Micromobility Information and Resources

Universities across Pennsylvania have already determined that e‑scooters are unsafe for adults. They ban them, educate students, and enforce strict rules because of injuries. If adults require education, enforcement, and campus‑wide bans due to injuries, then children in K–12 schools require even stronger protections — and SRTS provides the framework for schools to implement them.

Claim	Evidence	Sources
Small wheels cannot handle cracks/bumps	Small wheels fall into cracks; higher impact angle; greater vertical displacement	Go Grava³; Levy Electric⁴; Transilvania University & Oradea¹
High center of gravity increases tipping	Forward‑pitching moment increases when wheel drops	University multibody model¹; Go Grava³
No suspension increases crash risk	Less air volume = less shock absorption; impacts cause tube pinches	Go Grava³; Levy Electric⁴
Hazards persist at low speeds	Instability is caused by wheel geometry, not speed	University multibody dynamics¹; Go Grava³
Small wheels are structurally vulnerable	High rim stress, crack initiation, accelerated fatigue	Materials (Basel) engineering study²
No U.S. safety standards	No federal mechanical, structural, or stability standards	CPSC⁵
Universities ban scooters due to injuries	Villanova full ban; Penn State enforcement action	Villanova Policy⁷; Penn State Police Notice⁸
SRTS requires school‑led safety	SRTS mandates education, engineering, enforcement, evaluation	FHWA⁶

Footnotes

1. Radu, A. I., Tolea, A. B., Trușcă, D. D., Ispas, N., & Năstăsoiu, M. (2023). Development of a multibody model used to study the impact between a vehicle wheel and a pothole. Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com

2. Montassir, S., Moustabchir, H., El Khalfi, A., Vlase, S., & Scutaru, M. L. (2024). Numerical study of crack prediction and growth in automotive wheel rims. Materials (Basel). Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com

3. Go Grava Adventure Corporation. (2024). Why e‑scooter tires and tubes fail faster than bike tires. Retrieved from https://gograva.com/blogs/guides/why-e-scooter-tires-fail-faster

4. Levy Electric. (2024). Troubleshooting electric scooter wheel problems: A step‑by‑step guide. Retrieved from https://www.levyelectric.com/resources/troubleshooting-electric-scooter-wheel-problems-a-step-by-step-guide

5. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. (2023). Micromobility safety reports and public filings. Retrieved from https://www.cpsc.gov

6. Federal Highway Administration. (2023). Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program Guidance. Retrieved from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov

7. Villanova University. (2024). Campus Micromobility Ban — Public Safety Policy. Retrieved from https://www1.villanova.edu

8. Penn State University Police. (2024). Micromobility Enforcement Action and Student Conduct Referral Notice. Retrieved from https://police.psu.edu

Click here for HEALTH EQUITY INFORMATION from John Hopkins Study

Youth Helmet Use & Micromobility Safety: Evidence Summary and Health‑Equity Implications (Ages 16–21)

Micromobility injuries among youth are rising sharply in Pennsylvania and nationwide. Helmet use remains critically low among adolescents and young adults, especially ages 16–21. This pattern is strongly influenced by adult behavior, peer norms, and gaps in state helmet laws. These factors create predictable and preventable health‑equity disparities affecting Pennsylvania youth.

If Bike are to share the road and cars have extensive safety requirements for all in them, should Bikes, e-bikes and any v not have have safety standards for all?

Footnotes

CDC. (2025). Bicycle Safety Fact Sheet.https://www.cdc.gov/pedestrian-bike-safety/about/bicycle-safety.html
CHOP. (2023). E-Scooter Injuries in Kids and Teens. Presented at AAP National Conference. https://www.chop.edu/news/e-scooter-injuries-kids-and-teen
NHTSA. (2021). Bicycle Safety — Countermeasures That Work. https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/bicycle-safety
Ghobrial, G.M. et al. (2023). Social Disparities in Helmet Usage in Bicycle Accidents Involving Children. Cureus / PMC. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10430888/
NIH / Pediatric Trauma Society. (2025). Headed for Trouble: Trends and Disparities in Helmet Use Among Pediatric Riders.
CPSC. (2023). Micromobility Products-Related Deaths, Injuries, and Hazard Patterns 2017–2022.
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. (2024). Evidence Synthesis on E-Bike and E-Scooter Injuries, Safety Interventions, and Policies.
Johns Hopkins Children’s Center. (2026). Disparities in Incidence and Severity of Electric Scooter Injuries in Children. Injury.
AMA. (2023). Resolution 9 (A-23): Reducing the Risk of Danger Associated With E-Scooters.
AAP. (2022). Helmet Use in Preventing Head Injuries. Pediatrics, 150(3).
IIHS. (2025). Bicycle Helmet Use Laws by State.
Van Houten, R., Van Houten, J., & Malenfant, J. E. L. (2007). Impact of a Comprehensive Safety Program on Bicycle Helmet Use Among Middle-School Children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(2), 239–247.
Hall, M., Cross, D., Howat, P., Stevenson, M., & Shaw, T. (2004). Evaluation of a School-Based Peer Leader Bicycle Helmet Intervention. Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 11(3), 165–174.
Murray, R. D. & Linscheid, T. R. (1991). Effectiveness of Bicycle Helmet Safety Intervention in Schools. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 8(3/4).
IIHS. (2025). Motorcycle Helmet Use Laws. https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/motorcycles/motorcycle-helmet-laws-table
AMA. (2024). Resolution 9 (A-24): Endorsing More Stringent Measures to Minimize Injuries as a Result of the Widespread Use of E-Scooters.
AANS & CNS. (2025). Position Statement on Safety of Electric Bicycles and Scooters. https://www.aans.org/advocacy/articles/neurosurgery-position-statement-on-safety-of-electric-bicycles-and-scooters/

Safe Routes to School Resources

Safe Routes to School Webinar I Recording

View embedded content

PA WalkWorks Program: Samantha Pearson, Healthy Communities Program Manager — https://padowntown.org/

Safe Routes Partnership: Kori Johnson, Program & Engagement Manager — www.saferoutespartnership.org

PennDOT : Consultant Project Manager: Joe Banks, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission — www.dvrpc.org

https://www.pa.gov/agencies/penndot/research-planning-and-innovation/transportation-alternatives-set-aside-program/safe-routes-to-school

FEDERAL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL –https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/safe_routes_to_school

PA Safe routes to school https://www.pa.gov/agencies/penndot/research-planning-and-innovation/transportation-alternatives-set-aside-program/safe-routes-to-school

Information on sustainability

Information of worldwide adoption of current e-scooters

Talking point	What happened	Safety reality	References
“Cities worldwide use e‑scooters”	Bird (USA) introduced electric scooters to Paris in 2018. Paris was one of the first major European cities where Bird launched its shared e‑scooter fleet. Many cities launched rental programs quickly after Paris	Several later restricted or banned them after injuries, clutter, and public backlash	Paris referendum ending rentals (2023); Copenhagen, San Francisco, Nashville policy changes
Adoption is assumed = safety	Presence in a city is treated as endorsement	Many cities adopted first, then added speed caps, geofencing, parking rules, or removals after problems	Municipal regulations and pilot evaluations
UK example	Private e‑scooters remain illegal on public roads; only limited rental trials	National government has not granted full road‑legal status	UK Department for Transport guidance
Pennsylvania	Did not legalize e‑scooters on public roads, sidewalks, or paths because low‑speed electric scooters were not recognized as allowed on roads and classified as motor vehicles in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, a temporary state authorization was granted in 2021 in Pittsburgh. This authorization expired in July 2023	Aligns with a safety‑first approach, especially given rising injuries elsewhere Did a trial in Pittsburgh but ended it , this caused some misinformation from the trial to circulate.	PA Vehicle Codes; State Police and Forks Township statements in LehighValleyNews article PA Legislation
, South Africa	Introduced by retailers and importers such as Xiaomi, Ninebotand generic Chinese 16+ may ride 125cc or lower scooters with a Code B license • 17+ may ride larger scooters with a Code A1 license • 18+ may ride any motorcycle with a Code A license •	Protective gear is mandatory, yet often not used • Underage riders face significantly higher injury risk	Code A1 Small Motorcycle Licence (2026)

Micromobility and childhood obesity

Topic	Fact	Evidence / Reference
Required physical activity	Children need at least 60 minutes of physical activity daily	CDC Physical Activity Guidelines for Children
Walking to school	Walking is a major contributor to daily activity for children in walkable zones	CDC “Active Transportation to School”
PA school expectations	Young children in walkable areas are expected to walk; buses are provided for non‑walkable zones	PA School Code; PDE transportation guidance
What children are actually doing	Children are using e‑scooters/e‑bikes for joyrides, not transportation and underage children are picking up elementary students on e-scooters and e-bikes	LehighValleyNews article: police report kids riding at night, in groups, “playing in traffic” Direct reports and observations in communities
Physical activity replacement	Riding powered devices does NOT provide the physical activity benefits of walking or biking	CDC & AAP guidance on active transport
Impact on obesity	Reduced walking time is linked to higher childhood obesity risk	CDC & AAP obesity prevention research
Recreation vs transportation	For young children, micromobility is being used as recreation, not a transportation need or providing physical activity	Police statements; PA School Code
Safety + obesity link	Children are replacing safe, healthy walking with dangerous, sedentary joyrides in traffic, playgrounds and sidewalks, that AMA says are not developmentally appropriate to handle and can injure other children	Combined evidence from CDC + LehighValleyNews article Penn State Health News /17671-2/

Talking points “Affordable,” “Last Mile,” and Alternatives to stand up e-scooters

Claim	Fact‑Check	Evidence / Reference
“Affordable transportation”	Only if ignoring medical costs; walking and regular bikes are cheaper, short life span and fire risk,	CPSC injury data
“Last‑mile solution”	Teen, adults can use other means or walk Young children should walk or take buses, Bikes for delivering and usually multiple delivers are being done	PA School Code
“Needed for speed”	Rush culture is causing safety problems (passing school buses, speeding)	Traffic safety campaigns
“Reduces emissions”	Only when replacing car trips; and does not consider disposal or short lifespan, walking/biking produce zero emissions	LCA studies

Micromobility Information and Resources

Safe Routes to School -Micromobility Resources

LINKS to National experts on e-scooter and e-bikes and safety for children

Draft School district policy based on Villanova University policy

Villanova University policy

Parent and Student Educational Flyers

Current 2026 PA State Law on Micromobility

EVIDENCE TABLE : REAL TIME FACTS ON E-SCOOTERS