Slashdot Mirror


The Year of the E-Bicycle

theodp writes "Electric bicycles have been around for more than a century, but they have never quite captured the imagination of auto-obsessed Americans. That may be about to change. At CES this month, Sanyo showed off its sleek, lightweight Eneloop Hybrid Bicycle. Priced at $2,300, the e-bike sports a black lithium-ion battery strapped to the frame beneath the seat. Press a button on the left handlebar, and a 250-watt motor kicks in, providing about twice as much power as your own pedaling. Some basic e-bike models, like the Ezip Trailz can be had for as low as $500. Both Trek and Schwinn began selling e-bikes last year, and Best Buy is offering e-bikes in three test markets: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Portland, OR."

22 of 494 comments (clear)

  1. Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Informative

    I love the idea of using one of these bikes for my daily commute to work and back, however they don't come anywhere close to solving the beer bottles from pickups aimed at cyclist problem, or the Houston has no safe way to ride a bike much of anywhere problem.

    I love to ride my bike, but Houston is a city built by politicians with pockets lined from oil companies. The oil companies decided people in Houston should drive individual cars to get around and dammit, the politicians not only saw that it happened, they made sure the public transit system sucked as well. Sure there's a great bus to get downtown and back, but you still have to drive locally to the bus stop, even if it's only a mile or two away unless you want to become road pizza. Then it's only to downtown, not across town. You can go around your area, you can go downtown, but getting from one area of Houston to another isn't easy, and unlike Phoenix and certain other cities putting a bike on a bus is hit and miss. Some drivers forbid it if they don't have a bike rack and bike racks are rare.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, and people sticking their hands out the window trying to smack you on a high speed drive by, and attempting to side swipe you. This is worse in the FM 1960 area where I used to live as opposed to the Clear Lake area where I now live. The Clear Lake area has a bit higher class of people around.

      Neither is bike friendly as both areas are built by the same Houston. I saw a guy in an electric wheelchair get stranded off of FM 270 about a year and half ago do to lack of good ways to get around, I was in the process of making my way over to help him out when someone beat me to it. There are NO sidewalks in most areas. Bike lanes are a rarity and qualify more as a vehicle sprawl lane for our many commercial vehicles, a good percentage of which are driven by unlicensed illegal immigrants.

      Just try to use one of these to get around random parts of Houston - not isolated to JUST the Montrose, downtown, or historical/old areas. I hear people argue they have no problem getting around a few areas of Houston, especially the older areas, but not everyone lives in these areas nor are they the destinations for everyone.

      Show me someone willing to commit to using one of these to commute Houston without limiting their travel horizons for a year and I'll show you someone who wont be alive in a year to claim their prize.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    2. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by pecosdave · · Score: 3, Informative

      Try Houston - a low-density urban sprawl city.

      We have a huge city, with a few acres of land here and there with cattle roaming all over the place. Your Razor scooter wouldn't have enough power to get me past one of these mini-ranches, not to mention the fact there's no safe place to ride it. If I can't ride a bike safely just a couple of miles anywhere I need to go I certainly can't ride one of those.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    3. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by Animaether · · Score: 4, Informative

      Having been to Houston as a tourist, I find parents' notes to be absolutely true.

      Not only do motorists freak out if there's somebody on a bicycle on their streets (and unless it's a highway/etc., that should be perfectly legal - share the road, dammit) and use any existing bicycle lanes as just more room for them to zigzag all over the place... ...there's almost no sidewalks! Okay, that's not true, there's plenty. But a lot of them just suddenly end with nowhere in particular to go next.
      I couldn't legally walk from my hotel to The Galleria (just 1.6 miles) because the sidewalk just -ends- after the last commercial store (a garden center)'s plot it straddles. The -only- way to walk there via the 1.6 mile route was by crossing freeways, walking through an interstate (I-10) underpass, crossing a road on a bend (speeding car surprise special *every time*) then walking through a bunch of muddy (sprinkler over-use) grass (by a rug store), before finally there were businesses again and - surprise, surprise - sidewalks.
      If I were to maximize actual sidewalk usage instead - ignoring the spots where there's no sidewalk - it's a 4.3 mile route. wtf.
      ( virtual cookies for whoever can identify the spot on google maps )

      People thought I was nuts for even attempting to walk there... suggesting that I should go rent a car. "For 1.7 miles? really? holy crap.", I thought. Then I started looking more closely as I was driven around by friends and it became clear to me as well that Houston was practically built around the idea that everybody and-I-do-mean-EVERYBODY has a car. It's evident from the clear lack of respect for cyclists and pedestrians - both by the majority of the people and by the city itself, courtesy of its lack of proper infrastructure for these groups. I mentioned that there are plenty of sidewalks... well, of sorts anyway; they were all concrete abominations that were crooked, cracked, and grown through by weeds.. so those who do like to walk are probably discouraged from that as well as you're likely to eventually trip and faceplant.

      For me, within a city, it is absolutely insane that it would be an easier and shorter trip for a motorist than for a pedestrian.

      Now, Seattle on the other hand.. completely different story - and with the odd hill here and there, and longer treks to get around the sound/bay, I suspect the e-bike could come in quite handy and not be a death-magnet.

    4. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by Animaether · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's perfectly normal - albeit dangerous (one gust of wind and wheeeeee off-course smack-dab into a car).

      Then again.. it's NL (and BE).. where we like to take little babies onto the front/rear of our bikes.. without helmets :D
      http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm173/nannet1973/?action=view&current=Zeelandjuni200876.jpg

      http://www.gerloeffen.nl/data/1788/70286-x.jpg
      Note narrow road.. without any bicycle lane... o0o0o danger! Not really.. it's so common in NL that motorists do tend to actually look out for cyclists and drive responsibly around them.

      Indeed, as GP notes.. it's often the cyclists in cities that tend to be more dangerous for cars, than the cars are for the cyclists.
      Running red lights is pretty much the norm, one-way roads tend to be one-way for motorists only as well so don't be surprised if a cyclist comes head-on at you, signaling (by extending your arm) is something that went out of fashion in the late 80's - so be prepared to be cut off by a cyclist, etc.

      The only people worse are the pedestrians.. who will cross wherever and whenever they damn well please.. even if there's a pedestrian crossing, with or without traffic lights, only 10 yards over :)
      ( Pedestrians are almost 'untouchable' by law in NL.. if a motorist hits a pedestrian, the motorist is gonna have to have some damn good evidence that there's nothing (s)he could've done to avoid the accident not to be the one 'in the wrong'. )

    5. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2, Informative

      For those of you that wonder what 'FM 1960' means, Texas has the concept of Farm to Market roads, not strange radio station names.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    6. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by stokessd · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you really have problems with people throwing beer bottles at you?

      I have in upstate NY.

      Frankly, most serious bicyclists have a bunch of stories like that. I've put many miles in the north-east, the mid-atlantic states, the west coast, the southwest, and now the midwest. I now ride in the country in Indiana (boring corn viewing experience), and it's a lot better from a politeness of drivers standpoint.

      But in the USA, the car vs. driver issues are way worse than the UK and Ireland in my experience. Just another issue where we think we are #1 and really we suck.

      Sheldon

    7. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by deroby · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not sure about The Netherlands, but here in Belgium you're quite welcome to use your bicycle on the main road when there is no separate bike path available.
      When there is one, yes you HAVE to use it, but when there isn't you shouldn't be using the pedestrians' side-walks but simply drive on the right side of the road.
      I'm pretty sure it's like that in the Netherlands too...

      Everyone here is used to it, that much that I'm having a hard time to imagine roads without cyclists. In fact the law even grants quite a bit of "super-rights" to bicyclists :
      * within built-up area cyclists are allowed to drive next to each other and don't have to go one-in-front-of-the-other whenever a car comes by (outside of built-up areas you actually have to ride 'sequentially')
      * if there is a car-bike accident, the driver of the car by default is the one at fault. Hence he has to prove that the cyclist made some error causing the accident, not the other way around... (this is true in car-pedestrian accidents too btw)

      Reading the stuff above makes me wonder what kind of cavemen-mentality they have in Houston =(

      ps: in Belgium we do have this 'exception' that when you're "very young" (I THINK it's up to the age of 6 ?) you can (and should) actually drive on the side-walk rather than on the street. Frankly I'm not that much a fan of such system, but I guess it's safer for the young (learning) cyclists to get some road-sense/awareness before putting them on the actual road... I'm not so sure it such a good idea from the point of view of (elder) pedestrians, but well, it makes everyone more 'attentive' =)

      --
      If there is one thing to be learned on slashdot, it has to be sarcasm.
    8. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      IINM, Houston is an oil town. It's in the rich, powerful, and sociopathic oil industry's interests to make sure nobody walks or cycles.

    9. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by DamonHD · · Score: 4, Informative

      "When bikers pay into the highway system, then they can have bike lanes."

      Motorists in the UK try to use this argument too, but motoring-related taxes (in the UK) do not cover the direct costs of providing the road network IIRC. So the cyclists paying their general taxes are *already* paying, and given that wear that drives road-maintenance costs is something like the fourth power of the axle weight, the cyclists' contribution need only be tiny to be proportionate. Cyclists may already be *overpaying*...

      I believe that in the UK almost the only transport form that fully recovers costs year-on-year is the train system, which people then whinge about the expense of.

      Many motorists continue to behave as if the full cost of a journey is the marginal pump cost of the fuel, ignoring externalities from pollution to tarmac to road-deaths.

      Rgds

      Damon

      --
      http://m.earth.org.uk/
    10. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by Locklin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, but roads are not paid for by motorists, they are paid for by citizens (gas tax is insufficient, roads are heavily paid for by other taxes). Cyclists, and any citizen has the same right to the roads you do. Operating large equipment doesn't give you more rights.

      --
      "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    11. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 4, Informative

      I guess bikers are too insecure to ride in single file, I see packs of them on the weekends riding 4 and 5 deep, taking up half the right lane in their funny outfits, even with a clearly marked bike lane. They run stop lights, and dart out across traffic without hand signals.

      What you're describing is very common. However, what irritates me is the undeserved sense of entitlement evidenced by such bechavior, more so than the actual breaking of the law.

      Some years ago, a nurse who was tending to my mother in the hospital was making conversation during some lengthy time he was forced to spend in her room due to her condition. The conversation ranged broadly and it eventually came out that he was a weekend cyclist (one of those funny-tight-pants guys) and he regaled us with his account of a recent run-in with the law. It seems that the rural folks where his (apparently rather large) group rides had complained to local law enforcement about the bikers who were running lights, failing to yield, taking up too much road space by riding abreast, etc. The local lawdogs set at a stop sign on their customary route. As was their habit, the entire group simply blew through the sign without stopping. The cops pulled over about 30 of them and wrote tickets.

      Come court day, the entire group showed up to fight the tickets. There were a couple of lawyers amongst them. They simply stood up in court and started talking about how they'd fight using some sort of (spurious, it seemed to me) argument that if each rider stopped at the sign, the group would get so strung out that various hazards would be created for both the group and other traffic. In a bit of a mob scene in the tiny traffic court of this tiny, rural courthouse, they vowed to gum up the works with enough paperwork and motions so as to keep the entire city legal staff occupied doing nothing else for as long as possible.

      It was a sort of "We're a big enough mob that we can get away with breaking the law" confrontation. The judge grabbed onto a technicality in the first case and simply dismissed them all.

      I said all that to say this - If I were part of a mob that managed to break the law and get away with it simply because the mob was big enough to overwhelm the resources of a small town, I'd be pretty embarrassed at getting away with such a thing. This guy wasn't. He was actually *proud* that he was able to get away with breaking the law. He felt that he was such a righteous person for riding a bike that he deserved to be allowed to run stop signs. Now, why on earth does riding a bike make someone a better person? Where do bicyclists get this attitude? I don't get it. I just don't get it. But I do know that I have a very low opinion of bicyclists because of this incident and so many others I've experienced on the road where cyclists seem to have an attitude of "The rules don't apply to us."

    12. Re:Great, still doesn't fix the Houston problem. by hondo77 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you're in a paceline.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  2. Re:These are useless as transport by pitterpatter · · Score: 4, Informative

    Probably Lance Armstrong can produce over 250W for much of a day. I on the other hand, break a sweat just thinking about it. A hardworking horse can keep up about 750W (definition of a horsepower). Imagine yourself and two buddies playing tug-of-war with a Clydesdale.

  3. Re:Why not just buy a motorcycle? by Calinous · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are places where you can drive a low power scooter without a license, but you still have to register it and pay taxes for it.
        However, bikes are not registered nor taxed.

  4. Re:These are useless as transport by EJB · · Score: 2, Informative

    The average in-shape 70kg person can produce 200W for a more than an hour on a bicycle (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance)
    Ever sat on a bicycle in a gym with a wattage meter? It is actually very hard to only produce 125W on a bicycle. On the road you'd go very slow and risk falling over, and in the gym the pedals almost spin faster than your legs.

    And of course Lance Armstrong can do that. I am a "recreational" amateur cyclist who does no more than 2500 km/year and can maintain more than 250W for hours. It's not difficult.

  5. endless-sphere.com ebike r&d forums by Two99Point80 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some folks there are in the multi-KW range, others commuting almost daily testing various motors and batteries. Lots of, well, roll-your-own activity.

  6. Illegal in NY State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    In NY state , ebikes are illegal. It's dumb, but true.

  7. 250W is not enough power. Over $2k is ridiculous by serialband · · Score: 2, Informative

    The electric bicycle rules need to be changed. A 20 mph limit is just not useful to commuters. I can't even fathom the 15 mph limit set for other countries. If I want to use it to commute, I want it to be able to keep up with traffic in a 25mph zone and not block traffic. Even with a 20mph limit, it should maintain at least 20mph going uphill. 275 Watts is just insufficient to keep it going even 5mph up the hills where I live. The only advantage to these e-bikes, is that they can prevent you from sweating profusely when you arrive at work, especially if you had no access to a shower there. Which is what I used it for when I started out. I didn't have to sweat going up the hill.

    I tried out an older 375W Charger Bike when I got back to bicycling to work and my muscles had atrophied from 7 years of having to drive an hour each way to work. It sells for around $750 from a guy who bought the remaining stock ( http://abc.eznettools.net/D300013/X300109/eBike1.html ) and it just wasn't enough power to really go up the hills where I live. It went about 7 mph uphill unless you stood up and forcefully assisted it and possibly doubled the speed. Has anyone seen how fast Lance Armstrong biked up a hill while huffing & puffing? He's not exactly speeding up a hill.

    The 20 mph limit is also too low for me since I now pedal faster than that on a level surface. It's absolutely useless for going downhill too. The motor would cut off at the legally set speed of 20mph. The only time I got the extra power was when I went up a hill and at best it added 5mph to my peddaling. It's been sitting in storage for several years now since I use a more convenient folding bicycle for easier commuting on public transit legs of my trip. The batteries are likely dead now, and I haven't used that in a while. Luckily, the bicycle is still usefull by itself without the battery pack.

  8. Used in Toronto for years by GSMacLean · · Score: 2, Informative

    Electric bikes have been used and encouraged in Toronto for over three years. They can appear like stocky bicycles, or scooter-style. They have a maximum speed of 20 mph, and you don't need a drivers license, motorcycle license, license plate or insurance. A whole industry has sprung up around the legislation with many models of electric bicycles being sold.

    Ontario Ministry of Transportation e-Bike FAQ

  9. Re:Sounds like a nice place to live by Locklin · · Score: 2, Informative

    When passing a cyclist, the motorist may need to slow for a minute or so, but then is able to catch up the the next car in traffic anyway. If that person was not on a bike, they would be in a car, and would be contributing to congestion -and congestion does slow overall travel time.

    --
    "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
  10. Re:Sounds like a nice place to live by cduffy · · Score: 2, Informative

    A good philosophy -- but I'd urge you not to compromise your own safety simply for others' convenience.

    One of the things they teach in the TS101 class from the League of American Bicyclists is that getting on and off the sidewalk is considerably more dangerous than staying in the road -- and that while using an improved shoulder is legal (and often the safe thing to do, if it's clean and in good condition), getting too far over to the right within a lane can encourage cars to pass you when it's unsafe to do so.

    The classroom portion of the course spends a fair bit of time on accident statistics breakdown and discussion on how each class of accidents can be avoided or mitigated. I think it's time well spent.