E-Micromobility Frequently Asked Questions
This FAQ is intended to accompany TA’s policy position paper Building an E-Micromobility Future.
Does Transportation Alternatives support e-micromobility?
Yes, wholeheartedly. E-micromobility has already transformed the way that New Yorkers get around. Going forward, e-bikes and e-scooters offer a tremendous opportunity to shift New Yorkers out of cars, revolutionize freight delivery, reduce traffic fatalities, and make more of our city accessible to older New Yorkers, families, those with disabilities, and those without easy access to public transit. As New York City’s leading advocates for safe streets and better, more equitable transportation access, Transportation Alternatives has a responsibility to push our city and state leaders to embrace and facilitate this transformation. By investing in infrastructure to make e-micromobility a safe, viable alternative to personal private vehicles, New York City can lead the nation to a more practical, safer, climate resilient future, and TA can help lead this charge.
Why are we pushing for New York City to adapt for e-micromobility right now? What’s the rush?
New York City is already woefully behind and it is critical that we get started right away. As the climate crisis looms and vehicle crashes rise, the need for a less car-reliant future is more urgent than ever. E-bikes and e-scooters make non-car transportation accessible over longer distances and more challenging routes, where public transit does not reach, and to a broader population. The data is clear that e-micromobility is effective in shifting trips out of personal vehicles. With the rollout of congestion pricing, e-micromobility offers a critical, missing mode to New Yorkers outside of Manhattan who are underserved by transit.
A future less reliant on cars will require enormous investments in infrastructure within a short timeframe. With billions of federal dollars flowing into transportation infrastructure across the country and new environmental regulations pushing automakers to invest in electrification, now is a critical moment to make these investments. Despite this inflow of potential, current spending plans seem poised to replicate and proliferate the current, dated, and dangerous car-centric model. Now is the time to seize this opportunity to build a better future.
Should we ban or restrict e-micromobility in response to reckless behavior by e-micromobility users, traffic crashes, or battery fires?
No. Simply put, banning e-micromobility would be a shortsighted limitation on the future growth of our city. We are in the early days of a technology poised to transform the way we move around New York City. As with any new technology, there are many unknowns, the landscape is shifting rapidly, and our regulation and infrastructure are struggling to keep up. This mismatch between the uptake of e-micromobility, the state of our streets, and the relevance of our laws has predictably created confusion, conflict, and uncertainty.
As transportation advocates, we have supporters, allies, and partners with a wide range of perspectives and lived experiences of this issue. Some feel endangered by reckless e-micromobility operators. Some have been in crashes; some have been badly injured. Others feel that the known safety issues with lithium ion batteries are a reason to ban this technology entirely. However, the conflicts and challenges that have arisen with this new technology are more the result of a lack of vision and investment on the part of cities than anything inherent to the technology itself. Focusing too closely on the behavior of individual operators managing in an imperfect system misses the forest for the trees, and restricting e-micromobility today would limit our ability to transform New York City away from the car-centric paradigm that has hamstrung the city for decades.
Do we need to reallocate street space for e-micromobility to work?
Yes, reallocation of street space is requisite to the safe integration of e-micromobility into New York City’s transportation system. Streets crowded with cars lack safe space for other uses. While less than half of New Yorkers have access to a personal vehicle, and more than 71% of trips are made by walking, biking, or public transit, more than three-quarters of our largest public space — our streets — is devoted to parking and moving cars. Achieving a better balance, one that reflects current uses and anticipates future uses, is the guiding principle of NYC 25x25, TA’s challenge to New York City’s leader to convert 25 percent of current parking and driving space into space for people by 2025. Evidence shows that an infrastructure-first approach is the most effective path to safer streets for all New Yorkers. To ensure that this technology is as safe as possible and is operated in a responsible manner, TA’s infrastructure-first position also includes immediate action on the regulation, policy, and enforcement.
Does TA support electric vehicles as part of the shift to e-micromobility?
No. New York City should not allocate public space to storing, fueling, or charging any private vehicles — gas powered or electric. Electric vehicles (EVs) are often presented as the solution for the harms of gasoline-powered vehicles, but ultimately, we cannot drive our way out of the climate crisis, the traffic violence crisis, or the congestion crisis. Besides being prohibitively expensive for most New Yorkers, EVs are heavier and more deadly in a crash than their gas-powered counterparts. The manufacturing process for electric SUVs — the majority of the EV market — is so resource-intensive that their widespread adoption may not reduce CO2 emissions quickly enough to achieve our climate goals. Finally, the basic spatial problem posed by large vehicles in dense urban settings is not solved by making cars electric. There simply isn’t enough space to store and move private cars in our cities in a way that facilitates a healthy and equitable city. With its lower price point, smaller size, ability to move more people in the same amount of space, and smaller carbon footprint, e-micromobility is the best path forward for New York City.
Does e-micromobility make our city more equitable?
Yes. Researchers have found that affordable, efficient transportation access is the single most important factor affecting the potential to escape poverty. With smart investments in infrastructure and thoughtful policy decisions, e-micromobility can be a tremendous force to level the transportation playing field. E-bikes have been shown to directly encourage new types of riders: women, older New Yorkers, New Yorkers with certain disabilities or are less physically active, and families who use e-cargo bikes. In transit deserts, e-micromobility is a viable alternative to car trips in a way that traditional bikes simply are not because electric bikes and scooters can handle longer trips, traverse hillier terrain, shorten commute times, and allow people of all abilities to move longer and more arduous distances. Studies have shown that owners of e-bikes ride 340% farther than classic bike owners.
Does e-micromobility help working New Yorkers?
Yes. In addition to providing affordable transportation for commuters of all ages and abilities, e-micromobility is already critical to the livelihoods of the workers who deliver restaurant meals and consumer goods locally. E-bikes and e-scooters have quickly become the primary mode for most of the 65,000 New Yorkers who make their living as delivery workers. For a food delivery worker heavily reliant on tipped wages, a fast and affordable e-bike or e-scooter can be the key to economic opportunity. In other cities, e-cargo bikes are a critical part of the shipping network, allowing package delivery workers a more efficient and safer way to do their jobs.
Should police officers enforce e-micromobility traffic violations?
No. The City of New York should actually prohibit the use of armed police resources for all traffic enforcement — electric and gas powered vehicles, e-micromobility, and human-powered bikes and scooters. Armed police officers have been shown to both unduly punish, and put at risk of violence, people of color and the most economically vulnerable, especially delivery workers. There is little evidence that traffic stops prevent traffic fatalities and ample evidence that redesigning streets is a more reliable and effective way to influence street user’s behavior.
Users of all modes must respect traffic laws and the most vulnerable street users: pedestrians. The safest and most effective way to achieve this is by equitably allocating safe space on the street for all road users.
Should e-micromobility users be licensed? Should e-bikes and scooters be registered?
No. Licensing and registration requirements would suppress e-micromobility use and create a financial and bureaucratic barrier for the most economically vulnerable e-micromobility users, who are often reliant on this form of transportation for their livelihood. Bicycle licensing requirements in other cities and countries have been shown to lower cycling rates and to encourage racial profiling. Bike licensing programs are costly, and per the principle of the “safety in numbers,” actually make e-micromobility use less safe by causing fewer people to ride bikes.
Should the City of New York use automated enforcement to police e-micromobility users?
No. The basic functionality of current automated enforcement cameras relies on photographing license plates. Automated enforcement of e-micromobility users would thus require an e-bike licensing program, which would be an aggressive deterrent and prohibitive barrier to biking and employment, and create major equity concerns. Bicycle licensing programs have been shown to cause declines in cycling populations and act as a conduit for racist police enforcement.
Is e-micromobility really a viable option for moving freight?
Yes, as cities around the world have already demonstrated, it is easier and safer to move freight through congested cities with smaller, lighter forms of transportation such as cargo e-bikes. Cargo e-bikes are a proven, effective last-mile delivery method — up to 60% faster than delivery vans and offering a 90% reduction in emissions. From 2019 to 2022, the number of packages delivered in NYC increased from 1.9 million to 3.6 million daily, and this number continues to rise steeply. The top three zip codes for daily freight deliveries are located in Midtown Manhattan, the most traffic-clogged areas of the city, where commercial cargo e-bikes would bring the most benefits. Since cargo e-bikes are significantly cheaper and easier to store than delivery vans, they hold the potential to help local businesses compete with giants such as Amazon on local deliveries.
Doesn’t e-micromobility endanger pedestrians?
No, the growth of e-micromobility makes pedestrians safer. The best way to make our streets safer for all users is to reduce the number of car trips New Yorkers take — and encouraging e-micromobility use is an important way to accomplish this goal. Street users have varying degrees of vulnerability, but whether a pedestrian, a traditional cyclist, an e-micromobility user, or a motorcyclist, anyone unprotected by the shell of a vehicle is especially at risk. Car and truck drivers are both the least vulnerable and the greatest danger to everyone else. In 2021, only 4% of crashes that led to pedestrian injury involved e-bikes, e-scooters, mopeds, or motor scooters per NYPD data. In contrast, more than 99% of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities involve cars.
Does “more space” just mean building more bike lanes?
It means both building more bike lanes and widening current bike lanes. Current bike lanes are too narrow to safely accommodate the growing population of traditional cyclists in New York City, much less users operating at different speeds, and the discrepancy in weight and speed between electric and non-electric micromobility creates dangerous conditions in today’s bike lanes. Both wider shared lanes for bikes, scooters, and e-micromobility, and dedicated, separated lanes for e-micromobility must be part of the solution. Where feasible, two-way lanes can help reduce the unsafe practice of “salmoning,” or riding against traffic.
On some streets, simply widening an existing bike lane is the best solution. For more heavily trafficked routes where space is available, mode-specific lanes by speed classification, that also factors in weight and size, should be built. In particular, lanes must be designed or retrofitted to accommodate last-mile freight delivery by e-cargo bikes, which require a larger turning radius than traditional bikes. Wayfinding and design of these lanes must follow best practices to make it easy for operators of all modes, including pedestrians, to navigate them properly the first time. New York City must lift its ban on e-micromobility in its parks and along greenways like the Hudson River Greenway, the nation’s busiest bike path.
Should the City build public charging infrastructure?
Yes. In addition to lane space, New York City must also invest in and expand public charging infrastructure such as Street Deliveristas Hubs, and incentivize or require residential buildings to provide safe, fire-resistant charging stations on their premises. FDNY should develop standards for safe battery and e-bike storage stations that include fire suppression and detection of damaged batteries, and work with residential and commercial building owners to install them.
Should the City build more parking for e-micromobility?
Yes. One on-street car parking space can accommodate parking for several e-bikes or e-scooters, and the City of New York needs to invest in safe, secure, well-located on-street parking for e-micromobility. This should include both short-term parking in busy commercial and dense residential districts, critical for workers making deliveries, and secure overnight parking. The latter, along with public charging, will vastly expand the use of e-micromobility to New Yorkers who can’t store their e-bike or e-scooter in their residence. Car parking can also be repurposed for the docking and charging of shared e-micromobility.
Do you support rider safety education?
Yes, but it should be complementary, and secondary, to infrastructure. Researchers have found that when cyclists break the law, it is a self-protective response to unsafe conditions. The same is true of e-micromobility users. Operators make a calculation about the safest route to serve their goal, and often break the law to compensate for a lack of infrastructure designed for that mode. A classic example of this is riding on the sidewalk to avoid riding the wrong way down a one way street. The single greatest impact our leaders can make to accommodate and encourage the safe operation of e-micromobility is to update and expand infrastructure for non-motor vehicle use. While education programs and campaigns to teach new riders how and where to operate e-micromobility safely may be helpful to those who see and participate in them, and may be worth the investment once safe-streets infrastructure is built, such campaigns will never reach every New Yorker.
How should we keep e-micromobility users off the sidewalks?
We must build more safe places to ride. Protected bike lanes have been shown to reduce biking on the sidewalk by up to 97%. When the response to e-micromobility use on sidewalks is to limit where e-micromobility can operate, we miss the point: there is simply not enough space for non-vehicular modes since today’s bike lanes take up less than 1% of all street space. To keep them off sidewalks, and to keep pedestrians safe, bike lanes should be widened and dedicated e-micromobility lanes should be added. Our streets can be designed to discourage driving by encouraging more people to walk, cycle, and operate e-bikes and e-scooters, and must provide adequate space for people to do all safely.
How can the City help prevent lithium ion battery fires?
Fires often start when the incorrect charger is used, when batteries, chargers, or e-bikes are non-compliant, or when charger parts are corroded and past their usable life. The City of New York should create a buyback program that allows New Yorkers to safely recycle or exchange uncertified or damaged batteries for cash, or trade in a non-compliant e-bike model for a heavily-discounted certified e-bike. The City must also be stronger on regulating substandard batteries, and should require distributors and stores that sell e-mobility equipment to be licensed by the NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection. This agency must hold vendors accountable that have profited by selling faulty equipment without guidance or with questionable registration titles. The cost of these programs could be partially subsidized by a legally mandated ‘Safety surcharge’ fee on delivery app companies. We also support an education campaign to help e-micromobiity users access better chargers and charge according to best practices.
If lithium ion batteries start fires, shouldn’t they be banned from residential buildings?
No. Banning e-micromobility from residential buildings impacts the livelihood of essential workers who make deliveries and punishes those who rely on this method of transportation. Bans will simply push battery buying, selling, and charging further into the black market where it will have less oversight and become more dangerous. There are several things New York City should do to address these safety issues on a systemic level, beginning with prioritizing funding for convenient public charging infrastructure to give e-micromobility users an alternative to charging batteries in their residences.
