Since there are no currently active contests, we have switched Climate CoLab to read-only mode.
Learn more at
Skip navigation

Please find below the judging results for your proposal.

Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' ratings


Judges'' comments

Judges' comments are outlined below:

Judge 1: This is an interesting proposal. I think the motivation for why cities would want this technology needs to be a bit clearer. I would imagine use of e-bikes would increase the use of bike transport, reducing reliance on other modes.

Judge 2:
A common architecture for wireless charging of e-bikes is clearly an interesting proposition. Nevertheless, there is a chicken and egg problem as the wireless charger system needs to be widely adopted to have an impact and e-bike manufacturers (which are very diffuse) would need to adopt it potentially increasing the bike's cost for limited incremental benefit to the user. Not having personal experience with e-bikes, I always use conventional ones, I cannot vouch for the benefits and attraction of them to non-bike, vehicle users. While I would like to see the scenarios mentioned above in driving users to e-bikes instead of EVs, I think they are very different propositions and quite unlikely.

Judge 3:
This is an interesting proposal, which could have a significant impact. Why haven't chargers been standardized already? What would it take to convince e-bike producers to participate in standardizing?

Judge 4:
I agree with the authors that technologies which have the potential to increase the use of bikes (including ebikes) have the potential to create significant climate benefits! As such, I believe that wireless charging for bikes would certainly boost adoption rates. Unfortunately, the authors do not discuss the cost (first-order estimates) of the on-board unit and the charging station which would provide some more insights into the economic feasibility of the technology. However, I agree that a standardized charging solution would greatly benefit future use of ebikes and would thereby create substantial climate benefits.

Semi-Finalist Evaluation

Judges'' ratings


Judges'' comments

The judges and fellows thank you for submitting this proposal.

The judges felt the proposal had high potential and was interesting.

A few suggestions could help refine and improve the proposal:

- elaborate on the business model - that is, explain who would pay for the chargers and the electricity

- explain the feasibility given the widespread implementation of (mechanical) bikeshare programs around the world

- build on the potential challenges and solutions that may exist.

- consider including an estimate of the CO2 reduction based on numbers presented in the current proposal

Share conversation: Share via:

Prith David

Nov 6, 2017


1 |
Share via:

The novelty of the product has been explained.

The business model has been explained, with a rundown on the components.

The feasibility of the product implementation has been explained with respect to the increasing use of private e-bikes and  the design focus to integrate the wireless charging solution with present day bike and e-bike rental solutions. In addition there is a energy audit that compares bikes and e-bikes. Furthermore, the cost issues that arise from rental systems has been explained and the need for alternative peer-to-peer sharing solutions.

An estimate of the CO2 reduction has been included. However, the link to the IPCC report is not functional. As this solution is not focused on a complete replacement of motorized vehicles, a percentage adaptation of the impact has been factored-in. As the main focus is on urban transport, the impact assessment requires a different data set. The description includes an alternative CO2 emission calculation that provides a brief summary.