Britain’s illegal e-bike boom: desperation, delivery drivers – and unthinkable danger

Honestly can't blame people for having opinion on (illegal)ebike. We love to blame carbrain for this, but...they also written a book on how to build car and how the driver should act, there's only like a few pages, if not one, that applicable to cyclist, and ebike adhere to the same rule as bicycle, yet the potential of harm(self or others) is higher than bicycle. Though i'd argue that throttle and a bit higher speed(30kmph) helps, illegal one is essentially a motorcycle that disguised as a bicycle.

With regards to the UK regulatory structure for ebikes and where they blur into other categories, it seems that the UK has a "missing middle" situation: there's nothing legal that is quicker than a 25 kph (15.5 MPH) ebike other than a "S-pedelec", moped or motorbike, all of which require registration, licensure, and insurance. I'm unreliably informed that insurance is a major impediment in the UK, because of the broad criteria that insurers can use to set rates.

To that end, I think a regulatory change would be to loosen the burden for "S-pedelecs". For reference, I say "S-pedelec" to mean a 45 kph (28 MPH) pedal-assist ebike, with a 250 W or 500 W power limit, making these almost comparable to American Class 3 ebikes. In the UK, the insurance requirement should be dropped outright, and the registration requirement reduced to a "plate" requirement, kinda like how California requires mopeds to pay a one-time fee to obtain an identification plate. This would directly address the supposed issue of snatch-and-run incidents using ebikes, and while I don't agree with the whole surveillance state thing going on in the UK, they've already set the precedent for this with the rest of the regulatory system.

In terms of rider training, I'm not entirely certain what to suggest. By far, the rest of the world has better road education than here in the USA, so I'm reluctant to suggest a "laisse-faire" approach where UK S-pedelec riders need zero qualifications to ride. In California, we are still coming to grips with whether our Class 2 ebikes can be safely ridden by children, premised on the somewhat shaky assumption that they're as easy to control as an acoustic bike. So with all that said, I could vaguely see changing the requirements so that S pedelec riders need some form of UK license to ride, so at least riders will know the road markings and intersection priorities.

It is fairly well-documented that American youth -- despite being surrounded by unshakable car culture for a thousand miles -- are less interested in a driving license than ever, and I imagine the same is true in the UK where driving an automobile is even more expensive and prohibitive. But I would hope that perhaps UK youth have a higher propensity than American youth at pursuing a motorbike license, and then using that to ride a cheap S-pedelec, if the regulatory changes I've proposed were to take shape.

My main gripe is that without a smooth gradient in personal mobility regulatory requirements, there is no cognizable difference between an S-pedelec, moped, or motorcycle today in the UK. There has to be some sort of distinction, or else people will either: 1) decline all options, or 2) ride illegally.

I harbor no airs that the California regulatory structure is perfect -- it dang well isn't -- but at least I can envision plausible two-wheeler scenarios for a 6-year old, a 16-year old, a 26-year old, and a 66-year old, given the breadth of permissible two-wheelers here and how the skills and training stack up. But in the UK right now, there's a huge chasm between riding an acoustic bike as a child, and then.... nothing for young adult transportation.

Lol fear uncertainty and doubt