Slashdot Mirror

Is there really a story here? It seems that these numbers are normalized to a random population and not to the cyclist population. According to http://bikeleague.org/commutin... the number of cyclist rose sharply in that period as well.

As far as I can tell, there are more cyclist injuries mostly because there are more cyclist. Per mile accident rates are more meaningful than an absolute out of context number.

That being said, I chose not to bike to work because the drivers where I live (Charlotte,NC) are complete nuts and there are no bike path I can take.

the baseline number is also suspect; i venture that the count of bike accidents for ages 1-16 includes a lot which should really be counted as "playing in road"

Is there really a story here? It seems that these numbers are normalized to a random population and not to the cyclist population. According to http://bikeleague.org/commutin... the number of cyclist rose sharply in that period as well.

As far as I can tell, there are more cyclist injuries mostly because there are more cyclist. Per mile accident rates are more meaningful than an absolute out of context number.

That being said, I chose not to bike to work because the drivers where I live (Charlotte,NC) are complete nuts and there are no bike path I can take.

Getting there on a bike on friendlier roads is probably more like 20 miles, and is probably at least a two hour trip each way [...]

I don't know the route, but I'd probably be a bit surprised if that was the case.

I have a four year old Specialized Allez Elite. It ain't the fastest bike on the road but it's not bad. I went for a ride today and averaged 14.8 MPH. 30 Miles took me a little over 2 hours. Even if you figure in about 30 minutes for stop signs, stop lights, and a rest break, you're still about an hour and three-quarters.

It's one of those "surprising" things. My roomate told me a similar thing--she works about 20 miles away and there was no way she could ride to work--it's just too far and would take too long. We went for ride and got home in about an hour-and-a-half. When we got home, I pointed out that the ride we just did was three miles longer than her trip to work. She insisted that it wasn't until she looked at the odometer. A few weeks later, we took a Saturday and rode to her office. Sure enough--a little over an hour-and-a-half (it's a hillier route).

Don't get me wrong--don't want to bike to work? I can understand it. It's a tough habit to get into--you usually have to get up a bit earlier in the morning. I am not a morning person and the concept of exercising first thing in the morning is enough to turn anybody off. You also have to have a pretty straight schedule--need to hang out a bit later at work than usual because something came up? Then you're either biking home in the dark, you're annoying people by saying, "Sorry, I have to leave now," or you're paying for a minivan cab to take you home (which may be pricey.) And I agree with the weather thing--you wouldn't catch me out there in cold weather. I don't live where there's snow, but I do visit it in the winter-time and I've seen people out bicycling in the snow. I think they're nuts.

I don't know what state you live in, but check out Bike To Work Day/Week/Month come May of next year. No, you don't have to bike for a whole month--they have the day option. Lots of municipalities have special events on Bike to Work Day. Here in LA, you get free rides on the Metro and various groups set up free snacks and water/gatorade/random promotional stuff. But even if there aren't any special events, it's still kind of fun to do one day a year. And if it works out well, you might decide that it's kind of a fun way to get to work during the summer months.

Lets get tax credits for every mile that we ride on a bicycle. That should help solve these problems.

Mark

Already done since 2009: http://www.bikeleague.org/news/100708faq.php

Ask your employer about it!

It's funny that you expect the serious sport cyclists to be more responsible road users; from what I hear from my friendly local League Certified Instructor, it's as often as not exactly the other way 'round. Cyclists who got their start in sport feel like they already know everything and don't need to take classes to learn how to safely, responsibly and legally be part of traffic. The responsible road users are the day-to-day average-Jane commuters who got their start looking to learn how to share the road safely.

With respect to the breakdown in the justice system you speak to -- it's the rule, not the exception.

No, the reason is because pretty much everyone else in the world has the sense to realise that bicyclists are pedestrians. They don't belong in the road any more than joggers or skateboarders.

I suggest you look again at Copenhagen.

Regardless -- the numbers show that vehicular cycling is safe -- and that in the US, riding on the sidewalk dramatically increases the chances of a car/bicycle collision (as drivers don't look for fast-moving vehicles on the sidewalk when pulling in and out of driveways). The League of American Bicyclists tracks statistics and offers classes (which leverage these statistics) on driving one's bicycle in a predictable, courteous, and safe manner; the accident rate for League members is on the same order of magnitude of that of motor vehicles when measured per mile traveled, but far lower when measured by other criteria.

Regardless, while the accident rate per mile is somewhat higher, the accident rate per hour spent traveling is dramatically lower for cyclists. This is critical, as the curve for peoples' commute time tends to be fairly constant regardless of vehicle -- people who use a faster mode of transport arrange their lives such that they live closer to work. As such, for a person who makes their decision to use a bicycle as a long-term lifestyle choice (and is thus eventually able to take such into account when selecting either their employer or their living space), the chance of being harmed during one's commute is actually much lower.

You might find Ken Kifer's analysis useful; the statistical arguments made are compelling. (Ken passed away some time ago, killed by a drunk driver; for anyone interested in making a point of this, I suggest comparing the frequency of this event to the rate of 3rd-party deaths caused by drunk cyclists).

No, the reason is because pretty much everyone else in the world has the sense to realise that bicyclists are pedestrians. They don't belong in the road any more than joggers or skateboarders.

I suggest you look again at Copenhagen.

Regardless -- the numbers show that vehicular cycling is safe -- and that in the US, riding on the sidewalk dramatically increases the chances of a car/bicycle collision (as drivers don't look for fast-moving vehicles on the sidewalk when pulling in and out of driveways). The League of American Bicyclists tracks statistics and offers classes (which leverage these statistics) on driving one's bicycle in a predictable, courteous, and safe manner; the accident rate for League members is on the same order of magnitude of that of motor vehicles when measured per mile traveled, but far lower when measured by other criteria.

Regardless, while the accident rate per mile is somewhat higher, the accident rate per hour spent traveling is dramatically lower for cyclists. This is critical, as the curve for peoples' commute time tends to be fairly constant regardless of vehicle -- people who use a faster mode of transport arrange their lives such that they live closer to work. As such, for a person who makes their decision to use a bicycle as a long-term lifestyle choice (and is thus eventually able to take such into account when selecting either their employer or their living space), the chance of being harmed during one's commute is actually much lower.

You might find Ken Kifer's analysis useful; the statistical arguments made are compelling. (Ken passed away some time ago, killed by a drunk driver; for anyone interested in making a point of this, I suggest comparing the frequency of this event to the rate of 3rd-party deaths caused by drunk cyclists).

A good philosophy -- but I'd urge you not to compromise your own safety simply for others' convenience.

One of the things they teach in the TS101 class from the League of American Bicyclists is that getting on and off the sidewalk is considerably more dangerous than staying in the road -- and that while using an improved shoulder is legal (and often the safe thing to do, if it's clean and in good condition), getting too far over to the right within a lane can encourage cars to pass you when it's unsafe to do so.

The classroom portion of the course spends a fair bit of time on accident statistics breakdown and discussion on how each class of accidents can be avoided or mitigated. I think it's time well spent.

"The New York administration of the late 19th century" did popularize the issues and did a lot of direct work on solutions, which helped speed these innovations (implementation starting before the automobile was conceived, and a long time before the automobile became a significant factor):

1. Horse drawn trolleys, with routes that encouraged formation of residential commuting neighborhoods
2. Zoning ordinances in general
3. Taxi industry (remains highly dependent on local ordinances)
4. Short haul delivery and freight industries (remains highly dependent on local ordinances)
5. Bicycles (see below)

These and similar endeavors received support from city governments through ordinances, city brokered bond issues, changes in laws. Between 1897 and 1910, they significantly altered city transportation systems, and through that, all aspects of city life. So the changes were in place before the number of automobile drivers had reached significance.

The annals of the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) documents this with respect to bicycles. Known as the League of American Wheelmen (LAW) until updating its name in 1994, it was founded in 1880 and had become a major lobbying group for paved streets and sensible and consistent traffic laws by 1895. It is one of the very few organizations that had a political impact on urban affairs before 1900 that is still effective and relevant today. The LAW acronym was very deliberate: this group has had more impact on traffic law development than any one else, including the automotive industry, which mostly tweaked traffic laws that had been developed for safer bicycling. Wikipedia article on LAB gives a quick, highly glossed 3rd party description of the organization.

Parent post asserts that

The problem was solved by new technologies invented, developed, an popularised by private individuals looking to either make a buck or solve a problem that they faced personally. Not by any committee of busybodies trying to save the world.

This is false.

The changes were in fact brought about through local political processes like committees using mostly well established technologies like horse drawn trolleys and livery services in controlled ways. Wide area organizations like LAW provided input and attempted to shape the local processes. Arguably the most important innovation during this period was a change in pavement from cobblestones to brick, asphalt, and oiled surfaces-- to improve bicycling conditions.

This is kind of important stuff to know today, because in the city nearest you, there are definitely efforts to reshape the transportation system to something greener, and these efforts involve the same processes that were in extensive use 110 years ago, before the automobile.

Sadly 40% of all trips made by car are less that 2 miles, i.e. 10mins by bike. So really all this money, time, energy, and man power is put towards solving only 60% of the problem.

Anyways, go to google maps, right-click on where you live and select "Directions from here" then right-click on where you work and select "Directions to here". If the result is less than 5mi, you should be biking to work.

Help the planet, help the country, help yourself, ride a bike.

http://www.bikeleague.org/resources/why/environment.php

> "As a fellow cyclist I feel sick to the stomach to think the biggest danger to me is something I can't do anything about - getting hit from behind. And it makes me more sick to know there are a lot of drivers out there who would hit and run. If you read lilos blog you can see one of the reasons he was riding was because he was eminently aware of the ecological crisis cars are causing. So it's another soldier dead today in my view."

Good news chum! For trained cyclists riding in the proper lane position, overtaking collisions are reduced to only 0.3 percent of all bike-car collisions. (see _Effective Cycling_, John Forrester). The trick is proper lane positioning and (at night) lighting. If you're in the USA I strongly recommend taking one of the League of American Bicyclists' "Road I" classes, they cover this in detail. To find courses in your area, access the course finder at http://www.bikeleague.org/cogs/resources/findit/in dex.php , and check only the "BikeEd Courses" box.

When I took the class I already had perhaps 10,000 urban miles under my belt. I was skeptical whether there was anything there to learn. I learned a lot. The experience of 10^10 miles of collective cyclist experience goes into those clasess.