The Finnish Parliament’s Transport and Communications Committee has proposed new nationwide regulations for electric scooter use, including a minimum age requirement of 15 years. The recommendation is part of a broader micromobility policy framework approved on Friday 16 May.
The proposed age limit follows a series of accidents involving minors, some resulting in serious injuries or fatalities. If enacted, the rule would apply to both shared and privately owned e-scooters. Electric bicycles would not be subject to the age restriction.
Previously, local authorities were responsible for setting age limits, but the Constitutional Affairs Committee advised that such measures should be standardised across the country. The Finnish Road Safety Council had recommended the adoption of a national age limit in 2024.
The draft legislation also introduces a ban on operating e-scooters while intoxicated. A legal blood alcohol content limit of 0.05 percent, mirroring that for motor vehicle drivers, would apply to users of light electric vehicles, including both e-scooters and e-bikes.
While the use of helmets will not be mandated, the legislation includes a strong recommendation encouraging their use in an effort to reduce head injuries and improve overall safety.
Additional provisions would require micromobility rental companies to obtain operating permits from individual municipalities. This measure aims to address concerns related to parking practices and congestion on sidewalks in urban areas.
The proposal will now proceed to the full Parliament for consideration in a plenary session.
A new bill has been introduced in Washington, D.C., to implement mandatory fire safety standards for e-bike and scooter batteries.
The proposed Micromobility Fire Safety Standards Act of 2025 is intended to address fire hazards associated with low-quality batteries. From November 2018 to March 2025, riders in the District collectively travelled more than 38 million miles using e-bikes and scooters. The legislation seeks to regulate battery sales both in physical stores and online to enhance consumer safety.
LEVA-EU’s view
LEVA-EU thinks that it is important to align all battery rules such as with the EU’s Battery Regulation in order to minimize compliance burden for LEV manufacturers.
The UK Parliament is initiating an inquiry into e-bike safety, with particular attention given to the role of the gig economy in encouraging the modification of electric bikes and the use of potentially hazardous upgrade kits that may pose thermal risks.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Cycling & Walking (APPGCW) is now soliciting evidence from a range of stakeholders. These include industry professionals, delivery riders with relevant experience, advocacy organisations, policy experts, emergency services, and other concerned parties.
Fabian Hamilton MP, Chair of the APPGCW, noted the potential of e-bikes to contribute to a more sustainable and equitable transport system. However, he expressed concern that this potential could be compromised by the proliferation of low-quality imported conversion kits. He highlighted the pressures experienced by gig economy workers, who may resort to using unregulated or unsafe equipment to enhance their earnings. In some cases, these products may constitute illegally modified motorcycles rather than compliant e-bikes, which could harm the reputation of legitimate e-bike manufacturers.
Public perception has also been affected by media reports that may have misrepresented the root causes of fire risks associated with electric bikes. This has led to actions such as landlords and building managers restricting e-bike storage and use, and Transport for London banning e-bikes from its services. Additionally, some insurers have begun to deny coverage to bike shops, despite most shops not selling the types of kits linked to thermal incidents. This has raised concerns about the impact on independent retailers, which have not been responsible for distributing dangerous components.
Specialist e-bike insurers have indicated that, based on their data, e-bike fire risks are minimal, suggesting that media narratives may have contributed disproportionately to public alarm.
The inquiry aims to clarify the scope of the issue, explore its implications for the cycling industry and public safety, and identify practical responses. It also presents an opportunity to reassess public understanding of electric bikes amid industry challenges that have included shop closures and job losses.
China has passed a new electric vehicle (EV) battery safety regulation, becoming the first country to mandate that battery packs must not catch fire or explode, even in the event of internal thermal runaway.
Effective from mid-2026, this regulation will require EV manufacturers to meet significantly enhanced safety standards. Currently, EV manufacturers are required to include warning systems that alert users to thermal incidents at least five minutes before they become dangerous. This is typically achieved through extensive sensor systems that detect abnormalities and trigger automatic shutdowns or alerts.
Under the new regulation, manufacturers must now demonstrate that battery packs will not ignite, explode, or release smoke into vehicle cabins under a variety of stress conditions. The testing requirements include a new safety evaluation following a fast-charging cycle, as well as an external short-circuit test after 300 fast-charging cycles – neither of which may result in fire or explosion.
Wider e-mobility industry implications
Although the regulation is primarily targeted at electric cars, it applies to all electric vehicles, raising potential implications for the broader e-mobility sector, including e-bikes. The new standard, GB38031-2025, titled Safety Requirements for Power Batteries of Electric Vehicles, may influence battery suppliers and technologies across related industries due to shared components and manufacturing practices.
While the regulation may lead to increased compliance costs, particularly challenging for smaller or mid-sized suppliers, it is expected that larger battery manufacturers, many of which already supply reputable e-bike brands, will be able to adapt. Many companies in the bicycle industry have already been voluntarily improving battery safety standards.
Research from UK testing facilities has indicated a clear relationship between product cost and adherence to safety standards. For the bicycle industry, failure to adopt robust safety practices may present significant risks, particularly as incidents involving poorly regulated battery products continue to attract public and regulatory scrutiny.
Recent restrictions by transport operators and property managers have often followed media coverage of e-bike battery fires. However, investigations frequently trace such incidents to aftermarket conversion kits, which are commonly sold directly to consumers without rigorous safety oversight, rather than to mass-produced e-bikes from established brands.
In parallel, China is advancing the adoption of sodium-ion battery technology, which is inherently non-toxic and non-flammable, reducing the risk of thermal incidents. While sodium-ion batteries are currently less energy-dense and larger than their lithium-ion counterparts, they are gaining traction in applications where size and weight are less critical, such as cargo bikes. For instance, AKKU Energie has supplied Deutsche Post with sodium-ion batteries for its delivery fleet.
Continued advancements in sodium-ion battery performance suggest increasing viability in a wider range of electric vehicles. As China expands its use of this chemistry, it may influence global battery technology trends.
An alarming number of unsafe consumer products, including faulty chargers, and hazardous e-bike conversion kits, have been intercepted at the UK’s borders, according to a recent report from Suffolk Trading Standards’ Imports Team. The products, flagged for non-compliance with safety regulations, were destined for sale through third-party online marketplaces, raising significant concerns about consumer safety.
Between January and December 2024, Suffolk Trading Standards inspected over 349,000 consumer goods at Felixstowe Port, the UK’s largest container hub, identifying 104,983 unsafe electrical products, 74,656 toys, and 30,898 defective chargers and adaptors. Among the intercepted items were dangerous DIY e-bike conversion kits and substandard e-scooters.
“A frightening snapshot” of unsafe goods entering the UK
In a statement to Cycling Industry News, Suffolk Trading Standards highlighted the growing challenge of unsafe imports, describing the findings as “a frightening snapshot of the scale of the issues that we are facing from unsafe goods entering UK shores.”
Many of the intercepted products were intended for online sale, particularly through third-party vendors on popular platforms like Amazon, TikTok, and Facebook Marketplace. The convenience and speed of online shopping have driven consumers to these marketplaces, despite the associated risks of purchasing non-compliant goods from overseas sellers.
Clare Davies, Imports Team Leader for Suffolk Trading Standards, emphasized the importance of consumer awareness when shopping online. “The unsafe goods stopped at the border have all been detained and prevented from entering the UK and the online listings have been removed. Our safety advice is always check where the seller is based, especially when buying from an online selling platform. If the actual seller is not based in the UK, you may face heightened risks,” she said.
E-bike safety under the microscope
The cycling industry is particularly impacted by the influx of non-compliant products, including dangerous e-bike chargers and conversion kits. These products, often sold by disreputable vendors, pose fire risks and can damage the reputation of reputable e-bike retailers who adhere to strict safety standards.
Mark Gardiner, Joint Lead Officer for Product safety at CTSI, said: “Yet again, the work of Trading Standards at our ports demonstrates that such inspections are essential to keep consumers safe at Christmas, and throughout the year. Any one of these products could have caused injury, and despite this preventative action, there may still be unsafe products which are in circulation. I would urge everyone to be vigilant and if they have any suspicions about the safety of products that they have bought that they bring it to the attention of their local Trading Standards Service.”
Calls for increased UK border funding
The Chartered Trading Standards Institute has called for greater government investment in port inspections to tackle the rising influx of unsafe goods. John Herriman, Chief Executive of CTSI, stressed the need for more officers and sustainable funding.“We need more officers at ports and borders, and we need sustainable funding that makes a commitment for a minimum of three years,” Herriman stated.
The UK Government’s Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) currently funds Trading Standards teams to monitor and intercept dangerous products at UK borders. These efforts are critical in preventing unsafe goods from reaching consumers, particularly during high-traffic periods like the holiday season.
Consumer safety advice for shoppers
Trading Standards is urging consumers to remain vigilant when purchasing products online, particularly from social media platforms.
UK consumers are advised to report any suspicions regarding product safety to their local Trading Standards office. Helplines are available for guidance across the UK:
England and Wales: Citizens Advice Consumer Helpline at 0808 223 1133 Northern Ireland: Consumerline at 0300 123 6262 Scotland: Consumer Advice Scotland at 0808 164 6000 With the growing prevalence of online shopping, authorities are intensifying efforts to protect UK consumers from the dangers posed by counterfeit and non-compliant goods. The message is clear: buyer beware.
On the topic of “traffic accidents involving these vehicles”, it turns out, public perception of the dangers of electric bicycles does not match the actual dangers. The publication reports that e-biking is safer than many people believe.
There seems to be a tendency in public perception to highlight the dangers without providing a correct statistical classification. Even the most recent analysis of the pedelec accident figures by the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), a technically neutral, factually based and therefore generally sober presentation, cannot avoid using phrasing such as “the number of pedelec accidents involving personal injury has increased more than tenfold compared to 2014” or “overall, the number of pedelec accidents in Germany has risen sharply in recent years”. It seems strange that the absolute number of accident victims is practically never or only inadequately put into relation with the increasing use.
Would it really be so difficult to also include the estimated mileage? At least the ZIV has made this effort in the past. The association has at least put the mileage covered in relation to the number of accident fatalities up to 2020. While an average of around 290 kilometers per citizen per year were covered by bicycle in 2007, this figure had almost doubled by 2020, a temporary peak in bicycle use. The result was that in 2007, a cyclist was killed in an accident for every 46.4 million kilometers cycled. In 2020, this figure had already risen to almost 98 million kilometers. That would be a remarkable improvement in the situation.
Are e-bikes more dangerous than bicycles?
The wording that Destatis uses when comparing fatal e-bike and fatal bicycle accidents is completely clear: “Pedelec accidents involving personal injury are more likely to be fatal than accidents involving bicycles without an auxiliary motor.” 256 people died in traffic accidents involving non-motorized bicycles in 2023. A further 188 people died in traffic on a Pedelec. The total results in a figure that is, firstly, far too high and, secondly, unfortunately in line with the long-term average. In the years from 2007 to 2020, between 354 cyclists (in 2013) and 462 people (in 2009) died on German roads. An obvious conclusion would therefore be that the infrastructure has not improved significantly. But here too, given the increased use of Pedelecs, it would be appropriate to take mileage into account. At least Destatis seems to have put something into perspective, because when they say that “pedelec accidents involving personal injury are more likely to be fatal,” even though the absolute numbers are lower than for non-motorized bicycles, the number of cyclists who died in accidents was obviously related to something. In fact, the number of deaths was put in relation to every 1,000 registered pedelec accidents. The same thing happened with normal bicycles. As a result, 7.9 riders died per 1,000 pedelec accidents in 2023, while 3.6 people per 1,000 bicycle accidents died. But that is different from putting the fatal accidents in relation to mileage or to the number of bicycles and e-bikes.
Older Pedelec riders have always been at the greatest risk of having an accident with their vehicle. The increasing number of accidents involving e-bikes for children is relatively new.
Two years ago, a study by the insurers’ accident researchers (UDV) based the figures on mileage. The result (described as surprising in many media) at the time: e-bikes are no more dangerous than non-motorized bicycles. It was assumed that e-bikes cover distances that are on average 1.8 times longer than traditional bicycles. Whether this figure is still correct today is debatable (the figures came from the study “Mobility in Germany”, 2017). Even a factor of 1.8 changes everything. “The results showed that adult pedelec riders between the ages of 35 and 74 do not have an increased mileage-related accident risk,” the study says. “In contrast, younger (18 to 34 year olds) and older (over 75 year olds) pedelec riders showed an increased mileage-related risk of being involved in or causing an accident,” report the UDV experts.
Age as a risk factor
The age of cyclists and pedelec riders is therefore actually a greater influencing factor than their vehicle. In the case of pedelecs, it is particularly important to note that users are on average older than non-motorized cyclists: “People who were injured or killed on a pedelec were on average 53 years old, which, despite the falling average age, was older than those who had an accident on a non-motorized bicycle, who were on average 42 years old. Older people are more likely to be seriously or fatally injured in a fall than younger people,” says Destatis.
The falling average age of pedelec users is not just a market success for the industry, but is also reflected in the number of accidents, as Destatis also notes: “What is striking in this context is that the number of people who have died in accidents with a pedelec per 1,000 pedelec accidents involving personal injury has fallen significantly in recent years: in 2014 there were 17.4 fatalities per 1,000 pedelec accidents (compared to 7.9 fatalities in 2023). This is also due, among other things, to the falling age of the accident victims.”
Velobiz concludes that, in the future, the bicycle industry’s task will probably be to point out the relationship to mileage much more clearly, to communicate this and then to have these figures ready to hand. The portrayal of the bicycle as a dangerous form of transport is at least misleading. At the same time, no one can accept that over 400 cyclists are killed in accidents every year. Added to this is the suffering of those who survive but are more or less seriously injured in their accidents. These 70,900 accidents on bicycles and a further 23,658 on pedelecs were not even discussed here. Nor was the car, the main cause of these accidents, discussed. Infrastructure remains the key to the long-term success of the bicycle. The UDV also recommended expanding the bicycle infrastructure as a result of its study.
Legislation to fast-track standards for manufacturing lithium-ion batteries has unanimous, bipartisan support. But standards that will have the power to change the industry are still months if not years away
To address the hazards posed by poorly manufactured batteries in e-bikes and e-scooters, New York City officials have implemented measures to curb the rising incidents of fires and injuries caused by these devices.
Within the first three weeks of 2024, there were nine fires linked to these batteries, resulting in eight injuries. FDNY reported that since 2019, injuries related to battery fires have surged by 1,053%, reaching 150 cases in 2023. Last year, 18 people died in battery-related fires, up from 6 deaths the year before.
To counter this alarming trend, officials have passed local legislation to prohibit the possession or sale of refurbished lithium-ion batteries. A City Council committee hearing is scheduled to discuss additional e-bike safety measures, and Governor Kathy Hochul plans to propose a bill banning their sale. Public housing leaders in the city have also moved to limit the number of e-bikes per household. Despite these efforts, safety experts argue that true mitigation requires regulation at the manufacturing source.
Achieving this goal necessitates federal legislation, a challenging prospect given the divided and unproductive state of Congress. Surprisingly, there is bipartisan support for regulating the batteries, as evidenced by a pending bill in Congress. This legislation aims to empower the Consumer Product Safety Commission to establish federal standards for the safe construction and import of these batteries.
New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, along with Representative Ritchie Torres, have been advocating for such legislation since last year. Without this authorization, the Consumer Product Safety Commission lacks the regulatory authority to impose mandatory standards. The absence of mandatory standards allows manufacturers to adhere to safety measures voluntarily, leading to an influx of poorly made products and subsequent battery malfunctions, explosions, and fires.
The bill has garnered significant support during its progression through the House of Representatives, receiving unanimous approval in both a subcommittee and the Energy and Commerce Committee. Though viewed as a positive development by consumer product safety experts, the journey ahead involves Senate consideration and, if successful, a significant delay before the mandatory standards take effect, potentially extending to at least another year.
Despite the extended timeline, consumer product safety experts view this legislation as a crucial step. However, the process involves Senate deliberations and, as of now, there is no immediate information on its status. Regardless of the legislative outcome, the implementation of mandatory standards would represent a pivotal move to address the widespread issue of e-bike and e-scooter battery fires and associated risks.
Guidance includes information on how to safely buy, store and charge e-cycles and e-scooters.
Information around how to safely purchase, charge and use e-bikes and e-scooters has been published by the UK government to improve consumer safety.
After thorough consultation with the industry, guidance on battery safety has been developed for both e-scooters and e-bikes, which aims to enhance awareness among owners regarding the safe purchase of e-cycles or e-scooters, ensuring compliance with manufacturing requirements, and promoting transactions with reputable sellers. The documents cover information on secure storage and charging, the warning signs for fire risk and how to address them, and responsible battery disposal. The guidance also emphasises that legal use of e-scooters on roads is restricted unless they are part of an official rental trial.
Minister Anthony Browne, responsible for Technology and Decarbonisation, affirmed that “Safety has always been our top priority, which is why our latest guidance aims to improve the awareness of e-bike and e-scooter users in the trial areas where they’re authorised.”
This announcement follows the Home Office’s advice on fire safety for e-scooters and e-bikes published last year. To further understand the safety of lithium-ion batteries used in e-cycles and e-scooters, the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) is presently conducting a safety study and taking enforcement measures when unsafe products are found.
The extension of e-scooter trials until May 2026 will facilitate further insights across various areas, including usage, safety and environmental impacts, and the exploration of travel behaviour changes since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The two UK cycle industry trade associations, the Bicycle Association and the Association of Cycle Traders, have teamed up to release industry guidance on lithium battery fires and road legal e-bikes
Everyone in the cycle industry will be aware of recent reports and headlines about e-bikes fires, some of which have, sadly, had tragic and even fatal consequences.
Additionally, in recent months a number of fatal collisions have occurred on electric motorcycles which were generally referred to in the media as “e-bikes”.
These reports risk giving the impression to the public, incorrectly in our view, that all such vehicles are unsafe. This could have serious repercussions, potentially putting at risk the growth potential of e-bikes as a transport and climate solution, and deterring e-bike customers at a time when market conditions are already challenging.
Now, the two cycle industry trade bodies in the UK, the Bicycle Association and the Association of Cycle Traders, have issued guidance sheets for the industry, aiming to counter the often misleading media headlines.
The first guidance note summarises statements from fire services and industry experts to clarify the distinction between e-bikes from the reputable industry (which are generally very safe) as opposed to e-bikes, conversion kits, batteries and chargers which may pose significant fire hazard if certain risk factors are present, for example being sourced from overseas via online marketplaces.
The second guidance note clarifies exactly what is road legal as an e-bike – and makes clear the actual legal status of vehicles which are often incorrectly reported as e-bikes but which are in fact unregistered motorbikes.
The BA and ACT hope this guidance will provide authoritative resources for the industry:
Retailers, and others, can use the document on fire risk to reassure customers and potential customers that by buying through reputable industry channels they will maximise safety The fire risk document may also be a useful aid in responding to media enquiries, although companies may prefer to refer these to the national trade associations The document about road legal e-bikes will, the BA and ACT hope, provide useful clarity for industry, customers and media, to dispel public confusion about road-legal e-bikes vs other vehicle types. Any company in the cycle industry is welcome to use, print out or distribute these documents freely – but the BA and ACT request that they are not amended.
Peter Eland, Technical and Policy Director at the Bicycle Association, said:
“We hope these resources will set the record straight on the very safe products which our industry provides. Being clear and consistent about battery fire risk factors, and the law around e-bikes, is essential to get the message across.”
Jonathan Harrison from the Association of Cycle Traders said:
“There is a perception that has been allowed to develop that e-bikes are dangerous and it is simply not true. Let’s help educate owners to avoid e-bikes, batteries and chargers that do not meet UK safety standards, and boost awareness of the real safety benefits of buying from a specialist retailer.”
This joint initiative with the ACT is the latest development in the Bicycle Association’s work on these issues. To date this has included:
Instigating a cross-Government roundtable in March, bringing together Department for Transport, DEFRA, ROSPA, the Association for British Insurers and Active Travel England. Assisting the Department for Transport in developing guidance, which should be published shortly, for users, for premises managers and for public transport operators. Working closely with the Office for Product Safety and Standards and their researchers, ahead of recommendations being made for future regulation. Representatives from OPSS and their researchers have attended a number of Bicycle Association technical meetings, to take industry input. The BA has also engaged with the charity Electrical Safety First, which has been raising awareness of the fires issue and advocating urgent Government action. The BA has also worked extensively in conjunction with the DfT-backed Cycle Rail Working Group on continued e-bike access to trains and stations. The BA has made publicly available resources for the industry to assist with safe sourcing of batteries, their correct transport and storage. Also available on that link are press releases and statements making clear the industry position. The BA is piloting a battery collection and recycling scheme which will take waste batteries from retailers at no cost for safe and proper disposal. Finally, the BA has engaged regularly with the mainstream media in an effort to add the industry voice on the fire issue, and also to clarify what is a road legal e-bike and what is not. Further joint industry initiatives are under development and will be announced shortly, say the two trade associations.
