologues who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes, even on 50mph state highways, and who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

    • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

      by kheldan ( 1460303 )
      Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
      However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.
      • However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you,

        Pretty sure nobody is saying anything of the sort. Well, no cyclists would, anyway.

        • However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you,

          Pretty sure nobody is saying anything of the sort. Well, no cyclists would, anyway.

          They're certainly saying it, not cyclists but people involved in that debate. The reason it sounds like something nobody would say is because it isn't a popular idea. ;) Probably less than 1% of people supporting any sort of ban actually support replacing all of the access they would be removing. Pretty much all the people talking about it are intentionally misleading in how they present the issue, because if people understand what they actually mean they'll get laughed at. What they really mean is, bicycle

      • by hawguy ( 1600213 )

        Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
        However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.

        I've been an active cycling advocate for over 20 years in several different states, regularly attending community meetings to promote cycling, and have never heard of an advocacy group that would reject dedicated cycling infrastructure because they think cyclists belong on the roads. (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection).

        More commonly, safe cycling infrastructure is dismissed

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          (though I have seen some poor "dedicated" lanes rejected because they were more dangerous than shared lanes since the cyclists were exposed to cars at every intersection)

          So... the shared lanes don't expose cyclists to cars at every intersection (and all points in between as well)? How does that work?

          Where I live we spend a million bucks a mile for bike lanes which are ignored by at least half the cyclists on the road who insist on "sharing" lanes with vehicles lawfully travelling at three times their speed

        • You fell for the misleading claims, though. They're not talking about replacing anything, they're just phrasing their ban proposal in a way that would imply it. So that they sound reasonable.

          When he says:

          delusional group of ideologues... who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of

          What he means by "dedicated bicycle facilities" is a park. Where you're allowed to ride your toy. Of course, they blame "vehicular cyclists" but that isn't who is trying to popularize the idea; it is anti-bicyclists who are pointing at fringe nutcases to try to paint bicyclists in general as insane impedime

      • cyclists should be banned from roads

        You guys realise when you keep using the exact same red herring that nobody mentioned, down to the wording, it's a giveaway that you're actually just trying to dissemble in favor of your utterly failed ideology, right?

        hat would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.

        What's ruined cycling for everyone in the US is the kamikaze cult that thinks bicycles belong only in ordinary motor vehicle roads and will lie, cheat, and protest to keep it that way. In every location where cycling has a significant modal share it's due to the construction of dedicated cycli

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 03, 2016 @05:55PM (#52245983)

      I've always wondered why we'd rather have cyclist hit by cement trucks than pedestrians hit by cyclists..

    • John Forester's cult of Vehicular Cycling [copenhagenize.com]. Cycling in the US has been crippled for decades by a delusional group of ideologues who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes, even on 50mph state highways, and who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

      I doubt if they've been influential enough to cripple cycling. They seem to be confined to online ranting in their own little echo chamber. Thankfully.

    • by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      a...group...who believe bicycles belong in the middle of regular motor vehicle lanes

      Actually, what vehicular cyclists really believe is that bicyclists should act "as drivers of vehicles." Did you know that slow-moving vehicles are already required to be driven as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb [ca.gov]? A bicycle is (usually) a slow-moving vehicle, so why should it be treated differently under the law than other slow-moving vehicles?

      Sometimes it's safer to ride in the middle of the lane, such

      • Actually, what vehicular cyclists really believe in their own words is that cyclists should "take the lane". Start to finish that's their nigh-religious mantra, "take the lane" and all will be solved.

        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          Yep take the lane, because if you're kind enough to share it, you'll get killed by some entitled idiot like you who disapproves and would rather risk killing the cyclist by squeezing by than having a bit of patience and waiting.

          Take the lane does solve most problems because the the chance of getting intentionally murdered is much, much, much lower than the chance of getting hit by someone being stupid. Taking the lane leaves (literally) less room for stupidity.

          PS the road isn't yours, stop acting like it is

      • Riding in the center of the lane makes the bicyclist more visible and forces motorists to change lanes to pass instead of passing unsafely close to the bicyclist.

        In California, when you do that, you are now breaking the law. The law requires all drivers to pull over to permit passing for just one vehicle now, and you are required to pull over when it is safe. The standard used to be five vehicles stacked up behind you. A cyclist can pull over safely basically anywhere, so the short story is that you should pull over immediately rather than holding up faster traffic. That's the same standard for everyone, not just bicycles. The standard is not "when you come to a tur

    • who will actively seek to prevent dedicated bicycle facilities from being built if it means people will ride in ways they disapprove of.

      This is intentionally misleading. Nobody proposing to ban bicycles from traffic lanes is actually proposing to spend the money to replace that access with dedicated lanes. No, telling cyclists to stay in the park is not the same as building "dedicated facilities" in the context of traffic.

  • by ffkom ( 3519199 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @05:49PM (#52245953)
    ... the much better trend for the US would be an increased use of non-electric, traditional bicycles.
  • "because cyclists are feeling safer on the roads"... they shouldn't or else they're just fooling themselves. In the US in general, people driving cars/trucks don't like cyclists.
    • , people driving cars/trucks don't like cyclists

      Generally false. We don't SEE them, and expect they are looking out for us, being the lighter, more nimble and better sighted vehicle. Even big motorcycles are hard to see, nevermind a skinny little bike.

      Now it is true that a cyclist holding up traffic makes people angry, and angry people may not use best judgement. There are some roads where bicycles just shouldn't be, or else the rides should be widened so that bicycles can be without disrupting traffic.

      • Even big motorcycles are hard to see, nevermind a skinny little bike.

        You aren't looking around enough. If you're used to looking for bicycles, they're easy to see. If you're used to looking for motorcycles, they're easy to see. Lane sharing by motorcyclists is legal in California, so if you're driving you have to expect that motorcycles are going to come up the apparently non-existent lane between you and the next car. They're easy to see if you actually look.

    • That's generally because they blow red lights and act like complete twats.

  • by willworkforbeer ( 924558 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @06:04PM (#52246033)
    Professional cycling races.
  • by ukoda ( 537183 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @06:09PM (#52246061) Homepage
    Having used eBikes for a daily commute in China I think they are a great technology, practical and affordable. The average price for an eBike was about USD $400 when I lived there a couple of years ago. Current eBikes outside of China appear to be grossly over priced. There are a few changes need if they wish to sell outside of China. The build quality needs to improve, quite doable. The speed restrictions need removed, typically 35kph which is too slow in cities outside China, 55kph (35mph) should make them able to mix with cars safely in cites. They currently have 500W motors which would probably need boosted to 750W-1KW for flat cites and 2-3KW for hilly cities.
    • by mysticgoat ( 582871 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @07:35PM (#52246429) Homepage Journal

      E-bikes that can exceed 20 mph need to be limited to cyclists who can pass a motorcycle license exam. At 35 mph an e-bike with its smaller tire-to-road surface area and poorer braking behavior is more dangerous than a motorcycle and requires more skill in the instantaneous risk assessment that is critical to safe driving of any vehicle. E-bikes in traffic lanes at faster than pedaling speeds are not only a threat to their riders, they are a hazard to all other drivers on the road.

      • by ukoda ( 537183 )
        Well the 20mph limit is a regional thing but yes it is relevant. We use a 300W limit so most existing Chinese eBike would be treated as motorcycles here anyway but at 20mph they have all the same risks that bicycle suffer from with not being able to join the other faster traffic. In many countries you could ride them with a car licence. The eBikes I rode had fat scooter tires and disk brakes were becoming common. Basically my argument is they should be up spec'd to match a typical 50cc scooter which is
    • You can buy conversion kits on ebay for under $200 and stick one on a $50 craigslist bike.
    • Throw yourself off of a bike at 35mph and tell me how safe it is.

      • by ukoda ( 537183 )
        About as safe as falling off at 20mph and landing under a car doing 35mph? I watched a good friend of mine be killed by a car, she was riding at less than 5kph when the car drove over her. What's your point? I have been riding motorcycles since 1974 and all those years I have never felt the desire or need to throw my self off. My normal commute is on a VTR1000, 100KW, top speed 280kph. When commuting I do so at the same speed as the traffic when it is moving, and about 20kph when passing stationary tra
  • by tverbeek ( 457094 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @06:19PM (#52246099) Homepage

    I'm skeptical that electric-powered bikes will become very popular in the US. They're fairly similar in riding qualities (lightweight, easy to handle) and licensing requirements (pretty much none) to a 50cc motorscooter, and those have failed to take off, despite being widely available in the same price range for years. I've been a day-to-day scooterist for seven years, but I don't have a lot of company out there. Especially in the north, where they're a three-season vehicle (or one-season, for the less dedicated), they aren't seen as a viable substitute for a car. Even with 100mpg engines that cost almost nothing to fuel [genuinescooters.com], the ability to park them almost anywhere, and a lot of other appealing features, most consumers just don't seem interested (which is too bad for them, because unless the roads are wet or icy, I'd much rather ride than sit in a car).

    An e-bike also suffers from being neither fish nor fowl. A 20mph bike is too slow to keep up with traffic in a motor-vehicle lane, but too fast to fit in with any human-powered traffic in a bicycle lane. I've ridden a 50cc scooter (mine was capable of 40mph) in 45mph zones, and believe me: motorists don't like you when you go under the speed limit in a motorized-vehicle lane. They'll eat a 20mph e-bike alive, even in a 25mph zone. But if that e-bike takes the bike lane (which isn't legal in many places), it will quickly overtake regular bicyclists, whom it won't be able to safely pass because bike lanes aren't designed for that. Dedicated lanes for motor-powered two-wheelers might help as an option for e-bikes and scooters (and motorcyclists who aren't in a hurry), but I don't see that happening until they become popular... ye olde Catch 22.

    • failed to take off

      They wee one of the defining status symbols of the 1980's.

      • The key phrase there being "status symbol". There was a short-lived fad in which Puch mopeds and Honda Spree scooters were popular among upper-class 15-year-olds without proper driver licenses, but they never became a mainstream form of transportation. They started to make a comeback about eight years ago, thanks to skyrocketing gas prices, but as soon as Wall Street tanked the economy and drove gas prices down, the idea of investing a couple grand into another vehicle made people nervous.

    • Just because an e-bike _can_ do 20mph is no reason that it _has_ to do 20mph. I'd value the 300W assist cruising at a normal 12-15mph, if it meant I could arrive without being drenched in sweat.

    • Even with 100mpg engines that cost almost nothing to fuel,

      The problem is you vastly overestimate how useful 100 MPG is. MPG isn't a measure of fuel economy, it's the inverse of fuel economy. This has huge implications for fuel consumption and cost. Imagine you need to travel 100 miles.

      12.5 MPG full-size SUV = 8 gallons
      25 MPG sedan = 4 gallons
      50 MPG hybrid = 2 gallons
      100 MPG scooter = 1 gallon

      See how each time MPG doubles, the fuel saved (and thus money saved) is halved? It's counter-intuitive,

  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @06:21PM (#52246107)
    I went to Shanghai and Hangzhou about 18 months ago, and saw this stuff for myself. The newly-built portions of these Chinese cities (ie the ones that used to be open fields 20 years ago or razed slums) have their nice and shiny new roads layed out as follows:
    1. Storefronts
    2. A portion of the sidewalk taken up by space for bikes and electric scooters, with power strips provided by shopkeepers for their customers
    3. Rest of the (wide) sidewalk
    4. Dedicated bike+electric scooter lane, maybe 6-8 feet wide
    5. Small median (~1-2 feet, bigger for bus stops)
    6. Traffic lanes, 4 or more lanes total, sometimes in groups of two or three, sometimes with a set of reversible lanes, sometimes dedicated bus lanes.
    5 downto 1 in reverse order on the other side.

    At almost all intersections, the bike lanes have separate traffic signals (usually overlapping with pedestrian walk signals), and sometime the bike lanes have separate left turn signals which coincide with exclusive left turn signals for the car lanes. If I remember right, the car left and right turn lanes can be either on the interior or exterior of the road and there are signs to indicate which set of lanes allow you to turn which way at the upcoming intersection. This is to deconflict turning vehicles from bikes/pedestrians going straight at the outside of the road.

    Overall, it was a pretty good system. But (especially in Shanghai) you could tell that half the people on the road didn't have an f'ing clue of how to operate a vehicle in traffic, and one time when I was riding a bus, a woman cut of the bus changing from one set of lanes to another (in a way that just wouldn't happen here) and got her rear tail light knocked out.

    The other thing is that this all takes space. You couldn't do it unless you were building from scratch or were willing to knock down large numbers of existing buildings. But the Chinese had to do it this way because maybe only half of their people can afford to own cars, and even fewer back when this was built 20 years ago. So the streets were layed out to accomodate an equal number of people on bicycles and buses/motor vehicles. That's a ready market for electric scooters.
    • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Saturday June 04, 2016 @04:57AM (#52247627)

      You couldn't do it unless you were building from scratch or were willing to knock down large numbers of existing buildings.

      Or you take the Dutch approach. Reclaim a lane from the road traffic. Put in place restrictions on driving within the city centre. Prioritise traffic lights for the bicycle flow instead of main traffic flow, and make this ubiquitous across a city.

      When a large portion of the population is doing normal trips on a bicycle you don't need all that space for cars.

  • I use my e-bike for daily commuting. It is a low powered unit with a 350W geared hub motor. No wind cruse, under power is about 17mph, pedaling lightly gets me to about 20mph (after all, I am on my way to work, I have no intention of working hard to get there). Where the motor comes in handy is in shopping runs. When I have the bike and trailer loaded down heavy.

    The other place the motor makes a real difference is in a headwind. I am in South West Kansas, we have both wind and winter.

    Overall, this lifestyl

    • Parent post makes a good case for low powered e-bikes.

      Another case: when I was recovering from back surgery for a fractured spine, I got a used e-bike with a 500W motor, lead-acid batteries, sprung front fork, beach tires. My total moving weight was around 325 lbs, 340 lbs with baskets of groceries. Top speed was around 18 mph with lots of pedaling, best cruising speed using the motor in pedal-assist mode was 10 - 12 mph. This was excellent therapy as my bones knit together and I got back in shape after th

    • It isn't that it "can't work," it is that it is more expensive than a motorcycle. If you build it yourself, and don't count the time, that brings the cost down to what a used motorcycle costs, and that is including the title and registration. Insurance on a motorcycle isn't very much.

      In my State you can ride power-assisted bicycles in bike lanes if they can't go over 15mph, and what sells are internal combustion kits with a small wheel that presses on the bike rim. (like a bottle generator) They're loud and

  • Bike theft is one of the fastest growing crimes here in Europe. It will definitely get worse still a few years from now when the average bike is a $1500 e-bike instead of a $150 regular bike. There is an inherent problem with a vehicle that is both expensive enough to be worth stealing and lightweight enough that a person can just pick it up and walk away with it.

  • And not cars.

    The day that E-bikes take over in the US is the day *after* the bicycle infrastructure get so good, the distances so short, and the attitudes so much improved that everyone would be riding bicycles. This is unlikely. And if, somehow it did happen, it would actually be kind of sad. All that work to overhaul transportation, and Americans would still rather sit on their ass and coast rather than pedal.

  • by dltaylor ( 7510 ) on Friday June 03, 2016 @06:53PM (#52246269)

    I have experimented with cycling to work (usually use a motorcycle). At no place I have ever worked have there been showers usable for the transition from cyclist to acceptable office occupant, and I really must have those facilities.

    • Two words: Sponge bath.

      The last place I worked didn't have shower facilities. I would bike in and be all sweaty. I'd come into the office, drop off my bike, and grab two sponges, a towel, and a bar of soap that I kept in my desk. I'd wet down both sponges and soap up one of them. I'd go into the stall, strip down, wash myself with the soapy sponge, rinse myself with the wet sponge, dry myself with the towel, and put on work clothes. I might add some body spray, just in case. I'd wash the bike shirt a

    • Re:no showers (Score:4, Informative)

      by radarskiy ( 2874255 ) on Saturday June 04, 2016 @05:04AM (#52247635)

      Normal human beings do not maintain a racer's pace if they are not actually racing.

      A 3 mph walk will burn ~60 watts, which will get you 9 mph on a bicycle without being any more sweaty than walking for the same amount of time. Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?

      • That really depends on the weather. No, You don't have to bike to work at 20 mph. But given a bit of heat, a nice 1 mile hill which needs some effort getting over, and some people would enjoy taking a shower before getting behind their desk.
  • Seen it twice in the last month. No earpiece.

  • Huh? With every driver now staring at their phone instead of watching the road, I find it hard to agree with this. Distracted drivers are deadly for cyclists. I wish e-bikes made some noise. Navigating streets in Shenzhen last summer, you had to constantly watch out for e-bikes whizzing by from every direction.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • They don't, only /. and similar sites.
    • Turn off your tee-vee, it is polluting your elitist brain. Bicycling is very normal thing in the US. Maybe your anti-Americanisms are not a big deal, but it is still pretty pathetic. Maybe you once visited some redneck American city and presumed the whole country is the same. I'll remember to judge you by assuming you're a French waiter.

  • In the warmer states an e-bike could be used all year round. In colder states it will take a very hardy and young person to use an e-bike in cold weather. Just as you see very few motorcycles when it's really cold you will see very few e-bikes. In the south we see people demonstrating enclosed bikes that go quite fast without so much effort but in our hot climates an enclosed bicycle is a torture chamber worse than a sauna, most of the year. this has to seriously effect what people are willing to pay fo
  • I actually first noticed this yeas ago when I was in Shenzhen: electric scooters/"bicycles" were everywhere. So much for thinking that China is unwilling to limit its pollution.

    Further reading about the power charging infrastructure (or, lack thereof): http://designmind.frogdesign.com/2014/01/chinas-electric-bike-charging-cultures [frogdesign.com]

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Working...