London Bans Most E-Bikes on Public Transport Over Fire Risk (theguardian.com) 77
Transport for London will ban most e-bikes across its network from March 31 amid growing safety concerns over battery fires, the transport authority announced on Wednesday. The ban, covering London Underground, Overground, Elizabeth Line and DLR trains, exempts only folding e-bikes, which are considered less likely to have been modified and pose a reduced safety risk.
TfL implemented the measure following union strike threats after several incidents, including an e-bike that exploded into flames at Rayners Lane Underground platform last month. The train drivers' union Aslef said the incident could have caused mass casualties.
TfL implemented the measure following union strike threats after several incidents, including an e-bike that exploded into flames at Rayners Lane Underground platform last month. The train drivers' union Aslef said the incident could have caused mass casualties.
Re: (Score:1)
Many of the greatest minds of the past believed in some variant of divine retribution/justice. Hell being the western name for such. Most (all?) major religions of east and west have some concept of consequences for actions in this life. Its the minority of humanity who live as if the life had no consequences beyond this life. Therefore, it seems wise to assume there there likely will be consequences, and live accordingly. Mr Saville clearly didn't get that memo, or he would have amended his behavior,
Re: (Score:3)
Therefore, it seems wise to assume there there likely will be consequences
Nah. Many of the greatest minds believed all sorts of things, but philosophy has advance over the past few thousand years. Thanks to those great minds, we have better tools for reasoning, and there's no reason to believe there is anything after this life.
I'll continue to live as if hell does not exist, but I'm not going to be a dickhead about it.
Re: (Score:1)
exactly. and all religions are dangerous as fuck. life pro tip today is the STAY AWAY FROM CULTS.
especially the gender delusion, that's going round really bad at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
if this was about fires (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TfL doesn’t have the power to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
And the climate change wouldn't it make more sense in the wider public Safety to ban "conversion kit" e-bikes as well as poorly made E-BSO bikes (E-Bike Shaped object)
The only thing Transport for London can ban you from buying is a public transport ticket, or ban you from riding on it. Many countries have rules banning various forms of dangerous ebikes. In those countries the rules are as you can expect, poorly enforced because of course they are, this shit is insanely hard to police.
Re: It is about fires (Score:2)
Other major cities will cite similar stats. NYC, in particular, is faced with significant damage to homes and loss of life related to ebike fires. In particular due to their popularity with delivery drivers, but also their use by the general population as a form of transportation.
https:/ [thecity.nyc]
China Is Replacing Lithium eBikes with SLA (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I worked in a shop,and the bikes that come in under the de minimis rule are scary. We actually enacted a policy that if it wasn't an ebike from a major brand(Trek,Specialized,C'dale) we wouldn't touch it. Also if we didn't sell the brand,we would only touch the acoustic bits,none of the e. I think the worst thing I saw was a bike whose battery was in a nylon bag on the handlebars.
Re: China Is Replacing Lithium eBikes with SLA (Score:2)
Yet there have been two such fires in the past year in London: on the platform at Rayners Lane station in February and on the platform at Sutton station last March.
Re: (Score:2)
30 kg per kWh versus 6 kg per kWh is a big deal.
The e-bike trade in program takes old models and scraps them. And then citizens can use credits to purchase a variety of new e-bikes, some of them are lead-acid but you can also buy other battery technologies (I believe some of the models are LiFePO). similar article [chinadailyhk.com]
The main reason MOC subsidized lead acid bicycles is because they are the cheapest one, even if their performance is not great. The goal is to make sure people trading in bikes can afford to get a
Re: China Is Replacing Lithium eBikes with SLA (Score:2)
SLA is the worst by far. At least use NiMH.
No real reason to disallow LFP either
Re: (Score:2)
That's mostly for scooters though, not eBikes as we know them. They have had electric scooters with lead acid batteries for decades, so there is less interest in eBikes from Chinese consumers it seems.
The problem bikes in London are DIY ones. The well designed products are fine, it's the people getting cheap kits with low cost batteries and inadequate safety protections that are catching fire.
Re: (Score:2)
These are also almost all illegal imports because they don't remotely satisfy UKCA or CE regulations, sold by the likes of Amazon. Oh as an added bonus they also are used to almost exclusively make unlicensed electric motorcycles rather than legal ebikes.
For some reason none of the governments seem remotely interested in doing anything about it, and Amazon is happy to cream off money from a flood of illegal shit.
The question bothering me (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I have two possible answers. One, the batteries in cell phones, laptops, and watches are small enough that those going up in flames aren't likely to kill anyone. Two, give it time.
Aren't the rules now that lithium batteries can't be in checked bags? If in the luggage hold a battery fire would be difficult to reach and contain. If in the cabin there's more people around to breathe in the fumes or what not but those people can also blast it with fire retardant.
Re:The question bothering me (Score:5, Informative)
If Lithium battery packs can be turned into incendiary devices by anybody who knows what they are doing... then why are they still allowed on airplanes?
Lithium batteries need to be in the carry on for this reason. An incendiary device on a plane is not of a major concern providing it is in the cabin where it is easily accessible and isolated. All history of planes downed due to batteries caused by lithium fires have been the result of the fire starting in an inaccessible place.
Re: (Score:2)
You can take lithium batteries in the hold too, where they are inaccessible. Some aircraft have fire extinguishing systems in the hold, but most rely on stopping the fire spreading and just let it burn itself out.
The rules are a bit complicated, but basically devices like laptops and phones can be put in the hold, but "spare" batteries like portable phone chargers and the like cannot: https://www.caa.co.uk/passenge... [caa.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
You can take lithium batteries in the hold too, where they are inaccessible.
You're stretching the word "batteries" a bit there. Most (not all) airlines allow small devices (several laptops on the market don't qualify) in the hold providing they are powered off completely enclosed. Devices with removable batteries almost universally have a requirement where you to take the battery out and carry the battery in the cabin.
But the entire premise is silly. If you know what you're doing you can turn your laptop into a bomb as well, and throw that into the hold. Or... you know... just tell
Re: (Score:2)
If Lithium battery packs can be turned into incendiary devices by anybody who knows what they are doing... then why are they still allowed on airplanes?
Lithium batteries need to be in the carry on for this reason. An incendiary device on a plane is not of a major concern providing it is in the cabin where it is easily accessible and isolated. All history of planes downed due to batteries caused by lithium fires have been the result of the fire starting in an inaccessible place.
True,
But I feel it should be noted that sometimes "fire" risk really means "arsehole" risk... Fire is just the way you say that without saying it.
TFL manages millions of journeys per day, 4 million on the tube alone. This means trains are often packed with little to no spare room for an entitled e-biker to bring his massive bike on the tube. Non-foldable bikes are already banned on the tube at peak times. By classifying it as a fire risk, they're giving the arseholes who think it's fine to abuse the t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is true. Or, at least the batteries are not allowed to be checked in, so the following questions that bother are: is anyone paying attention to those restrictions? how many people even know/care what a Li-ion battery is, and which of their devices have one? are the airlines checking the checked luggage for Li-ion batteries?
Re: The question bothering me (Score:3)
Instead, we trust in the religious ritual of taking our shoes off before we can board in homage to John Frum and the cargo cult of air traffic security.
https://xkcd.com/651/ [xkcd.com]
Folding e-bike Protectionism? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's more a case of a small device being able to be effectively manoeuvred in case of emergency. If your folding ebike catches fire you can yeet it out of the door at the next station. When a full sized e-bike catches fire good luck grabbing that burning mass and trying to carefully squeeze it past the chairs and through the door.
Re: Folding e-bike Protectionism? (Score:2)
With thousands of jobs on the line and a recent 99% cratering of their profits last year due to AI, or rather a shite economic downturn, they are important to protect and enable recovery. Those product is truly an amazing one and an important piece in sol
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, if you want a bicycle....well, use the tried and true method where you actually pedal the damned thing and get exercise.
Gears are quite helpful...
If you want a powered cycle experience, just get a damned real motorcycle....something with real power that can keep up with cars, and can carry 1-2 people and/or actual cargo if you want.
The whole 'e-bike' seems like a half assed solution to something that isn't a problem....we've had motorcycles forever, a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, if you want a bicycle....well, use the tried and true method where you actually pedal the damned thing and get exercise.
E-bikes provide some assistance for things like hills and long distance. They are not meant to be a fully motorized vehicle. I suppose maybe someone could use an e-bike for 100% pedaling but the battery would drain fast and the range would be terrible. As such it is not a black and white solution where it is e-bike for 100% of the ride vs a bicycle for 0%. There is an area in between for partial assistance.
Re:Folding e-bike Protectionism? (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess the e-bikes I see are much different than in other parts of the world...?
The ones I see are like BIG mountain bikes, thick tires and they aren't being pedaled...zipping along at a pretty quick speed.
Not as fast as a true motorcycle...but close to maybe a very small scooter....
But again, I'm not seeing anything that is pedal-assist...these things I see are using full electric motor.
Hence, my thoughts of, if you're using a fully powered 'cycle'....go for a real motorcycle.....
Re: (Score:2)
The ones I see are like BIG mountain bikes, thick tires and they aren't being pedaled...zipping along at a pretty quick speed.
The term e-bike is for any bicycle with motorized assistance. As such, the rider can choose some assistance to almost all assistance. It drains the battery quicker if the rider choose all motor.
But again, I'm not seeing anything that is pedal-assist...these things I see are using full electric motor.
Every google search I see is a bicycle with pedals AND a motor. For e-bikes these days, the motor and battery are well hidden to where they are hardly noticeable.
Hence, my thoughts of, if you're using a fully powered 'cycle'....go for a real motorcycle.....
I think you are seeing very small motorcycles and calling them e-bikes. Those are not by definition e-bikes.
Re: (Score:2)
No...what I term as a motorcycle has a gasoline motor (I've not seen any electric motorcycles yet, although I know they are starting to make them)....but what I'm talking about do not have pedals and can be driven on the highway.
Re: (Score:2)
No...what I term as a motorcycle has a gasoline motor (I've not seen any electric motorcycles yet, although I know they are starting to make them).
Electric motorcycles have existed since the early 1900s [wikipedia.org]. The most commercially successful variants I know have been electric scooters as the need for speed is reduced as well as the intended use of mostly light commuter traffic.
but what I'm talking about do not have pedals and can be driven on the highway.
That is, by definition, not an e-bike and not the subject of the article. The article is specifically talking about bicycles with a battery and motor being banned from using London public transportation. I am pretty sure motorcycles and scooters could not be ridden on London transpor
Re:Folding e-bike Protectionism? (Score:4, Informative)
Those are not bicycles. They are technically classified as electric off-road light motorcycles. An electric version of what we used to call dirt-bikes.
Not legal for use on road or sidewalk or trail. It just is not enforced often.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, what I'm describing still have pedals....and are not allowed on the highway like a real motorcycle is....
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the e-bikes I see are much different than in other parts of the world...?
The ones I see are like BIG mountain bikes, thick tires and they aren't being pedaled...zipping along at a pretty quick speed.
Not as fast as a true motorcycle...but close to maybe a very small scooter....
But again, I'm not seeing anything that is pedal-assist...these things I see are using full electric motor.
Hence, my thoughts of, if you're using a fully powered 'cycle'....go for a real motorcycle.....
Average speed of a cyclist is just shy of 10 MPH, an e-bike can easily get up to 15 or 20 MPH for a sustained period.
Re: Folding e-bike Protectionism? (Score:2)
You can't take your motorcycle on the subway.
Try thinking about things from the perspective of others just fucking ONCE in your life.
Re: (Score:2)
Most cities do not have a subway....that's a pretty rare use case.
Re: (Score:2)
It is true that most cities don't have subways, but it's also true that problems using motorcycles on subways is not a "rare use case" because it's not cities that matter here, but populations. And most of the largest cities by population in the developed world do, indeed, have subways, so affecting a disproportionately large number of people.
London and Glasgow together have a population of around 9M people, Britain having about 68M in total. So in Britain over 12% of the population lives in cities with sub
Re: (Score:2)
London and Glasgow together have a population of around 9M people
The London metro area is more like 15million.
Re: (Score:1)
There are two reasons for ebikes. First,is if you have mobility issues. Older folks or out of shape people can use them to help them up hills and go distances. I'm totally cool with that. Are are also folks who claim they need them because they work in a 'professional' environment and 'can't arrive at work all sweaty'. I roll my eyes at them because I used to commute through Wash DC summers and was in the USAF,so I had to be in uniform and get judged on it.
The second reason is to game the system. You get a
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, if you want a bicycle....well, use the tried and true method where you actually pedal the damned thing and get exercise.
What if you don't want the exercise? What if you have bad knees? What if you want to travel faster than normal exercise permits? What if you live in a really hilly area and could benefit form the assist? Your problem is you think cycling is a form of exercise rather than what it really is: a mode of transportation people use for a wide variety of different reasons.
I cycle on my normal bike most of the time. When I cycle to another city I'll take my e-bike. And given the state of my knees I guarantee you in
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I don't get the whole "e-bike" thing.
Um, OK, it's not complicated...
I mean, if you want a bicycle....well, use the tried and true method where you actually pedal the damned thing and get exercise.
Most people are interested in getting to the place they are trying to get to. Bonus points if it's reasonably fast, reasonably cheap, and doesn't involve sweating a lot. And I say this as someone resolutely sticking to my mechanical bike, because ebikes aren't fast enough, they're more complex to maintain a
Re: why ebikes make sense (Score:2)
While the exact math of the statistic is debatable, the central truth is not -- replacing those trips by walking, cycling, or public transportation would significantly decrease pollution.
The argument can be further boosted by the reality that a significant portion of urban traffic (30-60%) is intentionally driving slower while looking for a parking space which
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a powered cycle experience, just get a damned real motorcycle
E-bikes (at least in the USA) are a loophole in the vehicle/operator license and insurance laws. Don't need a drivers license (in spite of operating in and among other "real" vehicles). Bike doesn't need a license. Or insurance. So if some 12 year-old wants to mod one and hop on the highway right in front of, behind (or sometimes underneath) an 18 wheeler, there's not much the law can do. Particularly if any enforcement is seen by the likes of Critical Mass or other activist groups if it is seen to infringe
Re: (Score:2)
well, use the tried and true method where you actually pedal the damned thing and get exercise.
Electric bike users tend to get more exercise, because they're willing to ride further and more often. It ends up replacing trips which would otherwise be done by car, where you get no exercise.
They're also often used by elderly people who just aren't in good enough physical shape to ride a regular bike. Again, the alternative to an electric bike here isn't "more exercise on a non-electric bike", it's less exercise via driving.
ebikes are not cheap (Score:2)
Re: ebikes are not cheap (Score:2)
Re: ebikes are not cheap (Score:2)
Re:ebikes are not cheap (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you American?
Don't ban, define safe (Score:2)
Require Statandards - But Don't Ban (Score:2)
Re: Require Statandards - But Don't Ban (Score:3)
There's no easy way to differentiate jinky eBikes from safe ones. Until this is possible, it's the best way to keep London moving.
Can be hard to identify... (Score:2)
Many higher-end E-bikes are almost indistinguishable from non-electrified bicycles at a casual glance. Batteries and motors are hidden in the frame. But I suppose those aren't at high risk anyways.
Reactionary nonsense (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
How can one tell the difference between a "passed" mass production bike and a frankenbike?
I mean besides seeing an e-bike easily keeping up with highway speed traffic. They all look the same otherwise.
Why do eBikes not use LFP batteries? (Score:2)