The e-scooter debate, pros and cons
Depending on who you ask, e-scooters are either the future of urban mobility or a horrible dumpster fire. Let’s look into the pros and cons of e-scooters and try to dispel some myths…
Here’s a small debate on e-scooters. Afterwards, we’ll follow it with some recommendations to help ameliorate any potential problems.
Setting the scene: Ontario laws
For readers elsewhere, most locales are going through similar challenges. Keep reading and comment on how things are different in your country, state, or province.
Ontario is currently piloting use of e-scooters (ref). There are things you should know, especially if you have bought one or are thinking of it.
Limits:
- an electric motor that does not exceed 500 watts
- a maximum speed of 24 km/h on a level surface
The program ends 2024–11–27, and it is unclear what status will be in after then. So in 5 months, there will either be clarity on the future of e-scooters or you may face a ban.
So why the hype, what are the problems, and what can one do about it?
Debate: the pros
Within the urban landscape, e-scooters have many pros.
E-scooters are much smaller than cars. That means they occupy less than a tenth the space that your average SUV does for generally the same task: conveying a single commuter to work or school. The small size has lots of advantages, primarily that much less space is needed for parking and traffic. By moving to more efficient forms of transportation, we can eliminate some of the extra space, then it literally brings the community together; pedestrians benefit from being able to reach more destinations quickly.
E-scooters are much more energy efficient than cars. These use many fewer materials to construct. These have much less mass and air resistance, therefore are far more efficient. This means big saving to your pocketbook and the environment.
The form factor can be sufficiently small that e-scooters could be brought onto trains or into the office rather than having to leave these chained outside like bicycles. The added security and convenience is a benefit for mixed modality commutes and ensuring it does disappear from theft while not in use. This makes e-scooters the ideal candidate for last mile connection to transit.
The economic benefits of e-scooters are similar to bikes. Those using either form of transport are far more likely to stop and spend money at a local shop, compared to those driving by in a car. If they are without a car, then they also have about 20000 C$/y more to spend into the local economy as well.
Debate: the cons
Like any new technology, there are plenty of cons to e-scooters.
Compared to bicycles, e-scooters do not provide much of a workout. True, it is better than sitting in a car, and provides light use of core, arms, and legs; but without the exertion of pedaling, you won’t get any cardio workout. This means the fitness benefits of bikes and e-bikes do not apply to e-scooters. Riders of e-bikes usually pedal, still providing cardio exercise; the assist helping extend range and climb hills.
Many e-scooters are a fire hazard. While some top brands provide decent protection, e-scooters rely primarily on Li-ion batteries, which are prone to catch fire. With the sizes needed for a light vehicle compared to a cell phone, the amount of energy and fuel is considerable. There are plenty of documented cases of buildings burning down due to e-scooter battery fires. For example, there are over 130 fires per year in New York City alone caused by e-scooters.
In most cities, there are no good places to ride e-scooters. These are not safe in motor vehicle traffic, where is the speed limit is over 30 km/h, the chance of death or serious injury if in a collision is pretty much a guarantee.
E-scooters are less stable that bikes, so a rider is much more likely to get thrown off due to bumps and other hazards.
Lastly, there are insurance problems; as e-scooters may not be covered by either motor vehicle insurance or household liability insurance.
Rebuttal: the pros
E-scooters may be more efficient than cars, but it definitely does not beat the efficiency of bikes. In fact, the bicycle is the most efficient form of transport on land, including all forms of walking of any animal.
Rather than getting an e-scooter, try a bike instead. It is cheaper, doesn’t need to be plugged in, and provide more health benefits.
Some buildings and transit do not allow e-scooters in them due to the fire hazard. This won’t change until better safer battery technology is common.
Rebuttal: the cons
True that infrastructure, especially in North America, is behind — but what benefits e-scooters also greatly benefits cyclists and in fact makes streets safer for all users. This is just another reason to push for better street design and neighbourhood zoning. This includes cycle tracks or separated cycle ways.
Several of the cons: not being able to transport on transit on into buildings due to fire risks, lack of parking within apartment buildings, and even insurance, can be overcome by using a shared micromobility service. Here, users can pick up and drop off the e-scooters at predefined locations all over the city and the company running the service takes care of the rest.
Considerations and recommendations
Municipalities should provide AAA (All Ages & Abilities) style cycleways, allowing both bicycles and scooters and there electric counterparts to travel up to 30 km/h within cities. This network should be complete, enabling users to travel to all destinations within a city fairly easily. Generally, cycle and LEV (Light Electric Vehicle) infrastructure is separate from motor vehicle infrastructure. Having clear color distinction (like red in Netherlands) really helps mark off which areas are for cycles and LEVs vs either motor vehicles or pedestrians; this needs to be applied throughout the infrastructure, not just occasionally.
As importantly, e-scooters should not be allowed on sidewalks. This is a hazard to pedestrians. In a few larger pedestrian areas, such as pedestrian streets or piazzas, e-scooters and bike could be allowed with a more limited speed.
Multi use paths (MUTs) should generally be avoided. This is unsafe for pedestrians, for cyclists, and for e-scooters. There is the potential for too many collisions because expectations are different in terms of speed and use. MUTs may allow for a little pass through a park in both cases. MUTs are not transportation infrastructure, these are recreation. Forcing commuters and others seeking transportation by way of bicycle, e-scooter, or similar onto MUTs just creates frustration and dangers for all parties.
Helmets should be encouraged at the very least, if not required. These greatly reduce the severity of injuries in crashes. The higher center of gravity of e-scooters than bikes, as well as the often shorter wheel base, means that e-scooters are much more likely to flip when breaking or when hitting an obstacle.
Training and practice are also available in many locations. Currently not mandated, training can make the different between knowing how to avoid a situation or how to mitigate problems versus being caught unexpectedly.
Changing zoning by-laws to provide secured parking and charge locations for e-scooters with bicycles rather than car parking is a smart move. This would help prevent fires starting within living spaces.
Many forward-thinking cities are trialing e-scooter rental services as well, and trying to resolve conflicts and figure out how the city can best benefit from the service and e-scooters in general. Like with many innovations, there will be some amount of learning and adaptation before e-scooters can be accepted.
No matter if you are for or against e-scooters, there are several actions that can be taken at the municipal and individual levels to make a city not only more accommodating to e-scooters, but also safer for all road users.
