Amsterdam is one of six European cities that will soon test a system that can remotely limit the speed of electric bicycles. Amsterdam’s traffic alderman, Melanie van der Horst, tested the system herself last week, NRC reports.

Alrighty,

So your system knows the exact situation and still is slowing down my bike, just at the moment I need to accelerate to avoid being overrun by that large truck heading into me.

How stupid are these folks? We’ve got rules, when people don’t follow those rules, you fine them. Case closed.

No system to prevent a bike speeding, teach people to obey the law.

  • hedgehog@ttrpg.networkEnglish
    191·
    8 months ago

    The speed limits they listed seem so low given that 90% of bicycles in Amsterdam (or at least, those that are “victims” in traffic accidents) are unpowered. I’m not even a hobbyist cyclist, but on my (unpowered) entry-level hybrid bicycle I rode faster than 25 km/h (or 15 mph) the last time I took it out… and heck, I can run faster than 15 km/h.

    The accident stats also don’t back up the idea that e-bikes are a problem demanding regulation, which makes me think that there’s knee-jerk politics at play here rather than this being a clear-headed response to a real problem. I’ll explain how I arrived at that conclusion.

    First of all, as an aside, it’s weird that they said “more than half of all traffic victims were on a bicycle,” when the metric here should be the number of traffic collisions caused by cyclists. But supposing that’s actually what they meant:

    • if half of all accidents are caused by bicycles, then the other half are caused by cars and other motor vehicles. Since bicycles outnumber cars 4:1 in Amsterdam, that means cars are 4 times as likely to cause accidents as bicycles (startling low compared to how much more dangerous they are in the US). They recently lowered the speed limit of cars to 30 km/h, but I’m not sure if the stats take that into account. Maybe it needs lowered further, or maybe they should only allow cars with the same sort of smart governors installed that they’re testing out for e-bikes?
    • One in ten of those cyclists was on an electric bike (meaning 5% of accidents were caused by someone on an e-bike). 57% of bicycles sold in the Netherlands in 2022 were electric, but bikes last a while and they have a ton of them. As of the start of 2023 they had an estimated 5 million e-bikes, and the country has 23 million bicycles total (more than 1 per person). This means that 22% of their bikes are e-bikes, and (assuming that ratio applies to bikes on the road in Amsterdam) then given that only 10% of accidents involving bicycles involved e-bikes, that means that unpowered bicycles are a bit over twice as likely to cause accidents as e-bikes. Honestly, though, the ratio of e-bikes to unpowered bicycles is probably higher - I would expect people are more inclined to ride the new bicycle they just bought rather than one of the ones they’ve had for several years.

    Obviously these stats are fairly sloppy, but I worked with what I could find.

    Assuming my conclusion is accurate, this still doesn’t mean that e-bikes are less dangerous than bicycles - the accidents they’re in may be worse - but it certainly doesn’t suggest that e-bikes are the problem. I’m aligned with the other commenters here - this isn’t going to address the problem of people riding already illegal e-bikes.

    The tech sounds cool and I’d love if it could be applied to cars, too, even if it’s opt-in only.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      5·
      8 months ago

      I can easily ride my bike at 25-30km/h on flat even surface.
      Light hills are more difficult on the long run but I can probably manage 20km/h.

      Edit:
      A relative worked in the ER so I have some ideas why e-bikes are maybe more prone to accidents. My theory: Older folks.
      The usual demographic driving e-bikes usually are/were +50 years old.
      With reflexes being not what they were and them going out more due to being mobile again, they surely are more prone to be involved in traffic accidents.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.networkEnglish
        3·
        8 months ago

        Makes sense, and is aligned with the “reduced barrier to entry” theory posited by another commenter. Just to be clear, though, what I read (though very imperfect stat-wise) suggests that e-bikes are less prone to accidents, not more.

    • BoscoBear@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      31·
      8 months ago

      The US has several proposals for this on cars. You say opt in only. How about this: when you exceed the speed limit the car automatically notifies the government so they can fine you. You can opt-in to have the car automatically control you top speed so you don’t get fined.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.networkEnglish
        2·
        8 months ago

        The tech I’m talking about isn’t related to speed limits, but zones where pedestrians, particularly children, are much more likely to be in the street.

        when you exceed the speed limit the car automatically notifies the government so they can find you.

        I assume you meant “fine”; regardless, why is there a need for that in order to enable the second piece?

        You can opt-in to have the car automatically control you top speed so you don’t get fined.

        Change that to “You can enable a feature that will automatically reduce your set cruising speed (or, if you’re not using cruise control at that point, give you tactile feedback on the accelerator foot pedal) when you enter an area where pedestrians are in the street or are expected to be in the street (i.e., there’s a cross walk up ahead and a pedestrian has triggered it).” Or, to summarize similar to what you said: “You can have the car automatically reduce your speed when necessary so you don’t kill people.”

        • BoscoBear@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          11·
          8 months ago

          The “zones” should have lower speed limits. That is a traffic engineering problem.

          The need for the opt in process is to counter the (stupid) arguments of I need to be able to drive fast to get my grandma to the hospital.

          You don’t need “tactal feedback.” You need to limit the speed of the vehicle, like a rev limiter. Why do you need the ability to break the law?