As electric bikes become increasingly popular in cities across the US, some in the media are trying to wrap their heads around this reported “electric bike craze.” But make no mistake, this isn’t some short-lived enthusiasm or a passing fad. This widespread adoption of e-bikes by young and old alike is merely the first signs of a paradigm shift.
That’s right, welcome to the future.
Sure, the car is still king in the US. But not like it once was.
The rate of US teens seeking driver’s licenses has continuously dropped for decades. The reasons are myriad. Cars are more expensive than ever. Wages haven’t kept up with inflation. Cities are slowly becoming more navigable without cars. Young people care more about the environment because they’re the ones who will have to survive it. The reasons go on and on.
But the newest reason added to the list rolls in on two wheels. Not the traditional bike, but the electric bike.
Unlike pedal bicycles, whose sales have been on a steady decline outside of the pandemic-induced boost, electric bicycles are skyrocketing in popularity. They give the same freedom of movement as a pedal bicycle, yet are easier to ride with the motor-assisted pedaling. That lets people go faster and travel longer distances than they previously thought possible. Throttle enabled e-bikes are even easier to use as they don’t even require pedaling – they can basically be used as 20 mph (32 km/h) mopeds. At that speed, they’re fast enough for people to cruise through a city easily yet don’t come with the same power and speed concerns that have traditionally turned most commuters away from motorcycles.
Add in the free parking, low entry cost, nearly zero maintenance cost, as well as turning commutes and errands from slogs into joy rides, and you’ve got yourself a recipe for a new transportation paradigm.
While electric bikes were once the domain of elderly riders in the US that had discovered a way to get back on two wheels for recreational rides and light fitness, now the new technology is found across the age spectrum from kids to adults. And it’s no longer just about Sunday morning cruises or getting in a workout; electric bikes are now widely used as serious transportation and utility vehicles in their own right.
Even without incentives though, e-bikes are surprisingly affordable. Like anything, you’ll find fancier expensive options. But a good e-bike can be bought for under $1,000. When you compare that to the cheapest $40,000 Tesla, you can see why young people are moving to e-bikes in droves.
That massive adoption rate among younger riders though has also lead to questions about safe riding. Santa Barbara City Councilmember Oscar Gutierrez, himself an electric bike rider, explained to the Independent that he wholeheartedly believes that most e-bike riders are “law abiding, responsible, and considerate,” but that some reckless riders are “bad actors” that give a bad name to everyone.
Cities and states around the country are seeking solutions to help regulate and manage the growing influx of e-bike riders. Many are quickly adding bike lanes to help provide safer cycling areas away from the leading cause of death among bike riders: cars. Others are proposing rider education programs for those that don’t yet have driver’s licenses, such as a new bill proposed in California that would create a simpler “rider’s license” e-bike riders that use public roads but have never taken driver’s education or gotten a driver’s license.
On one side of the issue, some argue that cities should take a light touch, making it safer to cycle with better public infrastructure but without imposing burdensome regulations that could disincentivize cycling. Others believe that the increased number of riders, especially teens and young adults that have sometimes demonstrated a penchant for reckless riding, should be met more heavy-handedly with police crackdowns.
If you know me, then you may already know what I think. But if not, that’s what the next section is for.
Electrek’s Take
To me, this is a very simple issue. No matter who you are, as long as you are a road user, you should like seeing more usage of e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, pedal bikes, a solid pair of shoes or any other personal transportation device. Studies have shown that a mere 10% shift from car drivers to bike riders has resulted in a 40% reduction in traffic congestion. Even if you never touch an e-bike, you would benefit from supporting their increased use.
That being said, I absolutely understand the safety issue related to dangerous riding. Anyone being reckless on the roads should be held accountable. No one should use the roads recklessly, whether you’re on a 50-pound electric bike or a 5,000-pound car. Hmmm, it almost seems like one of those is drastically more dangerous than the other, now that I think of it.
You’ll often hear complaints about cyclists running red lights, and that certainly can be dangerous. The implementation of rules like the Idaho stop can help make it safer for cyclists to navigate stops signs and red lights.
But to me, I think there is still room for compromise on e-bike safety. We’re going to see more riders every year, so we need to figure this out. In parallel to creating more safe, protected cycling lanes to separate bikes from the same roadways as cars, we should also enforce reckless driving laws, whether that means ticketing drivers or riders who endanger others on the road or in the bike lanes.
The tricky part, as it often does, comes down to enforcement. Police departments are often stretched thin, and ticketing bike-riding hooligans or car drivers parking in bike lanes isn’t a top priority. Perhaps we can find a little more funding (cough, tax car registrations, cough) to create an “E-bike Force” of bike cops who focus on this primarily. It could even be a force of good, not just doling out punishments. They could carry tire pumps and tools, helping cyclists and handing out education just as often as ticketing rule breakers. Who knows, maybe I’m a dreamer. But I think that if we actually care about making our cities safer, then we should prioritize getting more people on bikes and also find a way to educate riders and drivers while simultaneously enforcing rules that are designed to keep people safe.
Perfect, now people from both sides of the argument can crap on me in the comments section below.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Elon Musk has claimed that the Democratic party organized recent protests at Tesla locations worldwide. As he usually does with his wild claims lately, he hasn’t offered any proof whatsoever.
Over the last few weeks, there have been growing protests at Tesla locations around the word.
Protestors have different reasons for wanting to disrupt Tesla, but they are mostly centered around seeing the company as Elon Musk’s piggybank and they are upset at his involvement in the government through his financial contribution to Trump’s election and his role at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Musk took to X today to comment on the situation, and he made the claim that the protests at Tesla locations are funded by ActBlue:
An investigation has found 5 ActBlue-funded groups responsible for Tesla “protests”: Troublemakers, Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project and Democratic Socialists of America. ActBlue funders include George Soros, Reid Hoffman, Herbert Sandler, Patricia Bauman, and Leah Hunt-Hendrix. ActBlue is currently under investigation for allowing foreign and illegal donations in criminal violation of campaign finance regulations. This week, 7 ActBlue senior officials resigned, including the associate general counsel.
ActBlue is a political action committee (PAC) used by the Democratic Party.
Musk did not elaborate on what “investigation” he was referring to nor did he provide any proof to back up his claim. In fact, he even asked for people to help provide information:
“If you know anything about this, please post in replies.”
Musk directly named Reid Hoffman, his former Paypal Mafia friend turned foe due to political differences, who was quick to deny any involvement:
Just one more of Elon’s false claims about me: I never funded anyone for Tesla protests. I don’t condone violence. But it’s clear Americans are angry at him – it’s easier to explain away their anger, than to accept that actions have consequences.
While the Democratic Party could be sympathetic to the Tesla protestors, there’s no evidence that they started the “Tesla Takedown” movement or have any significant involvement.
It has since gained considerable momentum, and they are now using Action Network, an open platform, to organize. As it grew, some groups have gotten involved to organize local protests, like The Disruption Project, which claims to stand “against the unjust systems of racial capitalism, the hetero-patriarchy, white supremacy and settler colonialism.”
In Seattle, The Troublemakers, a local environmentalist group, has also been helping organize.
The biggest blow to Musk’s claim is that there have also been protests outside the US, including in Canada and Europe. It’s unlikely that the US Democratic party would be involved in those.
There are currently six protests planned in Europe by the “Tesla Takedown” in the coming weeks:
Musk has also been involved in European politics, promoting far-right parties throughout Europe.
Along with the claims about the Tesla protests, Musk also retweeted someone linking several Cybertrucks burning down at a Tesla location in Seattle to “Democrat NGOs”:
Again, this claim is without evidence. In fact, the fires are still under investigation and it hasn’t yet been confirmed if it was arson.
Electrek’s Take
Could the Democratic Party be involved in some of the protests? It wouldn’t shock me, but you can claim that without proof.
I think most people involved in the protests are just mad at Elon for any of the hundreds of stupid things he has done or said in the last few months, including doing a couple of Nazi salutes at Trump’s inauguration.
He prefers to think that there’s some grand conspiracy against him because that’s easier to swallow than people hating home for being a compulsive liar, oligarch dork with the sense of humor of a maladjusted 13-year-old.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
On today’s challenging episode of Quick Charge, Elon seems serious about rebuilding the Cybertruck that exploded outside the Trump hotel in Las Vegas. Meanwhile, there are questions about Tesla’s record-setting weekend in Canada, and lots, lots more.
In other news, we’ve got a hot tub you can sail around a lake, a 140-ton electric hoverboard from Liebherr, a $1,000 electric pickup from China, questions about the effectiveness of EV rebates in general, and a 0% interest deal on an all-new electric Dodge Charger Daytona.
New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Got news? Let us know! Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
HOUSTON — The U.S. could reach an agreement with Canada that avoids tariffs on imports of oil, gas and other energy resources, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Monday.
Wright said such a scenario is “certainly is possible” but “it’s too early to say” in response to a question from CNBC during a press conference at the CERAWeek by S&P Global. The U.S. is in “active dialogue” with Canada and Mexico, the energy secretary said.
President Donald Trump has paused until April 2 tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports that are compliant with the agreement which governs trade in North America. Trump originally imposed broad 25% tariffs on goods from both countries as well as lesser 10% tariffs on energy imports from Canada.
It’s unclear, however, how much of the oil, gas and other energy that the U.S. imports from Canada is compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Wright declined to provide specifics when CNBC asked how much of those imports are USMCA compliant.
“I’m going to avoid the details for now,” Wright said. The energy secretary said, “We can get to no tariffs or very low tariffs but it’s got to be reciprocal” in an interview with CNBC’s Brian Sullivan.
Canada’s energy minister, Jonathan Wilkinson, warned last week that energy prices will rise in the U.S. if the tariffs on energy imports go into full effect.
“We will see higher gasoline prices as a function of energy, higher electricity prices from hydroelectricity from Canada, higher home heating prices associated with natural gas that comes from Canada and higher automobile prices,” Wilkinson told CNBC’s Megan Cassella in an interview.
The U.S. has been the largest producer of crude oil and natural gas in the world for years. But many refiners in the U.S. are dependent on heavy crude imported from Canada. The U.S. imported 6.6 million barrels of crude oil per day on average in December, more than 60% of which came from Canada, according to the Energy Information Administration.
Wright acknowledged that the tariffs are creating uncertainty in energy markets as negotiations continue.
“We’re in the middle of negotiations for where things are going to go with tariffs, so that feels frightening and gripping right now but this time will pass,” Wright said. “Deals will be made, we’ll get certainty and we’ll have a positive economic environment for Americans going forward.”
U.S. crude oil fell more than 1% Monday to close at $66.03 per barrel, while global benchmark Brent closed at $69.28 per barrel. Crude oil futures have pulled back substantially as Trump’s trade policy creates uncertainty and OPEC+ has confirmed that it plans to gradually bring back 2.2 million barrels per day of production beginning next month.