Going After The “Fat” Of The Netherlands

A Dutch woman once explained her country’s liberal social environment to me. It was the first to legalize same-sex marriage, she said, for the same reason it legalized marijuana and sex work.  “We like order,” she told me.  “It’s part of our Calvinistic heritage.” Although she, like many of her compatriots, are no longer religious, the theologian’s way of thinking “still guides us.”

That reasoning seemed counterintuitive until she offered this:  “If people are being who they are aren’t hurting anyone else, why should they be made into criminals?” and therefore “outsiders.”  To maintain order, “include everyone.”

That desire for orderliness took a turn someone like me would expect—and wish for—in Rotterdam.  In one of the world’s busiest ports, authorities seized a shipment of 16,500 electric “fat bikes” from China. Another 1000 were taken from a nearby distribution warehouse.

As the name implies, such machines have wide tires and low-slung frames that cause them to resemble low-slung motorcycles.

European Union regulations limit eBikes to speeds of 25 mph (16mph). The “fatbikes,” however, have software and other components that can be easily manipulated to make them go much faster.

Apparently, nobody anticipated the arrival of those bikes. And, when the Netherlands mandated helmets for motor-scooter riders, many—especially teenagers—switched to “fatbikes,” for which there is no helmet requirement.

So now Dutch and European authorities are not only looking at headgear policies, but also to more clearly define different categories of two-wheeled vehicles. Would that authorities in my hometown of New York (and my home country of the United States) gain some of that Calvinistic penchant for making and maintaining order.

A Good Step—But Is It Enougih

 

The Federal Government defines them as “micromobility devices.” Soon, however, one state might, in essence, classify them as motorized vehicles.

That might seem like a mere matter of semantics—or the sort of thing that occupies lawyers and policy wonks with too much time on their hands.  But it could have real consequences for eBike owners and riders.

Last month, Bill S2292 was introduced in the New Jersey Senate. It’s said to be “gaining traction “ as it moves the required Senate committee reviews. A date for a vote, however, has not been set.

In essence, the bill, if passed, would require “low speed electric bicycles” and “‘motorized bicycles” to have the same liability insurance as motorcycles or cars.

For the purposes of the bill, a “low speed electric bicycle “ is defined as a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts that provides assistance when the rider is pedaling or ceases to provide assistance when the rider reaches 20 mph. A “motorized bicycle “ is one with pedals and a motor whose maximum piston displacement is less than 50cc or whose motor is rated at no more than 1.5 brake horsepower. Or, the bike is powered by an electric drive motor and does not reach more than 25 MPH on a flat surface.

Under those terms, eBike owners would be required to have insurance against potential bodily injury, death or property damage caused by their vehicles. In addition, eBike owners would need to carry personal injury protection in case their eBike causes bodily injury or death to another person.

The bill seems to be a response to the recent spate of crashes—and fires caused by eBike batteries. In that sense, I think it’s a good idea and think we should have a similar regulation here in New York. On the other hand, critics say that it could make eBike ownership “prohibitively expensive.” I also wonder how it could be enforced, given that many eBike purchases are made “off the books,” if you will, by undocumented immigrants.

Fixed Gear eBike: An Oxymoronic Contradiction?

An a capella heavy metal band?

When I first heard about it, a dozen years ago, I thought it was a joke.  Then I heard Van Canto and the combination seemed no more incongruous than, say, Saint Andre cheese on a bagel from Lots O' Bagels. (That's what I ate the other day, on Christmas morning.) And, hey, those guys were doing something I did when I was part of a punk band you've never heard of, and never will:  making a lot of noise with musical instruments and screaming.  

So why am I mentioning an a capella heavy metal band?  Well, knowing about them made what I am about to describe seem less implausible than it might otherwise have seen.  

In case you're new to this blog, or if your cycling is experience is limited, I'll explain a couple of things.  

First, this:  a fixed-gear bike. One of my Mercians--Tosca--is of this type. A single cog screws directly onto the rear hub.  When you ride this type of bike, if the wheels turn, so do your pedals--or vice versa.  In other words, you can't coast, which turns your ride into more of a workout. That is why I often take Tosca on short rides.  It's also the reason why all bikes raced on velodromes--enclosed tracks--have fixed gears: They are more efficient, and therefore capable of greater speeds.

I have to admit that when I ride Tosca, with my legs in continuous motion, it's difficult for me to imagine riding an electric bike, a.k.a., eBike,  which not only allows coasting, but also "assists" the rider.  In other words, a fixed-gear bike seems to be the antithesis of an eBike. 

Indeed it is, in spite of claims to the contrary.  "Fixed gear eBike" is, if you ask me, "click-bait."  If you actually click onto the websites where claims for such a bike are made, you'll find that the "fixed gear" is actually a single-speed freewheel or other drivetrain without a derailleur.

If they're not being deceptive, they simply don't understand the difference between "single speed" and "fixed gear."  It's not difficult for me to imagine an eBike with a single speed freewheel.  For one thing, the two systems would work well together.  For another, folks who'd want an electric, or any other kind of, assist, are also likely to coast for significant parts of their rides.  If they could pedal nonstop, even if only for a few minutes, why would they want an assist--unless, of course, it kept them pedaling?

So...while I can't say with certainty that a fixed-gear eBike is impossible, implausible or even impractical, I don't know how it's possible, necessary or desirable?

The Real Frankenbikes

 These things are freaks.

That is Ian Bogost's verdict on eBikes.  He based it on several months of "trying to live with one," an experience on which he based his Atlantic article.  In essence, he says that eBikes occupy a no-rider's land between motorcycles and bicycles, offering little of the health benefit of the latter and none of the "cool" factor (in the eyes of some, anyway) the former lend their passengers.  

But he points to an even more important way in which eBikes are not really a compromise (unless, of course, you define a compromise as something that pleases neither side) between bicycles and motorcycles.  Rather, as he explains, the eBike's motor propels the rider further and faster than his or her own pedal power alone would have.  That leads inexperienced and unskilled riders--as the author confesses to having been--to veer off course and crash.  Or, that speed can tempt them into riding in traffic with SUVs and other bigger, more powerful vehicles.

Photo by Christopher Sadowski, for the New York Post.

That relative speed--and, too often, riders' lack of control--makes an eBike on a trail or bike lane "a greater risk to its rider, to fellow cyclists and to pedestrians."  Moreover, he says, "Walking the streets of New York City, it now feels just as likely that you might get mowed down by an eBike as a taxicab."  

I have never ridden an eBike, so take my endorsement of what he says for what it's worth.  I know cyclists who believe eBikes should be banned in New York.  I don't know whether I would go that far, as delivery workers (almost all of whom are immigrants) use them. I certainly think, however, that anything with a motor--whether an eBike or a razor scooter--should not be allowed on a lane or path designated for cyclists or pedestrians, especially ones as narrow as the one on the Queensborough-59th Street Bridge.  

Whatever develops, Ian Bogost's article doesn't give me any incentive to try an eBike.

Cheap Jeep?

I recall seeing a Jeep full-suspension mountain bike about fifteen years ago.  It sold for $300.  I thought the price was about $299 too high:  It looked like a lot of cheap Chinese-made bikes sold in big-box stores.

Now, I have no experience with actual Jeeps.  I am sure, however, that the company had nothing to do with manufacturing the bikes and little, if anything, to do with designing it.  It seemed that lending its name to a line of crappy bikes was a cynical ploy to cash in on customers' loyalty to the brand.  

To be fair, Jeep isn't the first company to do such a thing.  Nor will it be the first auto-maker to try to  cash in on the latest trend in cycling:  e-bikes.

The company debuted its first electric bicycle yesterday.  Micah Toll reviewed it for Electrek.  Having no experience with e-bikes, I can't comment on his comparisons with other companies' models.  What I found amusing, however, is his umbrage at the price:  $5899.

That is a lot more expensive than some other e-bikes on the market.  But it's actually a good bit less expensive than, not only other e-bikes, but some non-electric, non-motorized bikes offered by some other companies that also peddle (pun intended) eBikes.  I am talking about Specialized and Santa Cruz, two of the best-known names in the mountain bike world.  Their eBikes cost a good bit more than Jeep's--but less than their top-of-the line mountain bikes, and less yet than Specialized's high-end road bikes.