Fast E-Bikes & E-Scooters Highlight Dangers of Immovable Objects

by | Apr 24, 2026 | News

Essentially no information was provided with respect to a fatal collision in Ingersoll, Ontario on Friday, April 10, 2026 that involved a “scooter-style e-bike” (CTV News London). It was only acknowledged that the rider struck a pole on Charles Street.

When a cyclist strikes a roadside pole the consequences can be variable. A glancing blow may only result in minor injuries. However a direct blow will cause the cyclist to come to an abrupt stop in a very short time. Without bodily protection fatal injuries can occur at much lower speeds than in collisions involving motor vehicles.

In a subsequent news story published by CTV News (“Fatal Ingersoll crash highlights growing safety risks of e-bikes and e-scooters”) an Ontario Provincial Police representative reported that the collision involved “a single scooter style e-bike”. No photos were available of the “bike” and there were not photos of the collision site where the fatality occurred.

It would seem that everyone should know exactly what a “single scooter style e-bike” looks like. And perhaps it may not matter since no one would be able to understand why the fatality occurred. Since police are not required to fill out a MTO “police report” if a motor vehicle was not involved it is not clear how such a tragedy would be coded in collision data.

From observational studies conducted by Gorski Consulting it is known that e-bikes travel at higher speeds than almost all recreational cyclists, many in the range of 30 km/h or higher. A small percentage of recreational riders on road bikes have also been able attain such higher speeds. The difference is that riders of e-bikes do not have to be expert riders or physically fit. Riders of road bikes are able to attain higher speeds because they are physically fit, developed through a long process of riding, and they generally equip themselves with higher end equipment including good helmets, lighting and high visibility clothing. While some high-speed e-bike riders have also been properly equipped there is less chance that they will be a road knowledgeable. Understanding the dangers that accompany higher speeds includes knowing how e-bikes may create violations of expectation in drivers of larger motor vehicles.

The higher speed of e-bikes and e-scooters means that these riders have less time to react to avoid a collision but it also reduces the ability of motor vehicle drivers to avoid a collision.

Much like e-bikes the riders of e-scooters have also been observed to travel at higher speeds. While e-scooters have not been as common on London’s roads they appear to be increasing in numbers. Key elements to safety including how riders conduct themselves near larger vehicles. And what safety equipment they use to protect themselves and make themselves more conspicuous.

Here three young males are riding on two e-scooters. The leading scooter is shared by two riders. None of the riders are wearing helmets. Although their black clothing distinguishes them from their present background, that background is ever-changing and at times they will be less visible. That is why high visibility retro-reflective clothing needs to be worn.
Cyclist impacts with fixed objects are not reported unless there is a fatality. And police are not required to fill out a report if a motor vehicle was not involved. This Detour sign in the cycling lane on Dundas St near Quebec St in east London, Ontario demonstrates the lack of attention officials give to dangers posed to cyclists and other micro-mobility riders.

Even though there appear to be a greater number of e-bikes and e-scooters riding on, or adjacent to, public roadways no publicly available data exists to understand where this trend is headed. The CTV News article about the Ingersoll cyclist fatality acknowledged that police are seeing an increase in “electric rideable accidents”, and that the Canadian Institute for Health indicated there was a recent 32 per cent increase in e-scooter hospitalizations. And the best advice was to wear reflective clothing, have proper lighting and to stay riding on bike paths. But the dangers are much more than this.

The persons who installed cycling trails, lanes and paths in the City of London have created many safety traps that most riders would not recognize or understand. When riders of e-micro mobility devices travel on this infrastructure they appear to have no understanding of the dangers they are in because many travel much faster than they should.

The photo below shows a dangerous installation of sign posts that were installed in 2021 on Dundas Street just west of Ontario Street. This track was installed to improve the safety of cyclists yet the designers failed to understand that the sign posts would actually increase the danger to cyclists.

In this photo taken on April 27, 2021 the Dundas Street cycling track was being constructed and we can see the sign posts that were installed directly at the left edge of the cycling track.

Fast forward five years to the spring of 2026 and we see below that the dangerous sign posts still exist on the edge of the cycling track. In fact one of those posts actually encrouches into the path.

This view, looking east, shows the Dundas Street cycling track in April of 2026, or five years after it was installed by the City of London. Dangerous sign posts were erected along the left edge of the track precisely at a curve in the path where cyclists would need to adjust their steering.
This view shows that one of the erected sign posts actually encroaches into the cycling track.

Riders of micro-mobility devices look at such small-looking posts and do not comprehend the danger they pose. These posts are immobile. Meaning that if they are struck they will not move. But the striking object will come to an abrupt stop. This change-in-velocity is what kills occupants of motor vehicles and this is why roadway design standards require a “clear zone”, often about 5 metres, laterally, from a travel lane whereby nothing immobile can be installed. But it appears it is OK to install such immobile objects next to a cycling track. Maybe because designers believed cyclists would be travelling at a slower speed than motor vehicles and collisions would be less severe? But no one can know what the reasoning was. Now that faster e-bikes and e-scooters are riding this track the collision severity could be a different matter – unbeknownst to the riders of the e-mobility devices.

While riders are often victims of their own poor judgment they are often blamed for being exclusively at fault even through certain cycling paths contain dangers by design or poor maintenance. An number of years ago we reported on such design failures on the Thames Valley Parkway (TVP) in London. A new portion of the TVP was built south of Trafalgar Road at the bridge at Pottersburg Creek in 1918. This segment extended to Gore Road and then to the crossing at Hamilton Road. A number safety problems were reported in Gorski Consulting articles on this website. One of those concerns was with respect to the narrow channel of limited visibility that was created when the TVP travelled in an underpass beneath Trafalgar Road. A photo of the underpass is shown below where a young girl decided to lie down, across the cycling path, within the shade of the underpass.

In this view, shown in a previous Gorski Consulting article, a young female decided to lay down across the cycling path in order to look at some fish that were swimming in the creek. Her position in the shade of the underpass made it difficult to detect her presence. Meanwhile cyclists had to make sharp turns on approach to the narrowing cycle lane and it made it challenging for cyclists to avoid the immovable iron railing as well as the concrete wall of the bridge.

In their wisdom planners had created a steep downgrade on the cycling lane as it crossed over the CNR railway about 300 metres south of this location. This meant that some cyclists came to be travelling very quickly along the downslope on approach to the underpass at Trafalgar, as evidenced by the photo shown below.

A high speed cyclist is shown here cutting the corner as he travels toward the narrow underpass of the Trafalgar Street bridge at Pottersburg Creek. If the young girl, shown in the previous photo, was lying across the path it is highly unlikely that the high-speed cyclist would detect her and a serious collision would occur. While these matters would be the fault of the cyclist and pedestrian they are also the fault of the City that designed the cycling path and this is rarely or never acknowledged.

Another safety problem that keeps recurring is the installation of concrete barriers or large rocks on cycling paths. An example is shown in the next photo taken in July, 2025 on the south branch of the TVP east of Wellington Road.

These concrete blocks were installed by the City of London to divert cyclists from the TVP where construction was being carried out near Wellington Road. No warning of the presence of these blocks was provided. In nighttime conditions this area has not artificial illumination so that approaching cyclists would have difficulty detecting the blocks which are of a very similar shading to the surface of the path.

In a very recent example, on April 22, 2026, City of London Bylaw enforcement officers parked their two pIck-up trucks at the bottom of the slope of the TVP just west of Richmond Street. This area is shown in the photo below, taken in 2018, showing a cyclist travelling down to the slope. The maximum slope was measured to approach 12% near its bottom. Testing in 2018 showed that average cyclist speeds reached close to 31 km/h at the bottom of the slope.

In this photo a cyclist is shown riding down the slope of the TVP just west of Richmond Street in 2018.

The two City of London pick-up trucks were parked at the location where the cyclist is shown in the photo below. This is approximately where cyclists would attain their highest speed.

Little recognition is given to the fact that, wherever a significant slope exists recreational cyclist speeds will increase according the length and steepness of the slope. Trucks parked in the location where the cyclist is shown here pose a danger and appears to be misunderstood even by government employees.

To summarize, e-bikes and e-scooters are becoming more common in the Province of Ontario and this evidenced in observations conducted by Gorski Consulting in the City of London. New safety challenges are developing from the speed of these newer micro-mobility devices. Designers are not recognizing that immobile obstacles such as sign posts, poles, or parked vehicles can pose a major safety problem because of the severe change-in-velocity that can occur to riders even at seemingly lower travel speeds. Micro-mobility riders are essentially unprotected and when they strike something that is immobile their chance of injury or death can be more likely than for occupants of motor vehicles.