OLOPS

False Equivalence and Our Roads

Mon, 08 Oct 2018 19:23:00 +0100

I am fed up of coming across examples of false equivalence on social media, so eventually I wrote this ...

Consider the relative danger a cyclist poses to other road users compared to the driver of a car.

A driver is sitting in 2000kgs of car, A heavy bike is 15kgs and you can add 80kgs of human to that if you are me;) 95kgs. Let's round it up to 100kgs. On this basis you might argue that a driver provides 20x more danger to other road users than a bike. Of course the difference is much greater than this as the car can travel much faster than the bike.

Consider the fairly extreme, but not uncommon, case of a car overtaking a cyclist at 50mph on a road where the cyclist is travelling at 15mph. Where are we up to on the relative danger caused by each individual now? 50x more danger? More? Well, let's try and work it out based on their kinetic energy:

Driver: 0.5 * 2000 * 50*50 = 2,500,000

Cyclist: 0.5 * 90 * 15 *15 = 10,125

Noting that I'm not worrying too much here about using the correct units (feel free to convert yourselves) to ascertain exactly the correct energy value in joules as I am only interested in relative figures here.

Divide one by the other and you get the relative kinetic energies one to the other and I'll initially posit that this equates to the of relative danger the driver of the car poses to other road users in this scenario: 246.91.

So the driver of the car provides approximately 250 more danger than the cyclist. Aside: see that speed being squared as part of the equation. This is why sticking to speed limits and the roll out of 20 limits to all urban areas is so important.

But we've not finished. There is another angle - the driver is in a metal box while the cyclist is almost completely exposed. How does this affect the relative danger posed by each. Well, just from a common sense point of view take this example - a driver in a car hits a cyclist on a bike head on at the aforementioned speeds? You multiple that relative danger by multiple factors of 10?

Next, think about a 10tonne lorry …

Finally, think about the relative danger a cyclist and a driver cause towards a pedestrian crossing the road. We can approximate the pedestrian's kinetic energy 0.5 * 75 * 5 * 5= 938 given the relative dangers of each:

Pedestrian 1

Cyclist 11

Driver 2665

Hmm ...

Equating the danger to other road users caused by cyclists to that caused by drivers is false equivalence. It is wrong. It is dangerous. It is ignorant. Don't do it.

We need to focus road safety improvements on those that cause the most danger. These are the bad drivers. There is no point wasting resources on cyclists who cause minimal danger to other road users.

A Too many drivers run red lights.

B But I see lots of cyclists running red lights.

This is false equivalence. B is ignorant. Don't be like B.

A Too many drivers pass cyclists dangerously, not giving them enough room.

B But what about the cyclists who go on the pavement, eh?

This is false equivalence and whataboutery. B is ignorant. Don't be like B.

Further Reading

https://www.roadbikerider.com/correcting-the-false-equivalencies-in-the-cars-vs-cyclists-debate-d5/

Giant Escape 3 Hybrid (Update)

Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:16:00 +0100

This is a brief update to my initial 'review' of my Escape 3 hybrid, the base model in Escape series of bikes from Giant. I'm now approaching 2 years of ownership involving use 3 or 4 times per week on average, for smaller, utility rides, and I could hardly be happier with the bike. There've been very few punctures - one at most, from memory though I get bikes mixed up so it could easily be none, and this compares very well with the previous Saracen (which, incidentally, I had properly serviced at my local bike shop and have handed on to my daughter for use). The Giant could now probably do with a fuller service but seems happy enough with my own very limited maintenance thus far. I've replaced the brake blocks once over the period. They are due another change.

As mentioned in my initial review the bike does cycle pretty heavy and I wouldn't put it in the 'sports' category of hybrid bike. This is not a big issue with the poor condition of Cardiff roads and I might even consider the additional weight of suspension forks for my next hybrid. Though the Giant has plenty of life left in it, I do like new toys.

I haven't explained my bike purchasing policy. I tend to buy last year's model or demo bikes to save a bit of money. I don't like to spend much more than £300 on bike, preferably less, mainly due to the level of activity of bike thieves in Cardiff. I picked up a 29" MTB with suspension and hydraulic discs for not much more than £200, so it can be done. Though that was pretty lucky, admittedly. That MTB has only been ridden once so far, by the way, so I really shouldn't be buying any more bikes! I wanted to give disc brakes a go and see if they were worth it but I'm not actually using the bike enough yet. Partly as it looks more like a £450 bike so I am reluctant to leave it anywhere! See my earlier point.

Still no close fitting mudguards by the way - my only real annoyance that the recommended mudguards didn't fit remains!

In summary, if another, higher spec'd Giant comes up at 40% off it would be rude not to.

Blacklisted Companies

Tue, 12 Dec 2017 10:22:00 +0100

Having recently had another bad experience with a supplier of goods/ services, I'm going to note these here, and maybe even some historical ones as I recall. I may extend to the good experiences. It has to be said that this will primarily be for my own consumption as a reminder for future reference.

Do not use

IWOOT - purchased t-shirt for son which appeared to have defects in the printing process. IWOOT customer services replied to say that these were as per the image on the website. If you looked REALLY CLOSELY you could see some of the defects in the image on the website but a) who looks that closely & b) it should have been made clear in the description, particularly if these shirts are 'seconds', as I suspect. Contrary to Trades Description Act?