Subsidies for ebikes

Gekko

Interesting to see that the government is beginning to look at this

Coupled with proper infrastructure being built it would be very welcome

I was thinking of buying an ebike but will now wait to see what happens before doing so

ted1

Gekko wrote: »

Interesting to see that the government is beginning to look at this

Coupled with proper infrastructure being built it would be very welcome

I was thinking of buying an ebike but will now wait to see what happens before doing so

The way I see it is that an annual travel pass can give a tax saving of about 1500 euro per year.
The bike to work is worth 85 euro saving a year.

There’s a lot of scope to bring incentives for environmental friendly travel up online with grants/ tax savings for other modes of transport

Look at the subsidies for electric cars which do nothing to elevate traffic congestion.

loyatemu

Gekko wrote: »

Interesting to see that the government is beginning to look at this

Coupled with proper infrastructure being built it would be very welcome

I was thinking of buying an ebike but will now wait to see what happens before doing so

where have you seen that?

Tenzor07

Gekko wrote: »

Interesting to see that the government is beginning to look at this

Got a link for this?

Seth Brundle

Gekko wrote: »

Interesting to see that the government is beginning to look at this

Coupled with proper infrastructure being built it would be very welcome

I was thinking of buying an ebike but will now wait to see what happens before doing so

When are they planning to look into the idea of creating proper infrastructure?

Utter Consternation

Seth Brundle wrote: »

When are they planning to look into the idea of creating proper infrastructure?

'If you build it, they will cycle.'

A famous quote from an old movie.

Kaisr Sose

ted1 wrote: »

The way I see it is that an annual travel pass can give a tax saving of about 1500 euro per year.
The bike to work is worth 85 euro saving a year.

There’s a lot of scope to bring incentives for environmental friendly travel up online with grants/ tax savings for other modes of transport

Look at the subsidies for electric cars which do nothing to elevate traffic congestion.

I don't see and economic or environmental correlation between a subsidy on a travel pass and a bike. At least when you buy the travel pass it's a bearer instrument and used as per the intention of the scheme. A subsidy on e-bike is no guarantee it would take a co2 producing vehicle off the road. It may just buy a bigger lawnmower or fancier something else. Even if an e-bike is bought, the person my not use it for work trips it may be a leisure bike.

Grassey

Kaisr Sose wrote:

the person my not use it for work trips it may be a leisure bike.

No different than the BTW scheme then. But getting people to use ebike for short trips to shops, neighbours, gym etc would be better then having them sat in a car for a 2/3 km journey

loyatemu

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don't see and economic or environmental correlation between a subsidy on a travel pass and a bike. At least when you buy the travel pass it's a bearer instrument and used as per the intention of the scheme. A subsidy on e-bike is no guarantee it would take a co2 producing vehicle off the road. It may just buy a bigger lawnmower or fancier something else. Even if an e-bike is bought, the person my not use it for work trips it may be a leisure bike.

anything that gets more people out cycling is good IMO. eBikes have a lot of potential for people who may not be (or feel) fit or young enough for a normal bike, or for longer commutes.

They've become very popular in the Netherlands, in general I think they know what they're doing there when it comes to active travel.

Padre_Pio

loyatemu wrote: »

anything that gets more people out cycling is good IMO. eBikes have a lot of potential for people who may not be (or feel) fit or young enough for a normal bike, or for longer commutes.

They've become very popular in the Netherlands, in general I think they know what they're doing there when it comes to active travel.

Totally agree.

Most people see daily cycling as a PITA. I think ebikes are fantastic at getting people onto a bike, and they quickly see the benefits.

I know plenty of workplaces have showers etc, but it's hard to justify arriving to work sweaty to most people.

Macy0161

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don't see and economic or environmental correlation between a subsidy on a travel pass and a bike. At least when you buy the travel pass it's a bearer instrument and used as per the intention of the scheme. A subsidy on e-bike is no guarantee it would take a co2 producing vehicle off the road. It may just buy a bigger lawnmower or fancier something else. Even if an e-bike is bought, the person my not use it for work trips it may be a leisure bike.

I don't know whether the non-bike purchase is as rampant as it was when the scheme first launched. However, the vast majority of Bike To Work bikes I see people in my organisation buy, are used for cycling to work. Those that aren't, mostly it's a case of an older bike becoming the commuter, so they are cycling to work more.

The biggest blocker of people using BTW bikes for biking to work imo, is actually security of parking. This would be my personal concern with an ebike too, and why it wasn't really on my agenda.

I don't see why ebikes shouldn't be subject to the same schemes and benefits as electric vehicles, which take zero cars off the road, a 100% of the time! That should be the way they are classified, rather than as bikes and on the bike to work scheme.

Just as an aside, plenty in my work who have a travel pass drive in often too.

Kaisr Sose

I am not against e-bikes. They are great way to open the joy of cycling to those who may not otherwise partake. No argument there.

I don't however see the need for a substantial subsidy for them. In my opinion, and based on experience of how these schemes are run, it will be abused. Lots of kids bikes have been bought on the current B2W scheme, as well as prams, lawnmowers, domestic appliances, etc.

Its all well and good citing Holland as an example, but this is not Holland. Our culture is different and our history with cycling, motoring attitude to cyclists, our traffic laws and infrastructure are all substantially in deficit.

Other than having a growing number of people who choose to cycle, or just own bikes, we have very little in common with it, or Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, all of whom are way ahead in supporting cycling as a safe and viable alternative to the motor vehicle. That is where the focus need to be, not getting more people on bikes on poor, or incomplete infrastructure.

A question for the poster that raised Holland, do they subsidise e-bikes, and if so, how?

Tenzor07

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I don't however see the need for a substantial subsidy for them.
A question for the poster that raised Holland, do they subsidise e-bikes, and if so, how?

The Netherlands and Belgium too I believe, pay people something like 26c per KM to cycle to work, as well as €1000 towards the purchase of the bike iirc.

The whole issue is that eBikes of any decent quality would start at around €2,500.
So the BTW scheme allowance needs to double.

loyatemu

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Lots of kids bikes have been bought on the current B2W scheme, as well as prams, lawnmowers, domestic appliances, etc.

I can believe the kids bikes, or buying a bike for your partner (and I don't really have a problem with it, the more cyclists the better). Lawnmowers, domestic appliances etc, really? The retailer is putting themselves at risk doing stuff like that, why would they?

Utter Consternation

loyatemu wrote: »

I can believe the kids bikes, or buying a bike for your partner (and I don't really have a problem with it, the more cyclists the better). Lawnmowers, domestic appliances etc, really? The retailer is putting themselves at risk doing stuff like that, why would they?

I've heard it happens but i've never heard that it has actually happened. It's always some lad who knows a lad who knows a lad.

LeinsterDub

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I am not against e-bikes. They are great way to open the joy of cycling to those who may not otherwise partake. No argument there.

I don't however see the need for a substantial subsidy for them. In my opinion, and based on experience of how these schemes are run, it will be abused. Lots of kids bikes have been bought on the current B2W scheme, as well as prams, lawnmowers, domestic appliances, etc.

Its all well and good citing Holland as an example, but this is not Holland. Our culture is different and our history with cycling, motoring attitude to cyclists, our traffic laws and infrastructure are all substantially in deficit.

Other than having a growing number of people who choose to cycle, or just own bikes, we have very little in common with it, or Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, all of whom are way ahead in supporting cycling as a safe and viable alternative to the motor vehicle. That is where the focus need to be, not getting more people on bikes on poor, or incomplete infrastructure.

A question for the poster that raised Holland, do they subsidise e-bikes, and if so, how?

So just continue with the massive subsidy for cars? Holland wasn't Holland in the 60's

Macy0161

Utter Consternation wrote: »

I've heard it happens but i've never heard that it has actually happened. It's always some lad who knows a lad who knows a lad.

Yeah, never actually had anything concrete on someone not getting a bike.

Holland made a decision to move away from car domination in the 70's.

ebikes reduce the physical exertion and increase the potential commuting distances. Both of which are blockers to people commuting by bike.

magicbastarder

Macy0161 wrote: »

I don't see why ebikes shouldn't be subject to the same schemes and benefits as electric vehicles

it's probably been made above, but it's a trivial argument that e-bikes are subsidised if bought through the BTW scheme.
however, as also mentioned above, subsidies are a minor factor in reasons why we don't see more e-bikes.

Dr_Colossus

Macy0161 wrote: »

The biggest blocker of people using BTW bikes for biking to work imo, is actually security of parking. This would be my personal concern with an ebike too, and why it wasn't really on my agenda.

+1 and not just cycling to work but cycling to shops etc. Until proper secure facilities are provided and bike theft is taken seriously with severe punishment imposed on thieves cycling has a higher risk than most modes of transport of your means of transport being stolen. I commute 140km a week by bike but have secure facilities at work and thus I only ever have my bike either at work or home. Shops are a fraction of the distance but it’s probably in excess of 10 years since I last cycled to one, much more convenient to bring the car. For instance the likes of Roselawn or Blancherstown shopping centres only have a few railings to attach your bike to where you often hear of stolen possessions or see remnants left behind. Train and luas stations are another hot spot for thieves whereas otherwise it would be convenient for commuters to cycle to the train/luas station and commute the remaining distance by rail.

Pigeon Reaper

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

+1 and not just cycling to work but cycling to shops etc. Until proper secure facilities are provided and bike theft is taken seriously with severe punishment imposed on thieves cycling has a higher risk than most modes of transport of your means of transport being stolen. I commute 140km a week by bike but have secure facilities at work and thus I only ever have my bike either at work or home. Shops are a fraction of the distance but it’s probably in excess of 10 years since I last cycled to one, much more convenient to bring the car. For instance the likes of Roselawn or Blancherstown shopping centres only have a few railings to attach your bike to where you often hear of stolen possessions or see remnants left behind. Train and luas stations are another hot spot for thieves whereas otherwise it would be convenient for commuters to cycle to the train/luas station and commute the remaining distance by rail.

Secure parking is a huge difference between here and countries with high modal use of bicycles. Many train stations and cities in Holland and Germany have monitored secure bicycle parking which allows the safe parking of e-bikes for commuters.

Kaisr Sose

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So just continue with the massive subsidy for cars? Holland wasn't Holland in the 60's

I did not say that. Its not a fir comparison. Holland have a goal and took a long term view and planned for it. This is not what happens here. Its always short term and more reactionary than vision. Subsidies are not a replacement for infrastructure, but subsidies are short term, infrastructure is long term.

Bigus

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I am not against e-bikes. They are great way to open the joy of cycling to those who may not otherwise partake. No argument there.

I don't however see the need for a substantial subsidy for them. In my opinion, and based on experience of how these schemes are run, it will be abused. Lots of kids bikes have been bought on the current B2W scheme, as well as prams, lawnmowers, domestic appliances, etc.

Its all well and good citing Holland as an example, but this is not Holland. Our culture is different and our history with cycling, motoring attitude to cyclists, our traffic laws and infrastructure are all substantially in deficit.

Other than having a growing number of people who choose to cycle, or just own bikes, we have very little in common with it, or Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, all of whom are way ahead in supporting cycling as a safe and viable alternative to the motor vehicle. That is where the focus need to be, not getting more people on bikes on poor, or incomplete infrastructure.

A question for the poster that raised Holland, do they subsidise e-bikes, and if so, how?

Yes , We are not Holland, we have lots of hills, we also have lots of wind and we also sometimes have headwind with rain , ebikes mitigate against all of the above in Ireland( heavyer rain gear can be worn ), plus I can go to meetings on my ebike dressed appropriately in chinos shirt and brogues, and not sweating in Lycra and cleats.

Kaisr Sose

Bigus wrote: »

Yes , We are not Holland, we have lots of hills, we also have lots of wind and we also sometimes have headwind with rain , ebikes mitigate against all of the above in Ireland( heavyer rain gear can be worn ), plus I can go to meetings on my ebike dressed appropriately in chinos shirt and brogues, and not sweating in Lycra and cleats.

Very windy in Holland and they have hills too. They also get lots of rain. Under 25kmph, the batter power you will use on an e-bike will not differ on a windy or calm day, or on flat or hilly terrain. The bike and you moving through the air will make up most of the resistance and draw on the battery.

However, you seem to have lots of good reasons to buy an e-bike without a subsidy. The thread is about a subsidy for them, not the merits of them.

LeinsterDub

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Very windy in Holland and they have hills too. They also get lots of rain. Under 25kmph, the batter power you will use on an e-bike will not differ on a windy or calm day, or on flat or hilly terrain. The bike and you moving through the air will make up most of the resistance and draw on the battery.

However, you seem to have lots of good reasons to buy an e-bike without a subsidy. The thread is about a subsidy for them, not the merits of them.

Are you also opposed to the subsidy for eCars? What about the subsidy motoring in general needs? I'm happy not to have eBike subsidy if cars fully pay their way.

Bigus

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Very windy in Holland and they have hills too. They also get lots of rain. Under 25kmph, the batter power you will use on an e-bike will not differ on a windy or calm day, or on flat or hilly terrain. The bike and you moving through the air will make up most of the resistance and draw on the battery.

However, you seem to have lots of good reasons to buy an e-bike without a subsidy. The thread is about a subsidy for them, not the merits of them.

You’re totally incorrect about cycling an ebike into a head wind or up a hill, the extra battery power mitigates against both hills and headwinds and will keep average speed well up compared to a non assisted bike especially under 25 kmh in windy or hilly conditions. This makes cycling more palatable and journey times more predictable.

As for the thread being about subsidies, the point I’m making is that subsidized ebikes would allow for a much broader use by a more diverse range of people in both age fitness that they can replace more and more car and vehicle journeys justifying such subsidies.

ted1

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I am not against e-bikes. They are great way to open the joy of cycling to those who may not otherwise partake. No argument there.

I don't however see the need for a substantial subsidy for them. In my opinion, and based on experience of how these schemes are run, it will be abused. Lots of kids bikes have been bought on the current B2W scheme, as well as prams, lawnmowers, domestic appliances, etc.

Its all well and good citing Holland as an example, but this is not Holland. Our culture is different and our history with cycling, motoring attitude to cyclists, our traffic laws and infrastructure are all substantially in deficit.

Other than having a growing number of people who choose to cycle, or just own bikes, we have very little in common with it, or Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, all of whom are way ahead in supporting cycling as a safe and viable alternative to the motor vehicle. That is where the focus need to be, not getting more people on bikes on poor, or incomplete infrastructure.

A question for the poster that raised Holland, do they subsidise e-bikes, and if so, how?

Tax fraud is an issue for revenue and not to do with an e bike initiative.

Increasing the number of cyclists will eventually lead in better infrastructure

beauf

ted1 wrote: »

The way I see it is that an annual travel pass can give a tax saving of about 1500 euro per year.
The bike to work is worth 85 euro saving a year.

...

Where do you get those figures from?

ted1

beauf wrote: »

Where do you get those figures from?

Well the bike 2 work is 520 every 5 years. So 104 a year. (Instead of 85)

And the annual tax saver tickets are here

https://www.taxsaver.ie/Ticket-Types/Annual-Tickets/Annual-DARTCommuter-Rail-Dublin-Bus-and-Luas2/

I might have over estimate the tax saver it’s worth up to €946 a year. So over 5 years that’s 4,730 as opposed to 520 for the bike 2 work.

Let’s not forget that every single public transport journey is already being subsidised

LeinsterDub

ted1 wrote: »

Let’s not forget that every single public transport journey is already being subsidised

And car journeys. The only modes not being subsidised in any really sense it seems are the two most sustainable walking and cycling

Gekko

I read something saying Paris is looking at giving a €500 subsidy towards ebikes

Doesn’t seem enough: €1000 would be good

For those asking I can’t find the original article I’m afraid...I think it was in the Indo or Irish Times but searches yielded nothing. Hopefully I didn’t imagine it 🤣

what_traffic

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I did not say that. Its not a fir comparison. Holland have a goal and took a long term view and planned for it. This is not what happens here. Its always short term and more reactionary than vision. Subsidies are not a replacement for infrastructure, but subsidies are short term, infrastructure is long term.

Agree - considering the overall transport cost allocated for cycling; Government should be doing both. Subsidies for e-bikes/bicycles should only be a small fraction though from that allocation IMHO.