View Single Post
Old 01-17-15, 08:36 AM
  #889  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,024

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,587 Times in 1,072 Posts
Originally Posted by njkayaker
No, it's the same problem. Most people wouldn't replace driving with riding for the same mileage (it's not generally even possible to do!). They would ride many fewer miles than they would have driven.
Originally Posted by njkayaker
And it's even worse using risk-per-mile because most people (we are talking about populations) will travel fewer miles when they choose to ride over driving because they mostly don't have the time to ride as many miles as they can travel driving.
Originally Posted by LesterOfPuppets
Per mile is the best way to calculate risk for commuting.
Lester, you are of course correct.

Njkayaker's peculiar construct of measuring travel risk of an activity by total time spent on the activity would lead to a deduction that depriving oneself of proper fitting shoes, or any shoes, would make walking a safer, less risky activity because the shoeless pedestrian will likely not walk as far, or spend as much time walking, or even walk at all to previously traveled destinations.

Using njkayaker's risk determination method, riding a bicycle with flat tires is a safer, less risky method than using a well maintained bicycle since the user would ride many fewer miles than he would have if he pumped up the tires.

Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 01-17-15 at 08:39 AM.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline