The government’s Road to Zero strategy, published today and which seeks to lay the groundwork for eliminating almost all road traffic emissions by 2050, has been criticised by cycling campaigners for failing to acknowledge the role electric bicycles can play in helping achieve that target.
The strategy foresees continuing existing grants to purchasers of electric cars, vans, taxis and motorcycles at leased until 2020, but Sustrans says there has been a “missed opportunity” to also provide subsidies to people buying e-bikes, as happens in a number of other European countries.
The strategy does say that the government will consider offering incentives for e-cargo bikes, but the charity Cycling UK said that it was “extraordinary” that no mention was made of e-bikes generally, an omission also highlighted by the Bicycle Association.
Unveiled today by transport secretary Chris Grayling, the much-delayed strategy seeks to build on the government’s stated aim of making the UK a world leader in electric vehicles.
Among its proposals are providing additional cash to fund more charging points for electric vehicles throughout the country, as well as considering whether there should be a requirement for builders of new homes to provide facilities for charging them.
The only reference to bicycles came in a section addressing ‘last mile deliveries’ with the government saying:
We are considering further options for reducing emissions for last mile deliveries, particularly in urban areas. We will shortly launch a call for evidence on this subject, including exploring for the first time providing grants and/or other financial incentives to support the use of e-cargo bikes.
Cycling UK policy director Roger Geffen said: “It is extraordinary that the government can publish a strategy on low emission vehicles and ignore electric bicycles, while saying nothing new about cycling more generally.
“E-bikes are a fantastic solution for enabling a lot more people to cycle. They can enable older or disabled people to take up cycling, while allowing people of any ability to cycle for longer or hillier journeys than they would otherwise have wanted to make by bike.”
He added: “Unlike electric cars, they can tackle congestion, road danger and physical inactivity as well as reducing emissions – and they are tremendous fun too.”
Sustrans also criticised the government for failing to consider e-bikes as part of its strategy.
The sustainable transport charity’s senior policy and political adviser, Rachel White, commented: “The UK government has missed an opportunity to make active travel more accessible to all in its Road to Zero strategy by not including measures to support e-bikes.
“Whilst we welcome the government’s commitment to hold a call for evidence on last-mile deliveries, including consulting on the provision of grants or other financial incentives to support e-cargo bikes, we would like to see financial support for all e-bikes to encourage their uptake.”
She continued: “E-bikes are a green way to get from A-B which reduces our carbon emissions and improves the quality of the air we breathe.
“They are also a more accessible active way to get about for those that may live in very hilly areas, or may be less physically able to use a pedal bike such as the elderly. However, they are still prohibitively expensive for the majority of people.
“There is a strong argument for linking the Road to Zero strategy with the ‘Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy,” White added.
“Whilst moving to cleaner electric vehicles has a role to play in helping us tackle our air quality and climate change crisis, 45 per cent of particulate matter – of which there are no safe levels for human health – comes from tyre and brake wear.
“A switch to electric vehicles fails to address this. We need fewer not just cleaner vehicles on our roads.”
Steve Ganidis, operations director for the Bicycle Association, said: “We welcome that the government’s Road to Zero strategy commits to exploring financial incentives for e-cargo bikes, which can play a central role in reducing air pollution on our streets.
“However, the Government should be doing more to encourage the uptake of e-bikes of all kinds, as they provide a cost-effective solution to key challenges the government is addressing as part of its Industrial Strategy, like air pollution, road congestion and clean growth.
“Unlike electric cars and vans, e-bikes are a road-ready solution for our air pollution crisis, and don’t need the same investment in costly infrastructure.
“We encourage the government to bring cycling in line with other low emission vehicles by extending the current OLEV electric vehicle subsidy to e-bikes,” he added.
Add new comment
13 comments
They seem to have acheived their objective very well. The road to; zero strategy. . .
I find the idea of subsidising someone to buy an expensive EV like a Tesla a bit counter-intuitive. Fair enough a Nissan Leaf or something, but an £80-100k+ luxury car??
And surely bikes themselves (beyond the rather limited, complex and questionable CTW scheme) are overlooked. Why is there no subsidy for cycles more generally, e.g reduced VAT.
EVs still need power to be produced somewhere, even if its partially renewable so its just shifting the problem. Not to mention the battery production.
Pedal cycles are properly zero emmission, not to mention the health benefits and hence reduced strain on the health service.
To be fair, the Model 3 starts at 35k USD. Targetting cars is definitely a good idea, even the keenest cyclists have polluting cars...
But I do certainly agree that we need a lot more funding for active and public transport; walking, cycling, buses & trams inclusive.
Not all cyclists by any means have cars. I've never got around to learning to drive and don't own a car (although my wife does drive and does own a car but we rarely use it - she mainly uses it for commuting or longer journeys).
If you're employed, and you can persuade your employer you can get an eBike under C2W without the usual £1k cap - see https://www.bike-eu.com/laws-regulations/nieuws/2015/09/new-uk-tax-relie... for an example scheme (there are others)
40%+ off is possible, which probably would be a bigger discount (and less faff) than you'd get with a govt scheme.
Still a massive missed opportunity, on the plus side this govt won't be around much longer.
Grayling. Figures.
"at leased until 2020"
"E-bikes" are erronously named. They are moppeds, and belong on roads, without any special consideration normally given to human powered bicycles.
E-bikes suck, fuck e-bikes.
yeh fuck e-bikes. The 80 year old granny I saw getting on one after getting a load from the bakers was taking the piss obviously. Should have been grinding a 53-11 like any normal mamil damn her!!
Or you could, you know, have a bit of perspective and understand the difference between a legal pedal assisted bicycle and the ones that power along without any pedal strokes that are completely illegal but for some reason no one seems concerned with clamping down on their sale...
Calling e-bikes "mopeds" shows how much you don't know about them.
What a stupid ill thought out comment.
The woman cyclist who had recently had a child and was able due to a derestricted e bike to continue to ride with the chain gang I hooked up with.
The husband and wife who can now enjoy a ride together without falling out
The older people who can still keep mobile on a bike
The car drivers who might be tempted out of their cars.
Yeah fuck e bikes, fuck wit.
If it's not a chauffeur driven Jaguar or something mind-blowingly expensive like CrossRail or HS2, MPs won't even know it exists.
"Road to Zero strategy"? They've had this transport strategy for years, and it's nothing to do with pollution. Massive ego schemes like HS2 with no proven benefits, and almost zero investment into cycling, which has more benefits than any other form of transport. This government is truly the most incompetent I've ever had the misfortune to live under, and there is no shortage of competetion.