“We need more together in mobility”

The mobility landscape in Germany has developed strongly in recent years. Electromobility not only includes the electrification of the car drives, but has also created new forms of mobility: E-Load wheels take over in cities The role of sustainable transporters, e-kick scooters complement the public transport and are at the same time expression of new mobility habits of people.

These and other micro vehicles are combined under the collective term micromobility. The newly founded initiative “Dialog Micromobility” gathers companies and associations of the industry and calls in a recent call that the urban infrastructure in the future should take more stronger into account. Tobias Breyer, COO of Swobbee and with-initiator of the industry alliance “Dialog Micromobility”, has answered us a few questions.

Micromobile as e-scooters are often presented as a fun mobile in public discussion. Why does it need more rights for these vehicles from your point of view?

This is a very shortened perception, which unfortunately reduces the great potential of micromobility. Under micromobility, we basically mean everything in dialogue micromobility, which is smaller than a car: bicycles and e-bikes, cargobikes and electric loading wheels, e-scooter and e-kick cooter. An e-kick scooter has the same dentual potential as a bike, both are a sustainable, city-friendly alternative to cars for many ways.

At least 20 to 30 percent of urban goods transport can be completed with load wheels, which would enormously reduce noise, traffic pressure and emissions in the cities. If we are serious about the road, then we need a departure from the car-centered traffic route infrastructure in the cities and more ways and rights for micromobility. All road users should have the same rights and obligations. That also has something to do with area righteousness. We must be clear that we are at the beginning of a social development in mobility that is no longer reversible. The micromobility has come to stay.

What are the central concerns of dialogue micromobility?

We wish that the coming Federal Government recognizes the importance of micromobility and developed a forward-looking micromobility strategy. Under the title “More Cars”, we have made first proposals in dialogue micromobility, as the new mobility and means of transport can be considered, against the background of a fair coexistence and a fair urban area development.

We need to adapt the old infrastructures to new realities, focusing on the safety of the road-participating and recognizing and use the ecological potential micromobiler traffic and transport solutions. For all these areas, we have made the first concrete proposals that we have on the website WWW.Dialog micromobility.DE have published.

Can you call us, two examples?

With pleasure. A central requirement that we have in common with many other initiatives is the expansion of bike path infrastructure, which must be further developed from our view to a micromobility route infrastructure. If we want to move more people to the use of sustainable car alternatives, we need more, wider and secure micromobility paths as well as more storage areas and an intelligent charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, BSPW. In the form of battery change stations. If such ways can not be set up, we forbiting the right lane for micromobility in the presence of two car lanes to spend the right lane for micromobility.

Before the desirable legal equality of bicycles and other electric vehicles, BSPW would have to. also the signs “bicycle free” in “micromobility free” are converted to reduce uncertainties with usable, but also in regulatory authorities. To increase the safety of all road users should be established accompanying tempo 30 as a guideline speed in cities. In Helsinki BSPW. This is already implemented with extremely positive results. Further claims are responsible for example. with measures that would improve the situation of sharing and logistics industries.

Thank you for the interview!

Related articles

Please follow and like us:

2 thoughts on ““We need more together in mobility””

  1. Above all, we need that these forms of mobility are not artificially unattractive by nonsensical regulations against the car. Pedelecs, who only support up to 25 km / h where each bike rolls over 35 km / h when it goes just downhill. L7e, which is only allowed to occupy 3 people despite 4 seats. E-scooters, which at 45 km / h already animate the other road users for overtaking.
    The list could be continued ad nauseam.

    Reply

Leave a Comment