Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 599 posts

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#521

Post by _ph_ »

louhike wrote: post #487
_se wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 miles is a very easy bike commute, not sure what you're talking about. It's about 20 minutes each way.

It depends on where you ride. My commute is 5 miles, and it takes 30 minutes, even though I'm used to bike, because of the circulation, all the time I have to stop. I agree it's easy if you're fit though. But I know it can be a pain for people who don't do sport at least weekly.

Well, first of all, if you bike regularly, you get all the training you need. The first couple of weeks are perhaps a bit hard, but that's about it for anyone in somewhat ok shape. And then there is the catch which is also the headline of the article we are discussing here: e-bikes. They allow anyone to go at a reasonable speed even uphill. That is, why they create a huge biking crowd.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#522

Post by namdnay »

pmontra wrote: post #514
namdnay wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the rules where you live? In France it's either a bike if the assist is limited to 25kmh (you could go above that on a nice flat road, but the gearing usually isn't designed for it) , or a "<50cc motorcycle" in which case it can go up to 50kmh (like all other <50cc vehicles). In the latter case, no bike lanes, you need a rear-view mirror and helmet, and for some bureaucratic reason the brakes have to be inve…

Same in Italy. It means that a ciclyst on an ebike can outperform a group of friends with normal bikes on an slope but can't stay with them on the way back home and they'll have to wait. I experienced that and it's not nice. The two types of bikes mix well only in low intensity sightseeing rides.

well, only if the friends are keen cyclists with road bikes.

no commuter in shirt and trousers with saddlebags for the laptop etc is going to be running at more than 25kmh

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#523

Post by Mengkudulangsat »

Retric wrote: post #189
Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #178

I'm sorry, but I absolutely hate e-bikes. We in Asia have figured the urban transit riddle long ago: Motorbikes or the more sustainable option; electric scooters [1]. If we are going to share the road, might as well everyone becomes capable of reaching similar speeds. E-bikes necessitate a cyclist lane for no good reason. [1] https://www.gogoro.com/

E-bikes allow a wider range of people to exercise and travel quickly. That’s their advantage over both electric scooters and traditional bicycles. As such they are really worth incorporating into the urban landscape. Also, it’s not obvious but the highest throughput per unit area at street level is sidewalks, bike lanes, and then the least efficient traffic lanes. Sidewalks need skyscrapers and a massive subway syste…

Electric scooters come with some amazing safety innovations, namely turn signals and rear-view mirrors.

I honestly don't understand why people need to exercise on their commute, just go to the gym!

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#524

Post by ben_w »

stavros wrote: post #498
ben_w wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but housing within biking distance to job centers sure isn't. In my view this is the primary reason bicycle commuters are stereotypically rich folks. Perhaps in some places (where the major newspapers are?), but there area I grew up in has residential, industrial, and commercial all mixed up in a way that solves that issue: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/50.8285/-1.0276 (Likewise Berlin, though Berlin also h…

I think the zoning thing is more of a "US vs other places" issue.

I was thinking that at first and was originally going to suggest that, then I realised there’s a similar stereotype in the UK despite the mixed land use.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#525

Post by fouc »

watwut wrote: post #520
Scroedingershat wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as any significant fraction of people use them they become congested, slow, and dangerous to pedestrians. Slowing to 5km/h repeatedly whilst waiting for an opening for a large portion of your journey makes commuting far less pleasant and severely limits viable range, and being overtaken constantly is unpleasant and dangerous for pedestrians. The separated bike lane *and* the mixed use path is the end goal, bu…

The separated lane is just too expensive while there are just a few bikers. If people start using bikes on mixed purpose roads too much, building them after makes sense. But while you are just in the process of promoting the whole cycle thing and there are not that many people, building dedicated tracks does not make much sense. This was the case in our city for quite long time. There was no massive negative sentimen…

It's not really expensive, since you're mainly re-drawing lines on the road, removing a lane for cars (or reducing parking area) and adding a lane for e-bikes. The bonus is that it encourages more e-bike use and reduces vehicle pressure.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#526

Post by 2-718-281-828 »

radu_floricica wrote: post #472
2-718-281-828 wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a 60 y/o hearing impaired unexperienced cyclist riding as fast as a fit experienced cyclist - good look with that. maybe you want to overthink your argument.

The same 60 yo might use a car instead, and drive multiples of 25kph. And energy is proportional to the square of the speed, so typical ebike will have about an order of magnitude less energy than the typical car, with also an order of magnitude less mass. Nassim Taleb made some pretty interesting points on the magnitude of a risk vs its probability. If you get a shower of pebbles thrown on your head, you'll be sore…

or even fly a plane? or operate a nuclear plant?

we're talking here about cycling on bicycle lanes.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#527

Post by osigurdson »

bambax wrote: post #519
mFixman wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people spend $20k to buy a low-mid range car. A top electric mountain bike seems like a better choice.

It's very difficult to buy a new car for less than $20k but it's very easy to find MTBs for ten times less...

It is possible to find a mountain bike for $2K. However, if you are serious about it $6K is probably a more reasonable starting point.

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#528

Post by fouc »

nradov wrote: post #107
enriquto wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mixed-use paths are an extremely bad idea and dangerous for everybody. I actively avoid them as a pedestrian and as a cyclist. They should all disappear. If ebikes help to accelerate the inevitable dismissal of these stupid mixed-use lanes, so good! A bike-friendly infrastructure is based on three separate networks, for pedestrians, cycles and cars. Each of the three networks must be continuous, reasonably complete a…

That's a nice ideal but it's just not realistic in most existing built up areas. There's literally not enough space for three separate networks without knocking down existing buildings and buying a lot of land through eminent domain. Let's focus on what can actually be achieved with realistic levels of funding.

You're forgetting that car lanes & parking spaces on sides of roads can be re-drawn to fit e-bikes and reduce overall car use (which is the goal anyways).

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#529

Post by Scroedingershat »

watwut wrote: post #520
Scroedingershat wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as any significant fraction of people use them they become congested, slow, and dangerous to pedestrians. Slowing to 5km/h repeatedly whilst waiting for an opening for a large portion of your journey makes commuting far less pleasant and severely limits viable range, and being overtaken constantly is unpleasant and dangerous for pedestrians. The separated bike lane *and* the mixed use path is the end goal, bu…

The separated lane is just too expensive while there are just a few bikers. If people start using bikes on mixed purpose roads too much, building them after makes sense. But while you are just in the process of promoting the whole cycle thing and there are not that many people, building dedicated tracks does not make much sense. This was the case in our city for quite long time. There was no massive negative sentimen…

> The separated lane is just too expensive while there are just a few bikers

I think we overall agree, but there are many things that can be done to reduce conflit points.

Firstly I agreed that the mixed lane with a shared car/bicycle alternate route should come first (as this covers both short/slow speed trips and high speed/high confidence trips), but secondly the shared lane has an absurdly small cost. Under 5% of the space and an even smaller fraction of the money spent on roads will give you a world leading bicycle network, and if you build it, it will be used -- cycling on good infrastructure is simply so much cheaper and more convenient than car ownership and cycle lanes have so much more capacity than roads that it becomes a no brainer.

I agree that bootstrapping it to get the political will needed for that pittance is extremely hard, which is why we need to think very carefully about encouraging long distance commuters who must average over 15km/h to make reasonable time and people taking the pram for a walk to mix. Ebikes are a big potential issue because they are both fast and favoured by new riders. It will only take one ebike with the speed limiter removed accidentally injuring a kid and hitting the news to set back bike infrastructure in an entire country by years.

Step 1 is mixed paths connecting local destinations (schools, shops, church, etc) and start reserving your space for the separated bikeway

Step 2 is a fully connected network where all the mixed paths have an alternate route with magic green paint or sharrows for high speed trips and to handle congestion.

Step 3 is build the separated paths.

You can't skip step 2 or avoid thinking about step 3 until it is too late.

Additionally throughout this process you need to fix all the cyclist and pedestrian hostile signals (waiting for a full 5 minhte cycle at a one way street full of stopped cars because the button wasn't pressed is absurd) and provide some alternative to stop signs (carefully designed roundabouts, yield signs, or cyclists-yield laws with public outreach work okay).

Re: The popularity of e-bikes isn’t slowing down

#530

Post by SyzygistSix »

Scroedingershat wrote: post #388
dTal wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E-scooters might be a way in. They're not as fast or as safe (to the rider), but they're practical in way e-bikes aren't due to portability. You can carry one into the office and charge it under your desk. And they lack the cultural baggage of cycling. And it's possible to look suave on one in a way that bicycles make difficult.

They're horrifically expensive, but something like an electric brompton as most of those same advantages. You can also usually take them on a bus or train. I'd disagree on the looking suave bit, it might just be because so many riders are clueless (and this perception being reenforced by selection bias), but someone on an escooter always looks far sillier to me than someone on a dutch style or folding bike, or even s…

Yep. I keep my eyes out for the well-dressed people on Dutch style bikes.
Post reply on HN