bikelight, streetlight, starlight

[devi]

I just bought a bike. It was 25 quid. I wondered on the way over to see it whether a) it was a piece of shit, b) the owner was clueless, c) the owner just couldn't be arsed to charge more. It turned out a bit more complicated than that. The bike is lovely, but it's been stripped of anything that isn't actually bike. It has no light and no lock and no pump and no rack. I mentioned the lack of light and the owner said "Um, well, I've never cycled it at night." Hmm.

I rode it all the way back from Kidlington, four or five miles. The streets were quiet. Everyone seemed to be staying in out of the cold. Cycling past the cop shop with no light was a bit worrying, but no one noticed. It was perishingly cold, and I've barely moved a muscle this last week, and before long my legs were throbbing and my eyes were streaming and my cheeks were blaring heat, but I knew I was alive. Alive and mobile and not dependent on eccentric buses, and it was good.

Coming through the town centre I found a short cut down past Keble College, between building after building of fabulous prettiness. It felt funny cycling along the stone-flagged streets in my flappy black coat, in the dim yellow light - as if I wasn't there as myself but was acting in some sort of period drama. When I stopped at some lights to peer at my city map a white-haired man on a bike pulled up to ask if I was lost. I said no, I was figuring it out, but thanks. A tweedy young man with glasses who could have been Son Of Giles gave me a grin from where he was waiting to cross the road. The Radcliffe Camera - that round building which I think is part of the Bodleian Library? - was all lit up inside like a temple to books.

As I cycled past the floodlit dog-racing track, just before the house, a trumpet fanfare rang out through the speakers, out across the estate houses and up towards the icy stars.

I might spray-paint the bike a stupid colour. It needs a name too.

I'm playing at being a student, I know. But while it lasts it's a fun game to play.

Comments

[cardinalsin.livejournal.com]

I've been wondering about the dangerousness of cycling in London for a while. I've had lots of people tell me what they thought, and it seemed almost invariably based on the 'I got hit' or 'I've been doing it for years and never got hit' arguments, which I don't find convincing.

Now that you've reminded me, and I've got a big book of road statistics in front of me, in 2004:
-Greater London (GL) had 25% more cycle accidents per head of population than Greater Manchester.
-GL had 10% fewer cycle accidents per head of population than Oxfordshire
-GL had 43% fewer cycle accidents per head of population then Cambridgeshire

Sadly I don't have the number of cyclists statistic that I'd like to go with the above (though I might look for it later on). This does seem to corroborate my friend K's view that Cambridge is way more dangerous than London.

[deborah_c]

Or possibly just that a far greater proportion of people in Cambridge cycle? After all, it's easy to achieve 0% cycle accidents per head of population if no one ever actually gets on a bike...

[cardinalsin.livejournal.com]

Well, hence my comment about wanting to know the number of cyclists.

[juliet]

[nods] You are of course right that personal experience doesn't mean that much. Although I'd add that not only have I never had an accident myself, I've never witnessed one (on a bike; have witnessed motorbike/car accidents & the aftermath thereof) in somewhere around 7,000 miles. Although I have witnessed a lot of *really bloody stupid* behaviour :-/

Can't find anything immediately on cyclist numbers, other than that they've doubled over the last 4 years in London. Waltham Forest claim that cyclist numbers have increased & accidents decreased in their borough (which matches what I've seen elsewhere, possibly on the LCC site, but can't find links to atm).

In general, my recollection is that measured per mile cyclist deaths are lower than pedestrian deaths, but quite a lot higher than public transport deaths (though note that public transport is significantly safer than any form of self-powered transport - the cycle figures are closer to the pedestrian/car figures than any of them are to public transport). But I can't remember whether that's in London or in the UK generally).

The other side of this, of course, is the health benefits from cycling - it's certainly arguable that they outweigh the risks.

[cardinalsin.livejournal.com]

Annoyingly, I have found numbers for London now, but not for Cambridgeshire - instead I can only get the "East". I might do a quick study on regional cycle casualties compared with number of cyclists (bearing in mind, as you imply, that what you really want is number of cycle miles), if I get a moment later on.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

measured per mile cyclist deaths are lower than pedestrian deaths

I think also lower than motorist deaths. Although I guess most cycling is in sub-30 traffic, so you'd be unlucky to get an actual death out of it. Obviously a bump is far more damaging to a cyclist than to a motorist.

Personally I reckon that the health benefits do outweigh any increased risk, as cycling's the only form of exercise I get at the moment!