This is *The Stepback*, a weekly dive into a critical tech trend. To stay ahead on the e-bike movement, follow Andrew J. Hawkins. *The Stepback* lands in subscriber inboxes every Thursday at 8AM ET. Opt in for *The Stepback* here.
—
## The E-Bike Revolution: Navigating a Rocky Road of Regulation
Last week, something truly out of character occurred: a surge of civic outrage compelled me to personally contact my elected representatives, voicing strong disapproval over a new piece of legislation. It was an unusual step, but the circumstances demanded it.
New Jersey’s policymakers, seemingly entrenched in an automotive-first mindset, had just passed a bill poised to severely restrict e-bike ownership across the state. My frustration was palpable. Of course, I understand the growing apprehension surrounding the rising number of injuries and fatalities involving teenagers on e-bikes, many of which are high-powered models blurring the lines between bicycle and motorcycle. Lawmakers assert they are simply trying to bring order to what has become an increasingly untamed market.
However, the proposed bill recklessly conflates high-speed electric motorcycles with gentler, pedal-assist e-bikes – the very models often relied upon by food delivery couriers or parents seeking an eco-friendly way to transport their children to school. The notion that an owner of a throttle-less e-bike, capped at 20mph, would be forced to register it with the DMV, secure a license, and purchase insurance is patently absurd. This draconian approach will undoubtedly cripple efforts to foster sustainable transportation alternatives within the state. For these compelling reasons, I urged my governor to veto the bill.
My plea, unfortunately, fell on deaf ears.
## New Jersey’s Misguided Mandate: A Case Study in Legislative Overreach
### A Unified Front Against Diverse Machines
Now, residents of New Jersey are grappling with one of the most restrictive e-bike laws in the nation. Bike advocacy groups are dismayed by the speed with which this bill navigated the legislative process, signed into law at the eleventh hour by an outgoing governor. Their concern is that other states, fueled by the escalating panic surrounding teenage e-bike ridership, will soon follow New Jersey’s regressive example.
### The Governor’s Deaf Ear
The backlash against e-bikes is not isolated to New Jersey. New York City recently imposed a painfully slow 15mph speed limit on e-bikes, effectively stripping them of their ability to safely navigate congested urban streets alongside multi-ton SUVs and trucks. Furthermore, some Manhattan residents are now advocating for an outright ban on e-bikes in Central Park, citing a handful of pedestrian collisions. Meanwhile, California lawmakers are considering legislation that would prohibit the sale of e-bikes exceeding 750W of motor power.
## A Spreading Chill: E-Bike Regulations Beyond the Garden State
### Echoes of Restriction: NYC and California
To be clear, legislators are indeed hearing an earful from their constituents regarding the surge of high-powered, high-speed e-bikes in their communities. A quick glance at any local Facebook group will likely reveal widespread alarmist reactions concerning teenagers on e-bikes. And often, these concerns are legitimate, given the increasing rate of e-bike-related injuries and fatalities. This is a problem that *can* be solved through thoughtful investment in better infrastructure and comprehensive safety education for both parents and their children.
### The Root of Public Concern (and Legislative Misdirection)
However, when these valid complaints trigger counterproductive legislation, as seen in New Jersey, it detrimentally impacts the broader community of individuals who depend on low-cost, environmentally friendly transportation to replace car trips – teenagers included. Numerous studies confirm that e-bikes are ridden more frequently than traditional bicycles and typically displace car journeys, leading to reduced carbon emissions and fostering healthier, cleaner communities. Yet, instead of bolstering and promoting this mode of transport by constructing protective bike lanes, lawmakers are adopting increasingly reactionary stances. This approach tragically fails to address the true safety hazards contributing to the rising number of fatalities and injuries on our roads: *cars*.
Bike advocates are now scrambling to rectify the glaring flaws in New Jersey’s e-bike law, hoping to redirect legislative energy towards more precise regulations targeting minors and high-powered e-motos. The success of these efforts remains uncertain.
## The Paradox of Progress: Why E-Bikes Face Backlash
### Battling Misinformation and “Car Brain”
In the interim, a wave of misinformation regarding e-bikes is sweeping online platforms. My colleagues at the Montclair Bike Bus are being inundated with hostile comments from individuals who illogically equate all e-bikes with inherent danger and death, failing to grasp the vast difference between a 40mph electric dirt bike and a throttle-less, pedal-assist model that tops out at 20mph.
None of this should come as a surprise. In a nation as profoundly car-dependent as the United States, we frequently struggle to comprehend the imperative of fostering superior, more sustainable transportation options, choosing instead to operate within the confines of our existing, flawed, car-centric framework. This pervasive phenomenon goes by many names – windshield bias, car brain, motonormativity – all describing the ingrained belief that every decision must ultimately serve the automobile. Legislators, unfortunately, are particularly susceptible to these biases.
### E-Bikes: Too Popular for Their Own Good?
It is undeniable that some e-bikes, much like some cars, can pose a menace. Yet, treating all e-bikes as identical, irrespective of their power capabilities and speed, completely overlooks their immense potential. I can’t help but feel that e-bikes are, in a perverse way, victims of their own burgeoning success. I’ve personally witnessed vitriolic comments from drivers irritated by having to slow down for an immigrant delivery worker, a parent with their children on a cargo bike, or even the mere existence of a new bike lane in their town. E-bikes are proving to be as polarizing as they are popular, suggesting that it was perhaps inevitable that car drivers, intolerant of the slightest inconvenience, would eventually push back.
## Charting a Smarter Path Forward
One of the most perplexing aspects of New Jersey’s new law is its complete abandonment of the widely accepted three-class e-bike classification system, a framework designed to distinguish between varying levels of motor assistance and speed. This rejection of a nuanced approach underscores the need for more thoughtful, informed policy-making that genuinely addresses safety concerns while championing the profound environmental and societal benefits that e-bikes offer.## Navigating the E-Bike Landscape: A Patchwork of State Regulations
The electric bicycle, or e-bike, has rapidly transitioned from niche transport to a mainstream phenomenon. Offering an accessible blend of exercise and assistance, these innovative vehicles are reshaping urban commutes and recreational rides alike. However, this swift adoption has presented a complex challenge for lawmakers: how to effectively categorize and regulate a diverse fleet of two-wheeled electric conveyances that range from pedal-assisted bikes to powerful, throttle-driven machines. The result is a varied, often confusing, regulatory tapestry across the United States.
### Divergent Paths to E-Bike Classification
States are grappling with how to define and govern e-bikes, leading to a spectrum of approaches. While some have adopted standardized classification systems, others have taken a more streamlined, albeit less granular, route.
#### The Tri-Class Standard: A Common Framework
Many states, including Texas, have embraced a three-tiered classification system for e-bikes, aiming to provide clarity based on their operational characteristics:
* **Class 1 E-bikes:** These are bicycles equipped with an electric motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling. The motor ceases to assist when the bicycle reaches a speed of 20 mph, and they do not feature a throttle.
* **Class 2 E-bikes:** Defined by their throttle-actuated power, these models can propel the rider without pedaling. Their motor assistance cuts off at a maximum speed of 20 mph.
* **Class 3 E-bikes:** Designed for higher speeds, these e-bikes offer pedal-assist only (no throttle) and provide assistance up to a maximum speed of 28 mph.
This standardized approach attempts to differentiate vehicles based on their speed and mode of assistance, which can then inform rules regarding where they can be ridden (e.g., bike paths, roads).
#### New Jersey’s Broad-Stroke Approach
In stark contrast to the detailed classifications, New Jersey has opted for a strikingly simpler, yet potentially oversimplified, designation. Rather than meticulously segmenting e-bikes by class, the Garden State broadly labels all electric bicycles as “e-motos.” This sweeping categorization might streamline administrative processes but could also obscure the significant differences in performance and safety implications between various e-bike types.
#### Connecticut’s Nuanced Regulatory Blueprint
Safety advocates frequently highlight Connecticut as a state that has developed a thoughtful and comprehensive regulatory framework. Recognizing the diverse nature of electric two-wheelers, the state enacted legislation last year that implements a tiered system based on design and power output:
* **Pedal-Free E-bikes with Substantial Batteries:** For electric bikes lacking pedals and equipped with batteries exceeding 750 watts, riders are now mandated to possess a driver’s license.
* **High-Performance E-Motos:** More powerful electric vehicles, those boasting batteries over 3,500 watts and capable of reaching speeds between 35 mph and over 50 mph, are subject to regulations akin to traditional motorcycles. This includes requirements for registration and insurance.
* **Low-Speed Pedal-Assist E-bikes:** Crucially, standard low-speed pedal-assist e-bikes, which align with the common understanding of an electric bicycle, remain largely unaffected by these new, stricter requirements. This targeted approach aims to address the safety concerns posed by higher-performance electric vehicles without unduly burdening casual e-bike users.
### The Challenge of Wattage and Future Regulations
While many regulations attempt to use motor wattage as a key differentiating factor, industry observers like Micah Toll of *Electrek* have raised pertinent questions about its effectiveness. Toll points out that relying solely on stated motor wattage can be problematic, as manufacturers may “fudge the numbers” – an industry term for manipulating specifications to fit within certain regulatory thresholds, potentially undermining the intent of the law.
The ongoing evolution of e-bike technology, coupled with the varied state-level responses, underscores the need for adaptable and precise regulatory frameworks. As a recent piece in the *Daily Kos* effectively summarizes, the landscape of e-bike and e-moto regulations across the US remains a complex and developing area.
### E-Bikes Beyond Regulation: Community Impact
Beyond the legal nuances, the practical benefits of e-bikes continue to gain traction. For instance, the utility of electric cargo bikes – celebrated in a previous piece for their versatility – highlights the positive impact these vehicles can have on communities, from facilitating local deliveries to enabling initiatives like bike buses, fostering sustainable transportation, and building community connections.
The journey to harmonized and effective e-bike regulation is still underway. As these vehicles become an increasingly integral part of our transportation ecosystem, striking the right balance between encouraging adoption, ensuring rider safety, and maintaining clear legal definitions will be paramount.