“Electric cars are no more dangerous for pedestrians than petrol and diesel models, researchers find.”
They’re also no safer. Which reminds us that “better cars” aren’t the main answer to the consequences of cars. The main answer is fewer (and smaller) cars driven less frequently in better cities.
https://www.leeds.ac.uk/research-32/news/article/5900/evs-just-as-safe-for-pedestrians
@BrentToderian Given how loud tires are, the idea that EVs are too quiet and would lead to more pedestrian conflicts always struck me as bad-faith fossil-fuel industry stuff.
@BrentToderian ignores particulate matter though. after all, that's a major health issue overall even if you cannot trace it to an individual car that gave you, e.g., lung cancer (and of course that does not only come from the exhaust either).
Dec 15, 2025, 1:07 AM@BrentToderian 100% Meanwhile here in NZ huge American utes seem to be growing more common. We know the right direction yet we actively run in the opposite one.
I am very pro EV, but I just don't see how this is possible. An EV is both thousands of pounds heavier (so worse braking and more energy on impact) than an equivalent car, as well as much quicker/better acceleration(which is clearly dangerous)
@NBAnthony2k @BrentToderian the article mentions the study didn’t control for fleet age, so EVs may seem safer by being newer and hence having better safety features. More study is required before we can tell for sure
I guess that's probably true. The average EV is probably higher cost and more safety features as well.
Dec 15, 2025, 1:24 AM@BrentToderian Yes, and more areas with very few or no cars sharing at very low mph if there are cars. As you obviously know, Paris showed the way.
@BrentToderian electric chainsaws are no more dangerous than gas ones, researchers find
I'm thinking that automobiles are ex-urban transportation and shouldn't enter the urban core, as a rule. Free, frequent, accessible, public transportation should permeate the core, becoming gradually less dense or frequent as private cars and transport carry more traffic, until the intercity systems take over.
City planning needs to be revised. It makes no sense to put cars, bikes, semi trucks, scooters, pedestrians all around each other. Just have dedicated driving areas away from everything else.
@BrentToderian Absolutely. "EVs found to be exactly as dangerous as ICEVs" would be a more accurate title.
Dec 15, 2025, 6:43 AM@BrentToderian I go by bike to work every day and it makes a huge difference whether I am behind a fossil fuel or battery engine. 180 k deaths per year in the EU can be attributed to air pollution with traffic being the major contributor.
We live in a world without nuances, and progress comes only in baby steps. BEVs are the best we currently have. To replace even a new ICE with a BEV now is better for the environment and the geopolitical situation than holding on to the ICE. Let us get rid of cars in general as the second step.
@BrentToderian yes, and safer cars that have collision detection and automatic speed adaption (and many other safety features).
@BrentToderian
I fully agree, as long as that this argument is not used to delay or prevent the banning of the sale of new petrol cars. Such a ban will contribute to reducing the number of cars on the road.
Beyond this intermediate step, cars should be replaced with safer, cleaner and less space-demanding transport systems. A city in which four-year-old children can go and visit their neighbours alone should not be a pipe dream.
“Electric cars are no more dangerous for pedestrians than petrol and diesel models, researchers find.”
Researchers paid by industry ??, that is batshit, many E cars are nearly silent and accelerate far faster than other vehicles.
Many weigh as much as a small truck and that mass can not be stopped as quickly as a lighter vehicle.
I have jumped for my life on several occasions already because drivers underestimated the dangers the vehicles they drive pose for others,
RE: https://norden.social/@dezeti/115705913615992478
Not the the drive of a car but its mass and the speed are relevant for nearly all impacts. In an answer to that topic I forgot to mention Noise pollution which is very important for strategic urbanism:
It is obvious that the noise of an individual car is only relevant to the safety of pedestrians in relation to the sourroundig noise. So electrification of all cars and speed limits makes sense.