Safer rail in the age of e-mobility: What Australia can learn from global practice
At a glance
Private ownership and use of e-mobility devices is rising fast in Australia. Rail passenger networks are seeing more people travel with devices such as e-bikes and e-scooters, bringing new safety risks linked to the lithium-ion batteries (LiBs) that power them.
Over the last two years, the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator (ONRSR) has been proactively monitoring the hazards associated with e-mobility devices powered by lithium-ion batteries as an emerging rail safety risk.
In a review for ONRSR, led by Dr Eleanor Short, Senior Technical Director at GHD, we looked at how rail networks in Europe, North America and Asia are responding, and what Australia can learn as e-mobility uptake continues to accelerate.
E-mobility Devices on Rail - Jurisdictional Review
Why e-mobility on rail matters now
E-mobility is important as a form of transport, including for first and last mile travel. It can improve accessibility and help people choose active and sustainable transport options.
But LiBs behave differently to traditional batteries in fires. When a LiB fails, it can enter thermal runaway – a rapidly escalating and self-propagating event with distinct, new hazards that can cause serious injury.
What thermal runaway can look like in a rail carriage
- Off-gassing
A highly toxic, flammable cloud of vaporised electrolyte can form before ignition. Exposure can cause short-term and long-lasting injury. In severe cases it can be fatal.
- Ignition
If off-gassing ignites, escaping vapours can form a jet-like directional flame. Thermal runaway fires are difficult to extinguish and often require larger volumes of water than other fire types.
- Projectiles
Individual battery cells can detach and travel through the space, injuring passengers and spreading fire within a carriage.
- Explosion
In confined spaces where off-gases cannot escape, gases can build and trigger a vapour cloud explosion.
Globally, incidents involving e mobility devices on rail have led to carriage evacuations, service shutdowns, smoke inhalation injuries and growing public concern.
Australia has already experienced multiple e mobility battery incidents on heavy rail. As a result, operators in several states have introduced new restrictions. With e bike and e scooter ownership continuing to grow and regulation still evolving, further incidents remain possible.
Recognising the emerging risk, ONRSR identified e-mobility incidents on passenger trains as a focus area in early 2025.Under its legislative mandate to support rail operators to eliminate or manage safety risks so far as is reasonably practicable, it wrote to all mainline passenger operators across Australia. It asked them to review their assessments and controls for managing fire risks linked to e rideables on trains and trams.
The Australian context: Rapid uptake, uneven e-mobility regulation
Australia’s rail safety framework is nationally consistent under the Rail Safety National Law, but regulation of e mobility devices remains fragmented, with different approaches across states and territories.
Australian national safety standards for e-bikes are currently being considered as part of the Road Vehicle Standards Amendments (Safer E-bikes) Bill. However, with the exception of New South Wales, e-scooters can be imported with limited regulation and no consistent approach to testing or labelling nationally. This has contributed to low-quality LiB products entering the market, creating consumer safety risks (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, 2023). For rail operators, inconsistent product standards complicate risk management.
Following incidents in 2025 and wider operational challenges, several Australian rail operators have acted.
New South Wales and Victoria have banned converted e bikes and introduced restrictions on other devices. South Australia has prohibited modified e-bikes and e-scooters, including devices modified from their legal factory settings to increase their motor power.
With the support of ONRSR, other jurisdictions are reviewing their approach, weighing safety alongside accessibility. In practice, identifying modified devices and enforcing rules consistently remains challenging.
Within this fragmented and evolving regulatory environment, rail operators are working to respond appropriately to emerging risks around e-mobility devices.
What global rail networks are doing
We reviewed approaches across eight international jurisdictions in Europe, North America and Asia. Controls vary, and include full or partial prohibition of devices, storage controls, certification requirements and time of day controls. Several themes recur.
- Understanding the national regulatory context for e-mobility
National approaches to active travel and e mobility regulation influence how rail risks are managed. Where regulation and certification are well established, incident rates tend to be lower. This reduces risk on public transport and limits the need for rail specific controls, as demonstrated in Singapore.
- Risk-based approaches
Many approaches are linked to perceived risk factors such as restricting uncertified or modified devices or e-scooters only. Typically, a precautionary approach appears to have been applied, particularly if a thermal runaway incident with an e-mobility device has occurred on rail in the jurisdiction reviewed. The report includes case studies of incidents in Toronto, New York and London.
- Operator led action
Most controls are introduced by rail operators rather than regulators, often following incidents. Few jurisdictions have rail specific legislation addressing e mobility risks directly.
- Enforcement is linked to existing practices
Aside from signage and information, no specific physical enforcement measures have been applied. beyond training for rail staff. Even with prohibition of devices, challenges and risks remain if users transport LiBs separately.
- Storage and time of day controls
Some operators manage risk through peak-period restrictions, folding and/or size requirements and designated storage areas. These measures are typically driven by crowding and access rather than LiB hazards. We found no evidence of additional fire alert or suppression systems linked to storage requirements.
Evidence based policy remains limited, reflecting inconsistent incident data and limited real world testing of thermal runaway in rail environments.
Key points for Australia
These research findings validate ONRSR’s decision to require operators to conduct robust assessments of the risks associated with e-mobility devices and highlights several insights for Australian rail networks.
Thermal runaway is a credible rail safety risk. Even small battery packs can create serious hazards in enclosed environments. Off-gassing risk means travelling to the next station to evacuate may not be appropriate in all scenarios. This requires more research.
Not all devices carry the same risk. Uncertified and modified devices present a higher risk than compliant, factory built e mobility devices. The risk is from the LiB rather than the device itself. Passengers transporting LiBs independently also create risk that should be considered in any approaches.
Incident response planning needs to evolve. Traditional fire engineering assumptions and response procedures may not fully address hazards such as off gassing and secondary ignition. More consistent incident data would help better understand risk factors.
Education is critical. Limited awareness around thermal runaway risks and warning signs among passengers and rail staff can lead to unsafe behaviour and delayed response, increasing both likelihood and severity of incidents.
The wider context matters. Active travel goals and national regulation of e-mobility devices will influence what rail can adopt in Australia. Stronger national controls could reduce incidents across public transport and other settings. At present, enforcement relies on existing practices and frontline staff, with limited physical enforcement measures.
In its regulatory capacity ONRSR is working with operators to further clarify its expectations on the management of risks related to e-mobility devices, including how operational incidents are reported.
ONRSR is continuing to make further enquiries locally and overseas, and is engaging with a range of stakeholders, including state governments as they continue to monitor the issue.