2025-2026 Group 2 - 1st Place Essay by Shravya Nadagowda

Electric bikes are shifting youth transportation in the United States, while raising new questions about safety and licensing. For many teenagers, electric bikes provide independence at an age when a motorcycle’s license still feels out of reach, introducing the debate on compliance. Beyond convenience, e-bikes offer an accessible and environmentally sustainable platform, producing 13-14 grams of CO2 per kilometer ( tamobykesport.com ). E-Bikes have been categorized by their three-class system: Class one provides pedal-assist up to 20 mph. Class two includes a throttle-activated motor, also limited to 20 mph. Class-three differs, offering up to 28 mph high-speed pedal assist, often discarding throttles. ( calbike.org ). From this differentiation, lawmakers have pondered on licensing enforcement and whether it’s appropriate. Compared with motor vehicles, trends have predominantly portrayed that addressing safety regulations with a more effective system would be beneficial rather than a traditional motorcycle license.

Because Class three has advanced performance and higher speed, these e-bikes require strict adherence to signaling procedures, traffic laws, and helmet requirements ( ncsl.org ). Class three’s e-bike injuries have been driven by increased delivery, high speed, and unregulated usage, fueling injuries and fire hazards nationally ( facs.org ). This sparks the argument on licensing, as many believe that legal licenses and awareness ensure safe transportation and strong coherence. By analyzing the varying e-bike classes, proposing a full motorcycle license could be restrictive. Often, Class one and two e-bikes are nationally lightweight and low-speed ( ncsl.org ). Licensing could discourage usage and create accessibility or financial barriers. E-bikes have been a significant help for low-income families, in addition to environmentally friendly transportation and youth independence ( calbike.org ). Research from the Mineta Transportation Institute suggests that the majority of e-bike injuries are driven by high-powered devices, rather than specific, defined e-bikes. ( transweb.sjsu.org ).

However, there is a flexible solution. California Senate Bill 381 specifies limiting continuous mechanical power to a maximum of 750 watts. E-bikes cannot surpass the classification speed limit. Additionally, the bill requires a new e-bike certification, which is useful to verify e-bike class and performance standards ( legiscan.com ). Under California’s SB 381, Class one and two e-bikes remain unlicensed, while Class three riders must be at least sixteen years old and complete a mandatory certification program, carrying their licenses through rides and e-bike use. Regardless of class, strict compliance with helmet and safety protocols is essential to reduce head injuries at any age. More than 20,000 people are injured on e-bikes, and only a third reported wearing helmets ( facs.org ). With a balanced approach to e-bike rules, California’s tiered approach is a model of protection while promoting adaptability.

Senate Bill 381, informed by the Mineta Transportation Institute study, exemplifies targeted policies, such as certification, education, and enforcement, that work better than broad licensing. ( legiscan.com ). Policies should be based on evidence, focusing on real safety risks. While full motorcycle licenses aren’t needed for the majority of riders, tailored rules for Class three e-bikes protect safety, preserve teen independence, and prevent future calamities.

Bibliography

California Legislature. (2024). SB 381: Electric bicycles. LegiScan. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB381/id/2828753

Mineta Transportation Institute. (2025, December 22). MTI electric bicycle safety study identifies illegal, overpowered devices as key problem. San José State University. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://transweb.sjsu.edu/press/MTI-Electric-Bicycle-Safety-Study-Identifies-Illegal-Over-Power ed-Devices-Key-Problem

California Bicycle Coalition. (n.d.-a). California e-bike classifications. CalBike. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://www.calbike.org/california-e-bike-classifications/

California Bicycle Coalition. (n.d.-b). Take action: E-bike rebate petition. CalBike. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://www.calbike.org/take_action/e_bike_rebate_petition/

American College of Surgeons. (2024, July-August). Electric bikes are emerging as a public health hazard. Bulletin, 109(7). Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://www.facs.org/for-medical-professionals/news-publications/news-and-articles/bulletin/202 4/julyaugust-2024-volume-109-issue-7/electric-bikes-are-emerging-as-public-health-haza

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2025, January 10). State electric bicycle laws: A legislative primer. NCSL. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://www.ncsl.org/transportation/state-electric-bicycle-laws-a-legislative-primer Tamobykesport. (2025, May 25). Comparing carbon footprints: E-bike vs. car commuting calculator.

Tamobykesport. Retrieved February 15, 2026, from https://tamobykesport.com/blogs/blog/comparing-carbon-footprints-e-bike-vs-car-commuting-cal culator