E-scooters to be allowed on public roads

[Drago]

The data was presented to me as-is.

I never desired any outcome.

You also may have made a mistake in your interpretation. How do you know journey length, duration and velocity were not accounted for? As a wise man once said, It is always best when looking a data not to have a desired outcome as intentional or unintentional data massaging can lead to distortion.

 

[Alex321]

Perception and genuine risk rarely align.

Per journey mile youre more likely to die while walking in public than cycling (59 deaths per billion journey miles, v 54 for cycling.)

And that is incredibly low values (so low I'm not convinced they are accurate), as 54 per billion equates to one every 18.5 million. Which for me at about 4000 miles per year would be an average of 4630 years of cycling between getting killed.

 

[Seevio]

Which for me at about 4000 miles per year would be an average of 4630 years of cycling between getting killed.

I guarantee that you will die at least once during that time.

 

[Alex321]

I guarantee that you will die at least once during that time.

I suspect you are right

 

[Drago]

And that is incredibly low values (so low I'm not convinced they are accurate), as 54 per billion equates to one every 18.5 million. Which for me at about 4000 miles per year would be an average of 4630 years of cycling between getting killed.

You better get out and rack up a few more miles then, bring that average down!

 

[Dogtrousers]

And that is incredibly low values (so low I'm not convinced they are accurate), as 54 per billion equates to one every 18.5 million. Which for me at about 4000 miles per year would be an average of 4630 years of cycling between getting killed.

According to cyclingUK there are about 3.5 bn cycling Miles / yr.(Pre COVID)

So at that rate 3.5 x 54 = 189 deaths per year would be expected.

Gov stats for that period are about 75 killed /yr.

Now given that that analysis took me 2 mins and I'm using data sets that may not be consistent, that's a pretty good match. In my book 75 = 189 near enough

I guess what I'm saying is that these figures don't seem incredibly low.

I think that by riding 4000 miles you can expect to be killed 0.0002 times per year and seriously injured about twice as often.

 

[Dogtrousers]

And on that subject the deaths per mile are about the same for walking and cycling (54 = 59, right? )

Given that cycling is roughly 4 times faster than walking (2.5 vs 10 mph is a nice easy sum) the cyclists incur their deaths in a quarter of the time, so cycling is 4 times more dangerous per hour than walking.

If you trust my sums, which would be a very foolish thing to do.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Given that cycling is roughly 4 times faster than walking (2.5 vs 10 mph is a nice easy sum) the cyclists incur their deaths in a quarter of the time, so cycling is 4 times more dangerous per hour than walking.

The cyclists are drinking pints in the pub whilst the pedestrian is still risking life and limb getting there.

 

[Dogtrousers]

The cyclists are drinking pints in the pub whilst the pedestrian is still risking life and limb getting there.

And increase their risk of cirrhosis. It's swings and roundabouts*

*Deaths per revolution of a roundabout is approx the same as that per swing oscillation.

 

[Drago]

Isn't there a variability in the results caused by cake related accidents?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

According to cyclingUK there are about 3.5 bn cycling Miles / yr.(Pre COVID)

So at that rate 3.5 x 54 = 189 deaths per year would be expected.

Gov stats for that period are about 75 killed /yr.

Now given that that analysis took me 2 mins and I'm using data sets that may not be consistent, that's a pretty good match. In my book 75 = 189 near enough

I guess what I'm saying is that these figures don't seem incredibly low.

I think that by riding 4000 miles you can expect to be killed 0.0002 times per year and seriously injured about twice as often.

Of course remove motorised traffic and the risk drops to pretty much zero.