Electric bikes - such a missed opportunity

[johncrossley]

One of the main excuses for not cycling and for local authorities not to invest in cycling infrastructure used to be hilly terrain. Other things that encourage cycling in the Netherlands also apply in much of the UK. For example, a mild climate and high density population. So once you remove the hills argument, then we should, in theory, be more or less on a par with the Netherlands. Electric bikes could have been that silver bullet.

However, sadly that has not been the case. In the early days, electric bikes were looked down on by seasoned cyclists as "cheating". More recently, they have been demonised because of illegal e-bikes that are not restricted to 25 km/h and/or do not require pedalling. Also by cheap e-bikes batteries that have a greater risk of fire.

Ironically, the Netherlands and the flat areas of Northern Germany have largely embraced electric bikes enthusiastically despite hills not being such an issue. Electric bikes allow greater distances to be commuted and provide protection against wind. So called "fat bikes" are unpopular in Amsterdam and other cities, but the Dutch distinguish between these and Dutch-style utility bikes that happen to be assisted.

The government could have promoted electric bikes and provided financial incentives. For example, offering discounts like they do for electric cars. Proper enforcement so that illegal e-bikes are taken off the street straight away.

 

[LYradial]

Taken to its limit the natural process of evolution would lead to the human race losing the use of their legs and moving round on an electric seat on wheels

 

[Egg Centric]

Instead of demonising electric bikes, the government could have encouraged them. For example, offering discounts like they do for electric cars. Proper enforcement so that illegal e-bikes are taken off the street straight away.

They offer cycle to work. My e-bike was essentially "free" in that I didn't notice it despite being over 2k* because a) it was bought pre-tax and b) spread over 3 years.

FWIW I think the 25kmh limit is too low; it's my understanding that historically we had a higher one but this was EU standardisation. If there's any point in Brexit at all it's surely 20-22mphish e-bikes, as this is roughly what a fit-but-not-obsessive cyclist does and would allow keeping up with traffic in 20mph limits.

*a lot of employers limit it to 1k which makes a decent e-bike impossible but this is a silly thing to do as they get an employer's NI rebate and usually caused by inertia, so if anyone's does I would suggest having it out with finance

 

[johncrossley]

They offer cycle to work. My e-bike was essentially "free" in that I didn't notice it despite being over 2k* because a) it was bought pre-tax and b) spread over 3 years.

*a lot of employers limit it to 1k which makes a decent e-bike impossible but this is a silly thing to do as they get an employer's NI rebate and usually caused by inertia, so if anyone's does I would suggest having it out with finance

However, cycle to work is also available for non-electric bikes and there is no additional incentive for electric bikes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2026 ==

Taken to its limit the natural process of evolution would lead to the human race losing the use of their legs and moving round on an electric seat on wheels

The beauty of legal electric bikes is that human effort is still required. People who have electric bikes tend to use them often, so get more exercise than they would have done had they a non-electric bike, or no bike at all.

 

[Egg Centric]

However, cycle to work is also available for non-electric bikes and there is no additional incentive for electric bikes.

Why do we need to incentivise electric bikes over non electric bikes? Cycle to work is already a substantial financial incentive and electric assistance is a substantial non-financial incentive over and above that for e-bikes. If someone is happy with a conventional bike I don't see why they should be encouraged to have an electric one for the sake of it if the blatant advantages aren't enough.

I think some work to get rid of the artificial 1k limit would be very helpful (by raising it by default unless the employer specifically opts out). It is my belief that in most cases it's there because the original scheme had that limit and no one did anything at the employers side to increase it.

 

[johncrossley]

Why do we need to incentivise electric bikes over non electric bikes? Cycle to work is already a substantial financial incentive and electric assistance is a substantial non-financial incentive over and above that for e-bikes. If someone is happy with a conventional bike I don't see why they should be encouraged to have an electric one for the sake of it if the blatant advantages aren't enough.

I think some work to get rid of the artificial 1k limit would be very helpful (by raising it by default unless the employer specifically opts out). It is my belief that in most cases it's there because the original scheme had that limit and no one did anything at the employers side to increase it.

People who are already happy getting a conventional bike won't be bothered about hills. Someone bothered about hills won't get a conventional bike but might be interested in an electric bike. But if they are too expensive then they don't buy one of those either.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

People who are already happy getting a conventional bike won't be bothered about hills.

Not so, you're forgetting that even experienced cyclists, as they get older, become a little lazier and more unfit, at which point an electric bike becomes and increasingly attractive option.

Up until a few years ago I used to enjoy a 50 mile bike ride most Saturdays, but when I reached my fifties it become less fun and more of an ordeal, so when I discovered electric bikes it gave me a new lease of life. As the OP says you still need to pedal but it's great to have the additional power as an option to get you up the steep hills.

 

[johncrossley]

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/perfect-storm-hits-e-bike-sales-new-research-shows-uk-trailing-among-european-nations

explains that UK electric bike sales are much lower than in most other European countries, even compared to countries that don't have a lot of cycle infrastructure.

The UK is floundering next to many other European nations when it comes to e-bike sales, according to new research that compared sales figures in 30 countries.

Britain was ranked second from lowest, with just 2.1 sales per thousand people in 2024, compared to top-ranked Norway, which boasted 36.2 sales per thousand.

It goes on to say that other countries have government grants for electric bikes:

There was also a strong suggestion that additional funding – for example via government schemes – boost sales too, and Paul's Cycles managing director Tom Thornley blamed the UK disappointing figures on "a lack of direct financial support".

“It’s time the government recognised e-bikes as a serious part of the green transport solution," he said. "Cost is still a big barrier for many people and we need targeted financial support whether through purchase grants and rebates, VAT reductions or a fairer, more inclusive Cycle to Work scheme.

“E-bikes are a significant investment and UK schemes are not as widely promoted or generously supported as the subsidies you see in other European countries”, Thornley added. “Government grants have made a real difference in other European countries and that kind of incentive could have a huge impact here too.”

 

[Noddy]

Instead of demonising electric bikes, the government could have encouraged them. For example, offering discounts like they do for electric cars. Proper enforcement so that illegal e-bikes are taken off the street straight away.

How is the Goverment ‘demonising’ electric bikes? Most licensed cycle hire schemes these days are electric (eg Lime or Dott or Voi etc etc)

The problem in (most of) the UK is that the cycling infrastructure is utterly terrible and not fit for purpose. That needs the investment first. It’s no good being able to cycle up a hill at 20kph if there’s a good chance you’ll be involved in an accident with a road vehicle.

 

[ChrisC]

Not so, you're forgetting that even experienced cyclists, as they get older, become a little lazier and more unfit, at which point an electric bike becomes and increasingly attractive option.

Up until a few years ago I used to enjoy a 50 mile bike ride most Saturdays, but when I reached my fifties it become less fun and more of an ordeal, so when I discovered electric bikes it gave me a new lease of life. As the OP says you still need to pedal but it's great to have the additional power as an option to get you up the steep hills.

I’ve never really been a cyclist. I did a little bit of short distance local cycling when I was in my teens, but gave up when I went to college, but had not been on a bike again until I got myself an electric bike almost 50 years later after I had retired. I have always done a lot of walking but as I got into my mid 60’s found that I could no longer walk the distances that I had always done. I used to try to do a walk of 10-15 miles in distance each week but these days I’m finding that around 8 miles, without too many hills, is my absolute limit.

Around 4 years ago I purchased a somewhat expensive folding electric bike. Although I live in a village, surrounded by a fairly rural area, the main road through the village is so busy that I would never cycle direct from my house. A folding bike is great to put in the boot of the car, then drive often only a short distance, to an area where there are lots of quiet almost traffic free country lanes. Well surfaced cycle trails and country parks are also useful to drive to. I go on holidays to quiet country areas and take my folding electric bike. Most of the time I pedal the bike just as I would with an ordinary bike but that little bit of extra help on hills, and when setting off, is so useful and will become more important as I get older. Electric bikes have got a bit of a bad name in this country but mine is from a very reputable manufacturer and cycle shop, and is safe and legal. It does not go anywhere unless I pedal, unlike the illegal ones where they can be ridden without pedalling and are often more or less electric motorbikes.

 

[johncrossley]

How is the Goverment ‘demonising’ electric bikes?

The problem in (most of) the UK is that the cycling infrastructure is utterly terrible and not fit for purpose. That needs the investment first. It’s no good being able to cycle up a hill at 20kph if there’s a good chance you’ll be involved in an accident with a road vehicle.

That was badly phrased. I meant that electric bikes are generally demonised by the media.

I see electric bikes as a way of finding the excuse to provide proper infrastructure so there would be investment at the same time. But, as I mentioned earlier, some countries that don't have much infrastructure have much higher rates of electric bike sales.

 

[SargeNpton]

That was badly phrased. I meant that electric bikes are generally demonised by the media.

I see electric bikes as a way of finding the excuse to provide proper infrastructure so there would be investment at the same time. But, as I mentioned earlier, some countries that don't have much infrastructure have much higher rates of electric bike sales.

The ones being demonised by the media are the illegal ones, not the legal e-assisted pedal cycles.

 

[johncrossley]

The ones being demonised by the media are the illegal ones, not the legal e-assisted pedal cycles.

Most of the media doesn't understand or even care that there is a difference.

 

[jupiter]

It's not just infrastucture though, although I agree that can certainy help.

I was nearly knocked off my bike twice yesterday within minutes on the same stretch of road. The problem is with over-entitled, poorly-educated and down right impatient motorists who seem uncapable of reducing speed slightly to time their pass, combined with massive great big wide cars nowadays that actually bring a sense of invulnerability to drivers rather than the opposite.

I've been fortunate to do many thousands of miles road-tripping in Europe, Canada and New Zealand. The drivers in all of those regions (ok, so not Italy I accept) have been way more polite and understanding.

We have close-pass driving regulations in this country that have been brought in like a daring SAS mission developed under total secrecy.

 

[Egg Centric]

People who are already happy getting a conventional bike won't be bothered about hills. Someone bothered about hills won't get a conventional bike but might be interested in an electric bike. But if they are too expensive then they don't buy one of those either.

I don't disagree. What I'm saying is they're not too expensive. Cycle to Work is a minimum 33%ish discount (basic rate plus NI) rising to "paid to take it" at certain specific salary points due to our crazy system, and can be spread out over several years.

I do think the scheme should be improved through better publicity, removing the "to work" requirement that it be used for commuting and that it's technically a rental (both of which are flagrantly ignored anyway), and defaulting the limit to 5k or something unless the employer specifically wants it to be 1k (a decision that only makes sense in very limited circumstances) plus the duration which again is often limited to 1 year but doesn't need to be, just was the first time it was introduced and no one bothered changing it unless it's pointed out. But the fundamentals are pretty good and not what's holding people back I think.

 

[Mattplans]

Often dreamt up a cycle hire ebike scheme ran by TfL and heavily subsidised. Not a lot of ways to promote cycling in general especially in the outer boroughs.

Ironically, the Netherlands and the flat areas of Northern Germany have largely embraced electric bikes enthusiastically despite hills not being such an issue.

Had a beautiful cycle ride earlier this week in the Greenwich area, which included Greenwich Park and Maze Hill. the (Forest) bike struggles (as does everyone) on the uphill sections a lot without some heavy intervention. Not sure how the incline compares to typical hilly area in the Netherlands but I don't think it handled it very well. Obviously with or without intervention you're still able to glide past those not on e-bikes

And, of course, conversely be prepared for some scary speeds when going downhill especially on the Maze Hil road, not sure whether weaving around cars (Maze Hill road) or pedestrians (Park) is more dangerous but you're braking very frequently!

 

[Noddy]

That was badly phrased. I meant that electric bikes are generally demonised by the media.

I see electric bikes as a way of finding the excuse to provide proper infrastructure so there would be investment at the same time. But, as I mentioned earlier, some countries that don't have much infrastructure have much higher rates of electric bike sales.

The fact that e-bikes are eligible for massive discount via the cycle to work scheme puts them on a par with electric vehicles grants (which only applies to certain vehicles).

It's not just infrastucture though, although I agree that can certainy help.

I was nearly knocked off my bike twice yesterday within minutes on the same stretch of road. The problem is with over-entitled, poorly-educated and down right impatient motorists who seem uncapable of reducing speed slightly to time their pass, combined with massive great big wide cars nowadays that actually bring a sense of invulnerability to drivers rather than the opposite.

Maybe I’m misinterpreting what the OP is questioning but I get the impression it’s about e-bikes being promoted and used for commuting/everyday local journeys. Assuming that is correct if the cycle infrastructure was as good as in many other countries the commuter/local journey rider would barely be interacting with cars or other vehicles but instead would be using proper cycle lanes which would mostly be separate from the vehicle carriageway. It shouldn’t be possible to nearly get knocked off in this scenario. Folk training on their road bikes might still be using the road carriageway but it’s the other 95% of folk that we really need to be getting on bikes. And once the other 95% are regularly riding bikes they’ll likely have bit better experience of what to do when they do encounter a cyclist in their car and equally a car as a cyclist.

 

[johncrossley]

Not sure how the incline compares to typical hilly area in the Netherlands but I don't think it handled it very well

There are some hilly areas in the Netherlands, especially in the far south, but the vast majority of the country is almost completely flat. The flat areas are of interest here. Electric bikes are still useful in flat areas because headwinds and cross-winds are more of a problem in flat areas.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2026 ==

The fact that e-bikes are eligible for massive discount via the cycle to work scheme puts them on a par with electric vehicles grants (which only applies to certain vehicles).

The implication from the link I quoted was that subsidies for e-bikes are not as generous as in other countries. It is clear that the current subsidies aren't sufficient as relatively few electric bikes are being sold. Certainly not enough to make up for the negative publicity.

Maybe I’m misinterpreting what the OP is questioning but I get the impression it’s about e-bikes being promoted and used for commuting/everyday local journeys.

You are correct in your interpretation.

 

[mmh]

I don't want any of these things to be subsidised.

 

[johncrossley]

I don't want any of these things to be subsidised.

You will pay one way or another. Either through improvements to cycling, or costs to the NHS because of obesity and lack of exercise.

 

[Noddy]

You will pay one way or another. Either through improvements to cycling, or costs to the NHS because of obesity and lack of exercise.

Absolutely.

And in the case of subsidies for EVs the cost to the NHS of lung/respiratory diseases and complications, and the cost to the climate through more CO2 being released. In the case of not investing in infrastructure the cost to the economy.

 

[styles]

They offer cycle to work. My e-bike was essentially "free" in that I didn't notice it despite being over 2k* because a) it was bought pre-tax and b) spread over 3 years.

It can actually be free without air quotes. I bought a Brompton for a pre-tax price of a little over £1k. Net, it was closer to half that, even with the P11D, after 2 years. When I went to sell it, I managed to still get £850 for it if I remember rightly. I suppose I should factor inflation or lose investment opportunities in other assets into that, but I remember doing quick calcs at the time and working out I'd actually profited from it. A few years ago the government removed the £1k limit, so employers are free to choose much higher amounts. If I bought some crazy expensive £10k bike, kept for 3 years, I could be making a few grand in profit, assuming it held its value like the Brompton did.

*a lot of employers limit it to 1k which makes a decent e-bike impossible but this is a silly thing to do as they get an employer's NI rebate and usually caused by inertia, so if anyone's does I would suggest having it out with finance

There are also potentially student loan savings, increased child benefits, etc. Even more so for those lucky enough to be in the £100-125k income range. Obviously while you have an active agreement in place, you can't sell it because it belongs to the company (not that I'm sure anyone would know, and employers don't tend to ask for the bikes back), but still a fair saving or even profit to be made.

 

[JohnMcL7]

You will pay one way or another. Either through improvements to cycling, or costs to the NHS because of obesity and lack of exercise.

Exactly and a few larger studies have shown that money invested in cycling saves substantially more money which isn't hard to believe especially in a time when obesity, lack of exercise, high traffic and pollution are all major problems.

One of the pages talking about these studies had a poll asking why people didn't cycle to work and the top one was traffic and busy roads which is what I'd expect. I used to be a cycle leader for social rides that were mainly aimed at helping people to get out cycling so we'd do routes to show them good ways to get through town and offer assistance with any mechanical issues as well as offer advice on how to use their bikes. People were grateful to find safer routes that they weren't aware of because the cycling infrastructure here is pretty abysmal and in no way joined up, people frequently commented that was one of the main reasons that put them off cycling.

Another frequent issue raised is that many people don't understand how to use their bike properly and are too shamed to ask. We take riding a bike for granted but I've come across a wide variety of people who have joined the rides who don't understand how to use gears properly, are unsure about brakes, don't have the right tyre pressure or seat height. Quite often I'd notice some aspect of a person's riding they needed help with and when I helped them with that, it would open the floodgate for further questions and sometimes from other people in the group which is great. Some tips on best gears to use, get the seat height correct, set up the tyre pressure and show them how to use the brakes has quite a remarkable change.

However for many people these sorts of rides aren't an option and when I started cycling in 2011 and wanted to move beyond commuting there was nothing really, it was only the more hardcore options with joining an MTB group or road bike group. While I joined an MTB group it was a very steep learning curve and not suitable or viable for many.

I don't think there's any issues with e-bike adoption and I think there's been a remarkable number of them sold. Often now going into bike shops I notice e-bikes are at the forefront and one of the local bikeshops has reduced their non e-bikes in favour of e-bikes. I've also noticed that e-bikes have moved on from older or less fit people to a much wider range, I've a number of MTB friends who have e-bikes because they want to ride downhill more and I see a lot of younger people who look to be commuting or travelling on them.

 

[Egg Centric]

Some tips on best gears to use, get the seat height correct, set up the tyre pressure and show them how to use the brakes has quite a remarkable change.

I can see how the first three might be non obvious, I'm intrigued to know what they were getting wrong with the brakes? Is this the common "afraid to use the front brake" thing?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think there's any issues with e-bike adoption and I think there's been a remarkable number of them sold. Often now going into bike shops I notice e-bikes are at the forefront and one of the local bikeshops has reduced their non e-bikes in favour of e-bikes. I've also noticed that e-bikes have moved on from older or less fit people to a much wider range, I've a number of MTB friends who have e-bikes because they want to ride downhill more and I see a lot of younger people who look to be commuting or travelling on them.

e-MTBs certainly make sense - MTBing is about the downhill, and it's no different in practice to a ski lift.

 

[Silent]

One of the main excuses for not cycling and for local authorities not to invest in cycling infrastructure used to be hilly terrain. Other things that encourage cycling in the Netherlands also apply in much of the UK. For example, a mild climate and high density population. So once you remove the hills argument, then we should, in theory, be more or less on a par with the Netherlands. Electric bikes could have been that silver bullet.

However, sadly that has not been the case. In the early days, electric bikes were looked down on by seasoned cyclists as "cheating". More recently, they have been demonised because of illegal e-bikes that are not restricted to 25 km/h and/or do not require pedalling. Also by cheap e-bikes batteries that have a greater risk of fire.

Ironically, the Netherlands and the flat areas of Northern Germany have largely embraced electric bikes enthusiastically despite hills not being such an issue. Electric bikes allow greater distances to be commuted and provide protection against wind. So called "fat bikes" are unpopular in Amsterdam and other cities, but the Dutch distinguish between these and Dutch-style utility bikes that happen to be assisted.

The government could have promoted electric bikes and provided financial incentives. For example, offering discounts like they do for electric cars. Proper enforcement so that illegal e-bikes are taken off the street straight away.

You adapt to cycling hills over time I think so it shouldn't be used as an excuse not to invest in cycling infrastructure. I find that e-bikes, that are probably illegal, make cycling on the towpath with a single speed push bike feel dangerous. I find that usually they tailgate me. so they are more like motorcycles. I also saw one crash into the back of a van a few days ago. I think they should be assist regulated if they are sharing narrow cycle paths with push bikes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jul 2026 ==

However, cycle to work is also available for non-electric bikes and there is no additional incentive for electric bikes.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2026 ==



The beauty of legal electric bikes is that human effort is still required. People who have electric bikes tend to use them often, so get more exercise than they would have done had they a non-electric bike, or no bike at all.

I actually think that is nuanced. When you are conditioned to ride a push bike I don't see why you would ride it less than an e bike, you can still cycle at easy paces

 

[SargeNpton]

You adapt to cycling hills over time I think so it shouldn't be used as an excuse not to invest in cycling infrastructure. I find that e-bikes, that are probably illegal, make cycling on the towpath with a single speed push bike feel dangerous. I find that usually they tailgate me. so they are more like motorcycles. I also saw one crash into the back of a van a few days ago. I think they should be assist regulated if they are sharing narrow cycle paths with push bikes.

If they are of the illegal type they need to be seized an crushed - same as any other motor vehicle in a public place that is not being used 100% in accordance with the law.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they are of the illegal type they need to be seized an crushed - same as any other motor vehicle in a public place that is not being used 100% in accordance with the law.

Certainly, the problem is catching them.

On the other hand, if the poster is cycling sedately and someone wants to pass a bit quicker, it's etiquette on canal towpaths to pull over when safe and let them past. Just as they'd probably expect a pedestrian to step aside for them.

 

[Silent]

Certainly, the problem is catching them.

On the other hand, if the poster is cycling sedately and someone wants to pass a bit quicker, it's etiquette on canal towpaths to pull over when safe and let them past. Just as they'd probably expect a pedestrian to step aside for them.

I don't cycle slowly and sometimes it's too narrow or there is a sharp bend that it's unsafe to pull over, just like you need top sometimes go into the primary position cycling on the road at times.

 

[johncrossley]

You adapt to cycling hills over time I think so it shouldn't be used as an excuse not to invest in cycling infrastructure.

Look at the countries that have the highest cycling rates. Those are Netherlands and Denmark, and they are flat. The Netherlands also has the best cycling infrastructure, with Denmark second best. In Belgium there is a lot of cycling and generally good infrastructure in the flat north but very little infrastructure and cycling in the hilly south. Although the flat north is mostly Dutch speaking and the hilly south mostly French speaking, so a cynic might put it down to culture rather than terrain.