this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
52 points (82.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

9629 readers
543 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
52
Electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles were found to be approximately twice as likely, on average, to collide with a pedestrian than internal combustion engine vehicles (press.psprings.co.uk)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/20086798

During 2013–2017, casualty rates per 100 million miles were 5.16 (95% CI 4.92 to 5.42) for E- HE vehicles and 2.40 (95%CI 2.38 to 2.41) for ICE vehicles, indicating that collisions were twice as likely (RR 2.15; 95% CI 2.05 to 2.26) with E-HE vehicles. Poisson regression found no evidence that E-HE vehicles were more dangerous in rural environments (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11); but strong evidence that E-HE vehicles were three times more dangerous than ICE vehicles in urban environments (RR 2.97; 95% CI 2.41 to 3.7). Sensitivity analyses of missing data support main findings.

  • "Pedestrian safety on the road to net zero: cross-sectional study of collisions with electric and hybrid-electric cars in Great Britain". Phil J Edwards, Siobhan Moore, Craig Higgins. 2024-05-21. J Epidemiol Community Health.
  • [PDF] (archive)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Extremely misleading title there, OP

More pedestrians are injured in Great Britain by petrol and diesel cars than by electric cars, but compared with petrol and diesel cars, electric cars pose a greater risk to pedestrians and the risk is greater in urban environments. One plausible explanation for our results is that background ambient noise levels differ between urban and rural areas, causing electric vehicles to be less audible to pedestrians in urban areas

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

I don't quite understand what's misleading in my title, given that quote. Would you mind elaborating?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

They are responding to what they think the title is implying instead of what is says.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Your title ~~implies~~ says that people are more likely to be hit by an EV than an ICE. That is factually incorrect as there are more ICE cars on the road

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Your title says that people are more likely to be hit by an EV than an ICE.

No it doesn't. It says that EVs and H-EVs are more likely to hit a pedestrian than ICEs. That doesn't necessitate that more people are hit by EVs than ICEs. A reason for this potentially being that there are more ICE vehicles than EVs and H-EVs.