“Image note: The first and last images in this article were both AI-generated, and represent everyday car/bike interactions”

Wow. That’s laziness. You couldn’t find REAL images that show the same thing, you had to use AI?

Here’s an idea: If we want safer streets, how about we start by addressing the machines that weigh two and a half tons and can hit 100 mph, not the ones that top out at 20 or 28 and are powered by a one-horsepower motor the size of an orange.

This made me chuckle on the train. Hilarious, but true. I like the orange comparison.

Let’s take New York City, for example. It’s got more e-bike usage than anywhere else in the US, and there are still only an average of two pedestrians per year killed by an e-bike accident. That number for cars? Around 100 per year in NYC. It’s not complicated math – cars are 50x more lethal in the city.

I have no doubt that ebikes are less dangerous, but this data doesn’t do much to prove that point.

“there are still only an average of two pedestrians per year killed by an e-bike accident. That number for cars? Around 100 per year in NYC. It’s not complicated math – cars are 50x more lethal in the city.Around 100 per year in NYC.”

Since the articles author chose to be so pedantic about it: There are about 65,000 e-bikes in NYC, and about 2,000,000 cars. The math is simple. There’s way more car deaths because there’s way more cars. If you adjust the numbers make cars and ebikes equal and assume the too small value of 2 ebikes deaths to be a statistical average it would amount to 2 ebikes deaths for every 3.3 car deaths.

So yes, ebikes are definitely less deadly, but hardly kess deadly than the screwball claim of 50x less.

If a guy riding a unicycle backwards down a NYC street with a fanny pack full of nitroglycerin fell down and blew up, I guess I can tell everyone it’s only half as deadly to ride a uncle backwards while carrying nitro, since there was only a single fatality while doing it.