Youtube Livestream Ceremony and Strava Ride 直播Youtube記念儀式及Strava小組騎行
Ride of Silence沉默騎行2021 今年5月19日星期三的「沉默騎行」將繼續進行，但會以個人或小組踩車進行。 This year’s Ride of Silence, on Wed 19 May, will go ahead, but riding individually or in small groups. 當前的健康狀況意味著我們無法成群結隊地騎行。但是，我們仍然可以悼念16位遇難的踩單車人士，並記得去年在香港道路上受傷的2607人，沉默地發出「我們在這裡」的聲明，應得道路使用者的尊重和考慮。 Though we can’t ride as a large group, we can still honour the 16 cyclists who died and remember the 2607 people injured on Hong Kong roads last year, quietly making the statement that “we are here” and deserve respect and consideration as road users.
在當日晚上7時30分至10時期間，我們邀請您觀看Youtube網上直播記念儀式，之後登入在 Strava 的「沉默騎行」踩單車活動，獨自或與1至3個朋友一起去沿著尖沙咀與深水埗之間的路線踩你自己的小組「沉默騎行」。 On that evening from 7.30pm to 10.00pm, we invite you to join the Youtube live ceremony and Strava Ride event and ride your own Ride of Silence – either alone or with up to three friends – along the usual route between TST and Sham Shui Po.
通過踩單車，我們默念那些受害者。但是在這個困難的時刻，我們還展示了單車具有的移動性，可以避免困在帶有潛在病毒的封閉車輛中，甚至可以挽救生命。 By riding, we quietly recognise all those victims. But at this difficult time we are also showing that bikes offer mobility that avoids being stuck in a closed vehicle with potential virus carriers, which may even save lives.
**Youtube 網上直播記念儀式 Youtube Live Streaming Remembrance Ceremony**
晚上7時30分至7時45分會有Youtube 網上直播記念儀式：https://youtu.be/JM8LYJmKr_Y 然後至晚上10時期間有各自的騎行。 7:30-7:45pm there will be a remembrance ceremony live streaming on Youtube: https://youtu.be/JM8LYJmKr_Y Then there will be individual or small group ride until 10:00pm.
Use your mobile phone to join the Strava event (https://www.strava.com/clubs/909848/group_events/925920 ) before 7.30pm on 19 May and then ride your own Ride of Silence while letting Strava to record your ride. You need to sign up for a free Strava account in order to do that. One Strava-connected person per group is OK. Of course avoiding bunching with any other rider groups under the present situation.
請表現出對「沉默的騎行」所有慣常的尊重 – 特別是踩單車時不要聊天。 Please show all the usual RoS respect – especially not chatting while riding.
您可以考慮將RoS標誌和標語打印並添加到單車上。 You may consider printing and displaying images of RoS flags and banners on your bike.
當然，踩完車後，請分享您的經驗–請用帶有#RideofSilence2021 及 #RideOfSilenceHK 標籤的任何故事，照片或視頻。 Of course, after the ride please share your experience – any stories, photos or video, tagged #RideofSilence2021 and also #RideOfSilenceHK.
Strava event: https://www.strava.com/clubs/909848/group_events/925920 如果您打算參加，請在這裡“參加”活動，就像我們一起騎行一樣。 If you intend to participate, please ‘join’ the event here, just as you would if we were all riding together. 並請與任何希望參加或支持該活動的人分享。 And please share with anyone who may wish to join or support the event.
全球網站 Global website 如要知道更多世界各地｢沉默的騎行｣的詳情及活動要表達的訊息，請前往全球｢沉默的騎行｣網站 http://www.rideofsilence.org/ 。 For the story behind the Ride of Silence, and the now hundreds of participating rides – in normal years, at least – that are held around the globe, visit http://www.rideofsilence.org/ .
What is an “electric assisted bicycle”? What is the difference between these and ordinary bicycles?
Electric-assisted bicycles, as the name suggests, are bicycles that are mainly human-powered and supplemented by electricity. The way to move forward is to pedal with both feet. When the speed reaches 25 kph or above, the electric motor will cut out. Above 25 kph, such machines are entirely dependent on human power.
This offers the following advantages:
1. Better strength when going uphill, which helps to overcome gradients.
2. The same human energy output can support longer distances.
3. Saves effort, helps overcome the weight of freight, and helps Hong Kong commuters avoid the problem of arriving sweaty at their workplace.
4. Allows people of lower physical strength, or with slight disabilities or injuries to use bicycles.
In terms of driving speed, university research[1] shows the speed of ordinary people using electric-assisted bicycles is similar to that of ordinary bicycles, and some researchers [2] have found that using electric-assisted bicycles can also achieve the same amount of exercise as using ordinary bicycles.
What is the difference between “electric-assisted bicycle” and “electric bicycle”?
“Electric-assisted bicycle” refers to a bicycle (or tricycle) equipped with an auxiliary electric motor that operates only in support of human pedal power. It will only provide motor assistance when the user is pedalling. When a certain speed (generally 25 kph) is reached, the motor assistance stops.
“Electric bicycles” on the other hand refer to fully electric-powered bicycles, which do not necessarily have pedals (and are controlled by a throttle, like a motorbike). The speed and horsepower are often higher than for electric-assisted bicycles. In the laws of various countries, there are usually different regulations for “electric-assisted bicycles” and “electric bicycles”.
In Hong Kong, more and more people use electric scooters and electric-assisted bicycles, and the public and the Legislative Council are increasingly calling for the development and regulation of this area. It is hoped that Hong Kong can catch up with the world.
Recent developments in Hong Kong include the Government’s briefing on the results of the review on the use of electric mobility devices in Hong Kong, at the meeting of the Legislative Council Committee on Transport held on 19 June 2020, and the introduction of a regulatory system.
The Transport Department (TD) is currently planning to amend legislation to allow electric mobility devices (such as electric scooters, electric-assisted bicycles, etc.) to be used on the cycling track (only), and is seeking communication with the industry. On 14 October 2020, Hong Kong Cycling Alliance attended a meeting to exchange views between TD and invited cycling groups.
The discussion paper submitted by the TD to the Legislative Council and organizations mentioned that “electric mobility devices” will be divided into three categories:
(i) PMD, or Personal Mobility Device: common examples are electric scooters, two-wheeled electric scooters and electric unicycles; electric bicycles that do not need to be pedalled but are powered at high speed will also be classified as a PMD.
(ii) PAPC, Power Assisted Pedal Cycles: electric-assisted bicycles or tricycles equipped with an auxiliary electric motor and driven only in assisted pedalling mode to support pedalling force. Provide power but when reaching a certain speed, such as 25 kph, power assistance will stop.
(iii) “Electric personal mobility aids” PMA, Motorised Personal Mobility Aids (common examples are electric wheelchairs).
The Hong Kong Cycling Alliance has long striven to promote a welcoming environment for cycling in Hong Kong. Among the various “electric mobility devices” mentioned above, the Alliance is particularly concerned about the regulatory plan for electric-assisted bicycles.
This paper will not discuss “electric bicycles”, “electric scooters” or “electric wheelchairs”, the speed and horsepower of which may be greater than for electric-assisted bicycles..
Regulatory recommendations and discussion of the Transport Department
TD stated in the “Administration’s paper on review of the use of electric mobility devices in Hong Kong” (LegCo Document No. CB(4)698/19-20(02), hereinafter referred to as the “Paper”), that the government had reviewed the practices and regulations of 12 jurisdictions/cities, namely:
Shanghai;
Singapore;
Tokyo;
Seoul;
Queensland (state), Australia;
Victoria (state). Australia;
the United Kingdom
Germany;
France;
Barcelona;
Washington DC; and
New York State;
and used this review as a reference to formulate Hong Kong’s regulatory approach.
Regarding the circumstances in which the use of electric-assisted bicycles on the carriageway is permitted, the paper states:
“All jurisdictions/cities studied allow the use of electric assisted bicycles on the carriageway (if there is a dedicated bicycle lane on the carriageway, the electric assisted bicycle must use a dedicated bicycle lane)” (Paper page 3).
Since all 12 regions/cities allow the use of electric assisted bicycles on the carriageway, it is strange that TD recommends that electric-assisted bicycles should not be allowed on the carriageway.
TD’s reasoning, echoing its long-held opposition to cycling in the urban areas, is “We have carefully considered the local road conditions. The current road infrastructure design is centred on automobiles, and there is no dedicated cycle line. In fact, even in a non-central commercial area, Hong Kong is crowded with people and vehicles. Many roadside activities are also very frequent, so we recommend…electric assisted bicycles should not be allowed to be used on the carriageway.” (Paper, page 4).
Looking at many foreign examples, the usual practice is to basically treat “electric-assisted bicycles” (that is, they provide motive assistance only when pedalled, with motor assistance cutting out at around 25 kph) as a regular bicycles, because as long as the electric power is limited to a certain low level in terms of technical specifications, the actual performance of this “electric assisted bicycle” is very close to that of a normal bicycle [1], so it is suitable to be classified as a general bicycle.
This concept is applied in the European Union, the United Kingdom, North America, Australia, Japan, Taiwan, and even China, and other advanced cycling countries. It is also feasible in the practical experience of various countries.
Ask the Transport Department why can electric assisted bicycle not use the road?
So why is TD still choosing to go against the trend of the world’s advanced laws and regulations, insisting to exclude electric-assisted bicycles from the roads and only recommend pedalling on the bicycle track?
The rationale given by TD is still the old-fashioned argument, that is, “there is no bicycle lane on the road”, “there are more people and more cars in the city”, etc.
And this so-called “reason” has been said for more than 20 years, right?
During this period, cities such as London and New York, which once had these same attitudes of “there is no bicycle lane on the road” and “there are many people and many cars”, have turned into bicycle-friendly cities!
In 2020, Hong Kong is still discussing how to prohibit electric-assisted bicycles from appearing on roads in the city!
The question in front of us is why ordinary bicycles can travel on the road, but 25kph electric-assisted bicycles can’t?
In the exchange meeting between TD and the cycling group, one of the reasons given by the TD was that electric assisted bicycles were not safe on the road. Then why is it that electric-assisted bicycles are less safe on the road than ordinary bicycles? Is it safer to ride on the cycling track only? If safety is a consideration, in theory, electric-assisted bicycles on the road should be safer than ordinary bicycles, because they should be safer if the speeds on the same road are similar to traffic (the average speed of traffic in Hong Kong is about 20 kph)
We think the authorities only need to refer to the European Union to regulate the technical specifications of electric-assisted bicycles, and treat electric-assisted bicycles as ordinary bicycles. It is the most reasonable approach to allow electric-assisted bicycles to use roads and cycle tracks.
On the contrary, the government has inspected 12 countries/regions/cities in the world and found that all of them have unanimously approved the use of electric assisted bicycles on the roads, yet our government still restricts the use of electric-assisted bicycles on the road.
To limit their use to cycling tracks, the authorities must provide very strong justifications to prove that electric-assisted bicycles are less suitable for use on the road than ordinary bicycles. Does the Transport Department have such a rationale? Otherwise, banning the use of electric bicycles on the road appears illogical and contrary to common sense. It only continues the unreasonable policies of TD which are blindly unfriendly to bicycles.
The following table: Regulations on the use of electric assisted bicycles on roads, cycle tracks and footpaths in various jurisdictions. (In all locations, a driving licence is not required to ride an electric assisted bicycle on a road or a bicycle track.)
City/country
On the road
On the bicycle track
On the pavement
Shanghai
Yes (if there are no special lanes, keep to the right of the road)
Yes
No
Tokyo
Yes
Yes
Yes (under 13 years old or over 70, speed limit 10 kph
Seoul
Yes
Yes
Yes (from 2018), children, elderly and disabled
Queensland
Yes
Yes
Yes (pedestrian priority)
Victoria
Yes
Yes
Yes (people under 13 or disabled)
UK
Yes
Yes
No
Germany
Yes
Yes
Yes (under 10 years old)
France
Yes
Yes
Yes (under 8 years old)
Barcelona
Yes
Yes
No
Washington DC
Yes
Yes
Yes (except for city centre)
New York State
Yes
Yes
No
Taiwan
Yes
Yes
No
Regulations on the use of electric-assisted bicycles on roads, cycle tracks and footpaths in various jurisdictions.
[1] A comparative health and safety analysis of electric-assist and regular bicycles in an on-campus bicycle sharing system. regular bicycles in an on-campus bicycle sharing system.
[2] Physical activity of electric bicycle users compared to conventional bicycle users and non-cyclists: Insights based on health and transport data from an online survey in seven European cities
[1] A comparative health and safety analysis of electric-assist and regular bicycles in an on-campus bicycle sharing system. regular bicycles in an on-campus bicycle sharing system.
[2] Physical activity of electric bicycle users compared to conventional bicycle users and non-cyclists: Insights based on health and transport data from an online survey in seven European cities
You’re likely to see bicycles at any junction in 5 mins.
The government should not ignore the needs of these citizens who ride.
Face the fact of urban cycling.
Go to the links below to see the 5-mins footages:
5mins footage#1: https://youtu.be/umSQ2Pcu1Qs
5mins footage#2: https://youtu.be/baIjbJQcrCY
You can try for yourself to stand at a junction and see if you can spot any bicycle too.
回應：單車只不過是一輛極速有限的車輛（其實單車一點也不慢，巿區汽車平均車速20多公里，部分主要道路（如德輔道西）在平日早上繁忙時間的行車速度約為每小時10公里甚至更慢，單車其實比汽車更快），塞車的元凶是汽車太多，完全和單車無關，這個另外有文章：
請看「單車阻慢交通嗎？」
及：「單車 v 跑步 v私家車」點對點全港首試實驗
5. 以為汽車有交車輛牌照費、有買保險，單車無，所以不應用馬路；
回應：汽車的牌照費不是路權費，是按照車輛汽缸容量而訂定的，相信是按照對環境的破壞而收的費用，單車汽缸容量等於零，更有助保護環境，收什麼費呢？反而 要補貼放棄駕駛而以單車代步人仕就對了。第三者保險是為使用車輛時的疏忽而引致第三者傷亡或財物損毀所須承擔法律上之賠償責任，很明顯，因為汽車可以是殺 人工具，隨時能引致其他人傷亡，所以要為第三者買保險，預備汽車撞傷人撞死人時可以有得賠，因為隨時能引致其他人傷亡，所以要學車考牌才可以駕駛（香港每 年交通意外死大約超過100人，傷20000人都是被有牌的司機所殺傷的，證明有牌不等於安全，態度更重要），以單車對其他人的安全性，以單車對環境的好 處，在世界各地踩單車也不用第三者保險及執照，更不用牌費可以說是理所當然。
想起外國人有句說話”You own a car, not the road.”
回應了這麼多，大家看到問題（problems）了嗎？問題是太多汽車，問題是汽車主導的思想，問題是部分駕駛者的駕駛態度。
單車在馬路上不單止不是問題，而且是解決問題的方法（solution），全世界都以單車為城巿問題的解決方法之一，香港人還在討論呢D？
In a rather interesting speech, from an urban mobility point of view, the Secretary for Transport & Housing, Prof Anthony Cheung, has described Hong Kong’s transport policy as “Public Transportation Plus”, which he explains as “public transport complemented by walkability and cycling-friendly measures”. He was talking to an international conference on walking and liveable communities but even so, is this a change? a real thing?
Prof Cheung begins by wondering “whether we have become too dependent on mechanised transport to the extent of creating all kinds of social problems, including human interface, perhaps. And there are problems associated with road congestion and carbon emissions.”
So he’s identified the problem. Not a bad start for the guy supposedly in charge of our transport policy.
After presenting the Government’s “railway as backbone” policy and (justifiably) trumpeting the high modal share (90%) of public transport, Prof Cheung adds rather too much about the constraints the government works under, in a tone of “we’re trying but it’s re-eally too hard to expect real change”.
His mobility solutions focus initially much on walkability, defining it in positive terms but not breaking new ground.
He seemingly endorses a statement that one can walk three kilometres – three MTR stops – through Central, at walkway level above the roads, which isn’t true, is it? (I don’t walk much; cycling is so much easier.) And there’s the obligatory reference to the Mid-levels escalator. (He says that “Some densely populated districts in Hong Kong are .. situated in hilly places”. But I can’t think of any, other than Mid-levels. Echoes of the “HK is too mountainous for cycling” meme.) He talks glowingly about pedestrianised streets but then hints at the fact that some are being withdrawn (allegedly after someone complained).
Selected other interesting admissions, claims and policy positions:
Rush-hour speed on some main roads is only 10 km/h
Building more roads brings more traffic, and more environmental problems [True, of course]
Government policy is to “discourage the use of private cars” [I’m not sure I’ve seen evidence of that, unless you count ‘affordable public transport’]
Hong Kong was rated “the most walkable” city of China (by NRDC) [not all agree]
“In the past, cycling was only considered to be something for leisure. But nowadays, we regard it as a form of short-distance green commuting.” [still with caveats, and not quite the first time it’s been said, but still good to hear.]
still discouraging cycling in the urban areas “for safety reasons” and apparently not challenging that situation
we need a mindset change in the community .. as much as .. among policymakers ..to move away from an unduly vehicular-based or biased mobility perspective. [Well, yes.., but does that mean you’re waiting for the public to change first? What happened to leadership?]
Now for the part that, arguably, talks up cycling.
Prof Cheung says “We also need diversity in our mobility system to cater for different travel needs. Hence, we promote walking and cycling as a mode of short-distance commuting through the provision of pedestrian walkways and cycle tracks.” Not quite committing to a six percent bike mode share by 2020 [as New York has] but at least he flew to Vienna to talk about cycling in Hong Kong.
He goes on to say that motorists, pedestrians and cyclists compete for road space (and always will). Taking that positively, I see an endorsement of our right to use even busy roads. Of course that’s always been true, but many in HK don’t get it. On the other hand, it suggests no interest in pushing back against the ‘competition’ of (some) aggressive people in a ton of armoured motor vehicle against others, more vulnerable, who are making a net positive contribution to society.
Another quote: “we seek to improve our public transport system complemented with suitable walkability and cycling measures”. Yeah, well, ‘suitable’ is another weasel word, but he said ‘cycling’. Several times.
Overall, there are warm and quite strong generalities about cycling and especially walking, though without any new specifics. This Secretary for Transport and Housing is reportedly more favourable to cycling than the Transport Department under him and this speech includes some pleasantly surprising facts and statements. Given the paucity of good news coming out of this government, I’m prepare to see a glass that’s, if not half-full, then at least providing a few refreshing sips.
The United States government is pressing city and local officials to develop and improve cycling practice and infrastructure, leveraging a trend that has seen US cities hurrying to catch up Europe and the rest of the world, after a slow start.
A new Federal initiative – which the Hong Kong Transport Department could usefully study – focuses on the safety of people who walk or bike, under this transformative ‘Complete Streets‘ approach.
Great thanks go to Matteo for allowing us to use his photo of the delivery cyclist. He writes on his own blog about riding vintage Fuji bikes "There is something special about these vintage fuji bicycles. It is inexplainable, but it is real. They are quality. They are beautiful. They surpass expectation.". See more at Fuji Crazy
Many thanks also to Christopher Dewolf for his photo of cycling at sunset in Ma on Shan. His photos can be found at his Flickr Site, and some of his many writings & photos can be found at Urbanphoto.net
Huge Thanks to Jason Findlay for the photo of the Harbourfront bike Ride 5 near Causeway Bay Typhoon Shelter
