Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bicycling: The SAFEST Form of Transportation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bicycling: The SAFEST Form of Transportation

    Bicycling: The SAFEST Form of Transportation

    bikenight
    Bikemont, Colorado
    Of all the objections I get from people about why they can’t ride a bike to get around, perhaps the most frustrating is the claim that bicycling is too dangerous. According to this line of reasoning, we all need the protection of a two-tonne steel cage in order to survive the trip to the office or the grocery store.

    I’ve always felt that this was complete bullshit, but I admit that my emotions may have been playing a part in this rapid condemnation as well. I started riding bikes about 32 years ago, and I just never stopped. To me, bicycling is being alive, and I’d rather run any necessary risk of death than be condemned to a life where cars were the only way to get around, because that sort of soggy dependence wouldn’t be much of a life to me.

    But luckily for all of us, we don’t have to choose between safety and freedom. They both come together perfectly in the form of bicycle transportation, and once we work our way through the statistics of the matter, all talk of choosing cars over bikes because of safety can be banished from the face of the Earth – forever.

    There’s going to be a bit of math involved, so for busy people we’ll begin with the final answer, then work through how we got there below.

    Riding a bike is not more dangerous than driving a car. In fact, it is much, much safer:

    Under even the most pessimistic of assumptions:
    Net effect of driving a car at 65mph for one hour: Dying 20 minutes sooner. (18 seconds of life lost per mile)
    Net effect of riding a bike at 12mph for one hour: Living 2 hours and 36 minutes longer (about 13 minutes of life gained per mile)
    In engineering and math, one method we use to prove a case is to define the boundary condition. If you can prove that your design holds up even in the worst possible case, it is guaranteed that it will work in all situations. So the box above is as bad as it gets. It’s already pretty good, so let’s see how we got there.

    First of all, in the entire United States (Population about 310 million), there were only 623 cyclist deaths in the year 2010. For perspective, there were about 26,000 deaths due to each of “falls” and “alcohol”, and 35,000 caused by car crashes. So for every cyclist who dies on a bike, 56 die in cars. Out of the MMM readership alone (roughly 0.1% of the US population), 3 people die in car accidents every month.

    But of course, we are a nation of Car Clowns, so as ridiculous as it seems, we cover a lot more miles in cars than on bikes. Still, we cyclists put in a good show given our small numbers, pumping out about Nine Billion Miles on our rippling leg muscles.

    Dividing 623 into 9,000,000,000, we end up with a cycling fatality rate of about 6.9 per 100 million miles. According to the NHTSA, that same statistic is 1.11 for cars in 2010.

    So on the surface, it looks like cycling in the US is about 6.2 times more dangerous than car-driving per mile (note that this is dropping as cycling grows in popularity – in the Netherlands, cycling risk is way down around 1 per 100 million). One of the goals of this blog is to help make the same thing happen here.

    But we’re not done yet. First of all, let’s compare a cyclist at a comfortable commuting pace of 12MPH, with a car driver on the interstate at 75MPH. Now, the risk per hour is equal, because the car is covering 6.2 times more miles than the cyclist. So the accident risk per hour of the two activities is roughly equal.

    Exactly how big is the risk in a typical hour of cycling or driving? Let’s calculate it this way: the average MMM reader probably has about 55 years left in his or her expected lifetime (1.73 billion seconds) . Dividing this by the chance of trouble in each activity, each hour of driving or biking subtracts between 20 and 24 minutes from your expected lifetime due to the risk of accident.

    But wait – we’ve so far neglected the whole reason I even talk about bicycling on this blog: because it is extremely good for you, and it saves you a shitload of money. It is not an exaggeration to say that a bicycle is a money-printing fountain of youth, probably the single most important and highest-yielding investment a human can possibly own.

    How powerful is this effect? Consider this: for every hour of exercise you do, you extend your lifespan somewhere between 3 and 9 hours. So while the fatality rate above suggests that riding at 12MPH for one hour would shorten your expected lifespan by 24 minutes, you more than counteract that with a gain of at least 3 hours*. The net benefit of 2:36 is what you see in my box above. And that’s the worst case – it only gets better from there.

    The years you do live will not only be greater in number. They’ll be healthier ones. How would you like to be packed with energy every day, rarely get sick, and be able to climb mountains and lift heavy things without fear of injury? What about being more attractive to the opposite sex, more desirable to employers, having a clearer mind, and the ability to work harder? All of these are gifts that the bicycle giveth, even as the car taketh away.

    What about money? Each hour of 12MPH bicycling also saves you about $5.00 in car operation costs (figuring cars at $0.50 per mile and bikes at $0.05). So that’s a minimum of $5.00 per hour of after-tax salary based on mileage alone.

    Studies show that even mild exercise like riding 2 miles a day also saves you from missing about two sick days of work per year. Assuming your days are worth about $300, you spent 60 hours riding to earn $600. An additional $10 per hour. And how do we account for those extra 2.5 hours of life you gained? Since one of my rules is that your spare time is worth more than $25 per hour, you get another $62.50 in pay for each hour you ride your bike.

    All-told, the net benefit is probably over $100 per hour, given the fact that being a cycling athlete makes you more productive, more attractive, more sexually capable, and better in every way than your old car-dependent self. And then there’s the joy of just getting out of that ridiculous clown apparatus and being a real human, powering your own transportation as you should be.

    So that’s the worst possible case. It gets even better from here. Are you ready for a few final rounds of ammunition to fire into the limp corpses of the whining anti-bicycling complainers?

    Remember the US cycling fatality ratio of 6.9 per 100 million miles? That’s with our current group of cyclists: a disproportionate number of children under 14 with no driver training, homeless people, DUI-convicts who have lost their license, competitive road racers and downhill mountain bikers, and the less than 1% of adults who actually ride bikes to work like they should be doing. When you and I ride our bikes, we stop at the red lights and stop signs, obey the lane markings and use arm signals, use bright lights and reflective clothing at night. We plan our routes to pick the safest roads and paths. By following these steps, our own crash rate can be much lower than the national average. Probably even safer than the average for cars.

    In the box above, I used the minimum 3 hours for the life-extension estimate. In reality, it is probably closer to 5.
    While already much safer than car-driving, cycling gets even safer as more people join in. Drivers become more aware of cyclists, and more bike lanes and dedicated paths get approved and built instead of Clownways. So you win, AND you change the world – every time you ride.

    “But I’m still afraid. How about I drive my car to the gym, and then work out really hard there to extend my lifespan?” – not a terrible idea, but you’re missing the math here. Car driving shortens your lifespan. Bike riding extends it. You’ll be safer if you ride your bike to the gym and do that same workout.

    By saving so much money through biking, you are able to retire years earlier, potentially cutting out thousands of additional car-commuting trips to work. This improves your safety statistics even more.

    And all this without even getting into the whole “Planet” issue. Sure, biking also solves most of the biggest problems facing developed countries – energy consumption, carbon output, climate change, urban sprawl, obesity, heart disease, depression, even wussypants mentality. But isn’t it amazing that the case is so strong even if you don’t give the slightest shit about the Earth?

    Given these final adjustments to the data, I close the article with my own best estimates:

    Biking vs. Driving
    Driving a car at 70MPH for one hour:

    20 minutes of lifespan erased
    $35.00 per hour of money burned

    Riding a bike at 12MPH for one hour:

    4.5 hours of lifespan gained
    $100 of monetary gains secured

    On a Per-Mile Basis:

    Car: Lose 50 cents and 18 seconds of life
    Bike: Gain $8.33 and 1350 seconds of life

    Regardless of how you tweak the stats for your own personal situation, the case for cycling over driving is so enormous that it would be difficult to even put them on the same level. Can you afford to take the risk of NOT riding a bike?
    Interesting! I love my bike.

    MMM
    "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

  • #2
    Clearly written by someone who has never been hit by a Buick while riding their bike in traffic.

    I'm not opposed to biking, nor am I opposed to anyone else biking. I think that if you can reasonably bike to work (or bike to a bus stop/train station, etc.), then that's great. Personally, I don't find it practical. Back before I had hip problems, I tried this for a while, and it just didn't work for me. There's no way for me to avoid getting very hot and sweaty, particularly in the summer months, even riding a relatively short distance (about 2-3 miles). Let's face it: I sweat easily, and I just can't go to work smelling like a locker room. It just won't work for me.

    Although I realize that this whole piece is a bit tongue-in-cheek (at least I hope it is), it's just not reasonable to pretend that riding one's bike in an urban environment just really isn't that safe. Even in what has become a pretty bike-friendly Nashville, with dedicated bike lanes just about everywhere, the simple reality is that a bicycle on city streets is in a very precarious position even with reasonably cautious drivers. It's just not a realistic method of transportation in the real urban world.
    It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
    In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
    Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
    Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

    Comment


    • #3
      It's pretty realistic out here (the author lives in Longmont which is north of Denver). I have commuted to work by bike and my round trip is ~20 miles. I don't do it as a regular thing (even though we have locker rooms, bike vaults, etc.) because it adds too much time.

      Based on my own experience, I think the safety issue is fairly tame. The people I know who have been hit or doored on a bike are almost all wannabe athletes. They were riding in traffic (not in bike lanes, not on dedicated paths), they were on road bikes which kind of forces your field of vision down instead of out, and they were going at quite a clip.

      I'm a cautious, slow rider. I'm okay with going a little out of my way to take a better route. I'm never time-crunched riding to work so I never need to take short-cuts or focus so much on speed that I lose track of what's around me. I really think that slowing down, obeying traffic laws, and managing time better would eliminate a significant part of adult rider accidents.
      "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gingersnap View Post
        It's pretty realistic out here (the author lives in Longmont which is north of Denver). I have commuted to work by bike and my round trip is ~20 miles. I don't do it as a regular thing (even though we have locker rooms, bike vaults, etc.) because it adds too much time.

        Based on my own experience, I think the safety issue is fairly tame. The people I know who have been hit or doored on a bike are almost all wannabe athletes. They were riding in traffic (not in bike lanes, not on dedicated paths), they were on road bikes which kind of forces your field of vision down instead of out, and they were going at quite a clip.

        I'm a cautious, slow rider. I'm okay with going a little out of my way to take a better route. I'm never time-crunched riding to work so I never need to take short-cuts or focus so much on speed that I lose track of what's around me. I really think that slowing down, obeying traffic laws, and managing time better would eliminate a significant part of adult rider accidents.
        The #1 problem here is the turning car. Many moons ago, when I was about 14, I got creamed by a guy in a van who was making a turn and (so he says) he never saw me. He was turning left across two lanes of traffic and was trying to thread the needle between traffic waves, and I was in the eye of that needle. Fortunately for me, it resulted in nothing worse than a little road rash and a destroyed Cannondale, and an encounter with someone who was a supreme asshole about the fact that he had just run over a bicyclist. More common these days are bikes that are in the bike lane and manage to ride up on someone turning right. I've had that on more than one occasion, fortunately all near-misses. That's probably part the biker's fault and part the driver's fault, but regardless, it's a common situation, and it's a hazard that will always be there so long as bike lanes are between the traffic lanes and the shoulder/curb/sidewalk.
        It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
        In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
        Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
        Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Adam View Post
          The #1 problem here is the turning car. Many moons ago, when I was about 14, I got creamed by a guy in a van who was making a turn and (so he says) he never saw me. He was turning left across two lanes of traffic and was trying to thread the needle between traffic waves, and I was in the eye of that needle. Fortunately for me, it resulted in nothing worse than a little road rash and a destroyed Cannondale, and an encounter with someone who was a supreme asshole about the fact that he had just run over a bicyclist. More common these days are bikes that are in the bike lane and manage to ride up on someone turning right. I've had that on more than one occasion, fortunately all near-misses. That's probably part the biker's fault and part the driver's fault, but regardless, it's a common situation, and it's a hazard that will always be there so long as bike lanes are between the traffic lanes and the shoulder/curb/sidewalk.
          I think it's all the rider's fault. I've had that same thing happen to me when driving. The plain fact is that drivers can't see bikes or motorcycles. A driver is looking for car-sized objects and I think we unconsciously just ignore objects below that size unless we are being vigilent (a lot aren't vigilent).

          As a rider, I either slow down until the car has done whatever it will do or I make eye contact with the driver so we know we've seen each other. I just avoid the left turn in traffic thing. It scares me on a motorcycle but it's way too horrifying to do on a bike.
          "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

          Comment

          Working...
          X