The power to make cycling make sense

[flecc]

No Stuart, most of us seem to feel that it's you are missing it, and going over ground that has been fully and adequately answered. It won't add to the problem if they are being propelled by a motor instead, it's still the same riders. They just fall off a different bike. As for the weight, I've already pointed out to you that the cheap all steel dual suspension bikes that kids presently ride are often much heavier than the modern electrics.

Only if riding is increased will there be the chance for more to have accidents, and one would expect that anyway, more riders, more accidents. However, every study here and in Europe has shown that as cyclist numbers increase, the proportion of accidents reduces since those around like drivers and pedestrians are constantly reminded by their presence of of the need to think about cyclists. Since our huge increase in cycling in Greater London, that's happened here.

Kids lives have been ever more grossly restricted by do-gooders in recent years, and it's now reaching the proportion of an abuse of fundamental rights. That's no exaggeration when a recent study shows that on average, today's child zone of free movement is one ninth of what it formerly was.

 

[flecc]

50cycles

This is Richard Louvs core statement verbatim:

"There's empirical work measuring the radius kids tend to go away from their house. I think between 1970 and 1994 it shrunk to one-ninth of what it had been. There are a few studies like that."

Here's the full story:

An interview with Richard Louv about the need to get kids out into nature | By David Roberts | Grist | Main Dish | 30 Mar 2006

 

[flecc]

Two issues of interest to many of us:

1) Have the government any plans to introduce legislation for the higher performance class of electric bike that's enjoyed in Switzerland and now in the European Union by Germany? If not, will they please look at this since it could extend the scope of electric bike commuting, relieving the roads of more cars.

2) With the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive at last coming into force in the UK, can plans be put in place to extend recycling of batteries beyond lead acid to all the advanced types now in use in various equipment, and particularly for the large batteries now used by Electric bikes.

Thanks for this initiative on your part, 50cycles.

 

[Miles]

1) Have the government any plans to introduce legislation for the higher performance class of electric bike that's enjoyed in Switzerland and now in the European Union by Germany? If not, will they please look at this since it could extend the scope of electric bike commuting, relieving the roads of more cars.

Been there, done that

It might be a good idea to have a clear idea about exactly what is needed, in case he asks? Maybe that's something we could discuss here?

 

[Flying Kiwi]

Been there, done that

It might be a good idea to have a clear idea about exactly what is needed, in case he asks? Maybe that's something we could discuss here?

Its good that you're already onto this. I think a starting point may be to relate the terrain we have with that in those other countries. OK so their aren't any Swiss alps in Buckinghamshire/the UK but it's still relatively hilly compared to say Holland. It follows that there would be a reduced difference in speeds relative to traffic and a shortened time required for hill climbing if the maximum constant power limit was raised above 200 Watts to (checking Swizzbee stats)... 270 Watts or so. This equates to safety benifits.
Additionally it would be important to be prepared for a "but that will make these bikes go faster so such riders will need to wear helmets" response. Personally, if push came to shove, the freedom provided by the extra power and speed would make up for that taken away by an MHL under such circumstances but I understand why people would have differing views.

 

[Miles]

I think the chances of getting the EAPC directive changed are pretty remote... I'm more interested in changes/concessions re. the Low Powered Moped category.

250 Watts or 270 Watts Is there an ISO standard for the Continuous Rating of motors, even?

 

[flecc]

I agree that it's best to have the speed that can get one out of danger, since that also leaves the other option of slowing as well, the opportunity to exercise good judgement according to circumstance.

Having only the one option of slowing is bound to be more dangerous.

 

[Miles]

It would be nice, but I just don't think it's remotely possible that they will change the EAPC legislation.

As far as the Low Powered Moped category, that allows 1 Kw, but still only 25 km/h and you need license, helmet etc. etc. I had a lengthy correspondence with the DfT about the inconsistencies of this, 2 years ago. If only we could get the speed in this category up to, say, 40 km/h and some concessions on the helmet specifications, that would be something. We're no longer talking about a bicycle, though.

 

[rsscott]

I too would like to see a speed increase, outside of built up areas. I think that could be a sticking point though, how would you govern the existing 15mph limit for urban areas and a faster limit on the open roads ?

 

[flecc]

Another suggestion for 50cycles.

Once again I've just had someone step out in front of the Torq, not looking but relying on their hearing, something all cyclists experience regularly. No accident since I expect pedestrians to do this.

However, I think the "Look both ways" message is so stale now after being in use for over half a century that it just gets ignored. With the inevitable growth in usage of quiet electric vehicles, some very much faster than bikes, this problem is likely to get very much worse and like all problems, the sooner it's tackled the better. Maybe it's time "Look both ways" was replaced or supplemented. Perhaps your MP could approach the DoT with a new campaign suggestion:

"Cross with your eyes, not your ears"

 

[Miles]

Good point, Flecc.

Another idea to bring up is the possibility of "Charging facilities". There must be ways to encourage shops/cafes/garages etc. to provide these. Subsidies, grants?

 

[Baboonking]

Really nice to see people asking questions and writing letters. I think 25mph would be a fair top speed for a new "high speed" class of electric bike but I wonder if we shouldn't aim higher than 400 watts.

I quite like the legislation they have in the states. This is a federal law that specifies a 20mph 750watt continous limit. The law allows state law to overide it. Some states have created higher limits, such as 1000 watts 30mph but it allows flexibility to deal with potential issues on a state level as they come up.

A llittle bit of background.
I have a modified currie electro-drive bike that I now run at 48 volts. This equates to roughly 1150 watts peak, so I would guess a continuous rating of about 750 watts. The bike has a top speed of 30mph and it is therefore illegal on UK roads.

I rarely ride it at anything like 30mph. The real advantage of the extra power is the ability to keep a contant speed say 15/20 mph regardless of hills or wind. Basically since setting it up I hardly ever need to use the car at all. The people who actually try it are pretty amazed and surprised as the prevalent perception is that electric bikes are slow, and only of use for elderly or disabled - in otherwords people who would otherwise ride pushbike if their physical condition allowed them to.

I've worked out that I could actually use the bike with a trailler for 90% of my work needs (I'm a self employed trademan). This wouldn't be possible with 250 watts or I imagine with 400 watts. I imagine that if we (the UK) were ever to get serious about tackling climate change, its this kind of thing that might make sense.

to sum up, I think, if we are to have a new class of electric bike regulation, it wouldn't make sense to restrict the power rating of the motor too much as this would impact on hill climbing and towing ability. What is more important, from a safety point of view, is speed restriction.

please excuse the slightly rambling post

 

[flecc]

Far from rambling, full of interest there Baboonking. Fascinating to hear the details of your bike, going to generate some jealousy I think!

I've looked at the info on the Electrodrive site about higher voltage gear, but it's always best to hear an owner's experience.

 

[Miles]

Hi Baboonking,

We already have a category for the next class of electric bike: "low-powered moped". Unfortunately, it doesn't allow any increase in speed It does allow motors up to 1 kW, though.

Isn't the US power rating a maximum, rather than a nominal-continuous one?

Miles

 

[flecc]

It does allow motors up to 1 kW, though.

Cycles Maximus with their Lynch axle motor on their trike already hit well over 3 kW peak, but still call them 200 watts average.

They seem to be making their own law as they go along.

 

[Miles]

Rated @ 200 Watts cont. for an ambient temperature of 100 deg. C.

 

[Miles]

Ok, my proposal:

Modifications to the Low-Powered Moped category.

• Simplified SVA procedure.
• Maximum speed increased to 36 km/h
• Helmet spec. changed to allow use of cycle helmets.

 

[halfmedley]

Re. 400 watts plus etc as mentioned earlier in this thread: I think the only way you'd get Westminster to genuinely take an interest is by suggesting a "Wattage Tax" with various bands, say 250W, 500W and so on. If it gives 'em a chance to extract revenue (and pretend to be eco too) then they'd be all ears, or is that just me being cynical?

 

[flecc]

I think you're possibly right halfmedley, if the tax amount was enough to comfortably exceed the admin cost.

But that's not the only reason it might become attractive, there's also the fundamental political desire to control, whether control is needed of not, and any excuse is all they need.

The fact that we have the electric bike law we have illustrates what I mean. They've set the law to ensure our e-bikes only approximate to normal cycle performance. Therefore it was only necessary to set a maximum wattage figure, since that's how human cyclists work, they have maximum powers too. But no, they couldn't leave it at that, they had to exert as much control as possible with unnecessary extra restrictions:

Maximum assisted 15 mph, humans cycling effort isn't restricted like that.

Power phasing down towards 15 mph, we don't fade with shock nearing that speed!

Minimum age 14, since when have humans been unable to cycle at less than 14 years?

Maximum weight 40 kilos, since when has ordinary bike or human weight been legislated?

They just love to control and restrict, power corrupts indeed.

 

[Baboonking]

$64000 question. Is the Eurodirective a minimum specification and/or a maximum specification for member states. In otherwords is it possible for a member state, say us the UK, to bring in legislation to create a second class of high speed ebikes? I presume that this is posiible if the EU direcective is simply a minimum specification. Or would our parliament not have that authority?